Article

2011-02-07 Afghanistan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by 2011-02-07 00:28|| || Front Page|| [6 views ] Top

#1 There is no modern Pushtunstan, but there also isn't a way for the US to exit Afghanistan quickly, particularly if we persist in 'nation building'.

I think George Bush had it right in late 2001, but he and others in his administration were co-opted by all the bleating about nation building. That's what caused us to ratchet this up, in the guise of "only a modern nation-state in Afghanistan will prevent al Qaeda from coming back in and taking over."

I've thought for a while that what we need is a de-facto border between the crazy Pushtuns and the rest of the crazy Afghans. Keep 'em on their respective sides of the border. Then remind the Pushtuns that the Arabs (like Binny) are also furriners who need to be killed.

If Obama really wants to make progess, make this happen and don't pay attention to the bleeding hearts, the UN, and the grubs and sponges inside the Karzai government who are making money off us. Let the Tajiks and Uzbeks have their areas. Let Harat go the way it goes. Tell the Pushtuns that we'll leave them alone as long as they don't let any Arabs in.

Leave the CIA in place, leave some support and training elements in the Tajik and Uzbek areas since they seem to like us a little more, and otherwise depart. Remind the Pushtuns of Ripley's famous comment about nuking them from orbit if necessary.

If we do this we get relative security at a lower price, and we can refocus on the other quiet parts of the WoT that need to be won.

Am I missing something here?

Posted by Steve White 2011-02-07 12:15|| 2011-02-07 12:15|| Front Page Top

#2 You've missed nothing Dr. White. This effort is a dike of a thousand holes. On the bright side however, following recurring engagements and re-captures of released detainees, our French Coalition partners have for all intents and purposes....... stopped taking prisoners.

Posted by Besoeker 2011-02-07 13:39|| 2011-02-07 13:39|| Front Page Top

#3 The Frogs have always been willing to play dirty when it's their interests that are being affected. God bless 'em.

It seems to me that if we really wanted to scare the Pak leadership, we'd start talking about the creation of an independent Pashtunistan on the Afghan side of the line.

Posted by Steve White 2011-02-07 15:15|| 2011-02-07 15:15|| Front Page Top

#4 Misplaced '/em' moved to the proper place in my comment above the article text. Only the second sentence, the one in italics, was written by Keystone; the rest was written by me in response. Also, Iran was meant to be Iraq. My apologies to Keystone and to you, Dear Reader, for causing any misunderstanding.

Posted by trailing wife 2011-02-07 15:45|| 2011-02-07 15:45|| Front Page Top

#5 The problem is, jihad -- or at least, murdering foreigners and/or unbelievers -- has a long history in Pashtun culture, as it does, for instance, in Yemen. And while at the moment on the Afghan side of the border they are concentrating on re-establishing Taliban rule and throwing out Coalition troops, on the Pakistan side they are concentrating on overthrowing the Punjab/Sindh oligarchy and attacking unbelievers in India and the West. So shortly after we stopped killing jihadis on both sides of the border in Pashtunistan, they'd go full-out to control the Afghan side to provide themselves a haven farther from Punjabi/Sindhi attacks... from which they could expand their attacks on that part of the world which should by rights be dhimmi.

General Petraeus is now saying that ~~we have killed enough jihadis~~ that we are starting to win the war. The Strategy Page analysts clearly believe we are starting to win, too. I am beginning to wonder if all our nation building isn't an acceptable way to stay in the neighborhood long enough to kill enough blood-maddened idiots to force them to accept sobriety... and that while the nation building is a good thing, it's actually the raw numbers of dead and disabled jihadis that is turning the tide.

I do like the idea of forming a Pashtunistan... then making it very, very clear to the new country that we will will bounce their rubble on their hydrocephalic heads if they engage in, or do not stop any guests from engaging in, any activity beyond their borders, whether in the rump Afghanistan, in Pakistan, or in the West/Australia. No doubt we would have to do so, several times, before they learnt the lesson.

Of note, Strategy Page last August wrote that Afghan war deaths are about 12,000/year of which 2/3rds are Taliban & friends, or 8,000/year. If the implication is that we've killed that many since the invasion in 2002 (let's go with 2003 as the first full year), then 8,000 x 8 years (we've only just started 2011, after all) means 64,000 dead jihadis. If it's only been the past two years, with some significantly smaller amount in the preceding years, then it may be only about 20,000 dead hard boys drunk on the idea of infidel blood... on the Afghan side of the border.

I'm not quite sure how to calculate from Strategy Page's January entry. SP's analysts are not trained writers, which sometimes makes things difficult, as they seem to make no attempt at consistency from post to post. But I think the writer means to say 5,000 Pashtun jihadis were killed in 2010 on the Pakistani side of Pashtunistan. We have been accelerating our operations there, as has the Pakistani army, so my data-free guess is that perhaps as many as 8,000 Pakistani Pashtun jihadis have been killed since Al Qaeda fled Tora Bora. On the other hand, that number is clearly accelerating upward.

I would very much appreciate if anyone would challenge my calculations -- I haven't any experience in this kind of thing, after all.

Posted by trailing wife 2011-02-07 16:32|| 2011-02-07 16:32|| Front Page Top

#6 TW: This entire effort, the Petreaus effort is basically a three-pronged strategy. (1.) Take down the Taliban leadership network. (2.) Deny supplies, weapons, and funding wherever possible. (3.) Continue to work with the GIRoA (Gov't of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan) Army, Police Force, and court system. Numbers of insurgent KIA doesn't tell the story. The number of key Taliban leaders killed or captured is the key.

Posted by Besoeker 2011-02-07 18:08|| 2011-02-07 18:08|| Front Page Top

#7 Just give Dostum whatever he needs and turn him loose. Oh, and look away. 40 million Pashtun is way too many.

Posted by Secret Asian Man 2011-02-07 21:09|| 2011-02-07 21:09|| Front Page Top

#8 "I'd like 400,000 shipping containers. Yes. Can you deliver?"

/General Dostum

Posted by Frank G 2011-02-07 21:18|| 2011-02-07 21:18|| Front Page Top

00:19 RandomJD
00:00 trailing wife
23:53 trailing wife
23:04 pan
23:03 CrazyFool
22:53 JosephMendiola
22:45 pan
22:35 pan
22:32 Barbara Skolaut
22:21 JosephMendiola
22:17 Secret Master
22:15 tu3031
22:11 tu3031
22:10 Secret Master
22:06 JosephMendiola
22:00 Dale
21:56 trailing wife
21:44 Thineque Dingle5078
21:40 JosephMendiola
21:35 JosephMendiola
21:28 JosephMendiola
21:18 Frank G
21:09 Secret Asian Man
21:02 Pappy