Within Afghanistan, only a single US program continues to do real damage to the Taliban. And President Hamid Karzai wants it to stop.
Our special operations forces (especially, the Army's) have been gutting the Taliban's leadership. Karzai doesn't like that. He didn't like our use of airpower and artillery, either. The Taliban feared them too much and told wild lies about civilian casualties. Most fire support ceased. More soldiers and Marines died. Now Karzai wants to put a stop to "night raids" by our special operators. If he were actively allied with the Taliban, he couldn't do the terrorists a bigger favor.
A source deep in the fight provided hard numbers-countering Karzai's claims that our strike teams wantonly kill civilians:
--Our "most elite" SOF element struck 1043 high-value objectives over the past year, 80% during the hours of darkness. 45% of those black-ops missions-a very high percentage-were successes that "resulted in the capture or death of the targeted individual."
--Only a third of those missions-366--required our troops to open fire. They don't go in with guns blazing. On the contrary, these are the most-disciplined soldiers on earth. And night raids limit casualties: An enemy taken by surprise is less likely to respond effectively, so you don't unleash a firefight in the streets.
--In over a thousand raids last year, 18 non-combatants died-because they were bunking with the Taliban and got caught up in a fight. Compare that full-year casualty rate to the 93 people killed in a single day in Mexico's narco-insurgency last week.
--Last week alone, the Taliban murdered twice the number of civilians that our special operators killed in an entire year.
--Our top SOF element recently eliminated a half-dozen key Taliban commanders and sub-commanders, seriously disrupting the enemy's chain of command. Top Taliban leaders in Pakistan (protected by our Pakistani "allies") are scrambling to regain control in Afghanistan.
President Karzai's been briefed on these statistics. He ignores them and continues to rail about our SOF forces causing civilian casualties and "violating Afghan culture." Karzai stayed mum, though, about the Taliban's recent hanging of a seven-year-old boy as a "spy." Lynching kids is culturally acceptable.
The fact conventionally minded generals and Are-we-there-yet? pols won't face is that Afghanistan always was and remains a special-ops fight. Privately, SOF veterans mock our counterinsurgency doctrine as "a disease just short of paralysis." That doctrine-for which soldiers and Marines are dying in growing numbers-assumes that we're partnered with a host government that has or can build credibility with its people, a government worth fighting for that has the interests of its people at heart. Instead, our troops serve as bodyguards for gangsters.
And President Karzai (rhymes with "our guy") has all but dropped the pretense that he wants to defeat the Taliban. He's rushing to cut deals behind our backs. To show good faith with our enemies, he's methodically stripped us of our military advantages. Air and artillery support were all but eliminated. Our "decisive" Kandahar offensive was neutered. Originally planned for May, the campaign's theme is now "See You In September." Maybe.
Now Karzai wants to halt our SOF stirke missions-the only thing left that works in Afghanistan. While CIA drone missions across the border in Pakistan do great service, our troop surge is meaningless-because our troops aren't allowed to do anything useful. According to one officer on the ground, the Army's elite 82nd Airborne Division, which recently wrapped up a thirteen-month tour, "did not target one bad guy." Those splendid soldiers were wasted.
Only our special operators are still in the fight. The rest of our forces have been reduced to serving as pop-up targets. Billions in aid have been squandered. Drug lords rule. Our local "allies" rip us off at every turn. And the man we backed as the "George Washington of Afghanistan" is siding with the enemy. If we cave in to Karzai and rein in our special operators, it's game over.
#2
Take him out and shoot him. Install an American general as governor. Fight to win or else get the hell out.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
06/18/2010 17:21 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Karzai needs to learn what it's like to have an IED explode under his vehicle. If he survives, he needs to learn what it's like to be the victim of an M1-A1 HEAT round used as an anti-personnel weapon. The election was a fraud, and his government is a fraud. He's as much complicit in the Taliban "resurrection" as the Pakistanis, who should also be destroyed.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
06/18/2010 17:58 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Next special ops action should be to spray poppies with diseases
no need to actually spray - just let the rumor out that you've sprayed it with pig blood.
#5
IIRC NEWS KERALA > PAKISTAN'S ARMED FORCES DEPLETING/DECLINING RESERVES [Budget-Finance/Accounting] MAY HARM ITS WAR ON TERROR: DEFENCE SECRETARY. PAK Anti-Militant Acitivies, Mil Campaigns. | PAK ARMY NEEDS MONIES TO RE-PRIORTIZE ITS WOT, SECURITY OPTIONS.
and
* WAFF > AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: OVER 4.0MILYUHN PAKISTANIS LIVING UNDER TALIBAN RULE.
#6
PAKISTANI DEFENCE FORUM > PAKISTAN REQUESTS US$2.5MILYUHN AMRS PACKAGE FROM AMERICA [mostly Army = Ground forces equipment + wares].
* SAME PDF > US ARMY PRPEPARES "UNBLINKING EYE" UNMANNED AIRSHIP/DIRIGIBLE FOR AFGHANISTAN
[Northrop Grumman LEMV Airship = L_ong E_ndurance M-ulti Intelligence V-ehicle].
POSTER > Iff successful, a US-armed PAK will have the MOST POWERFUL CONVENTIONAL ARMY IN ASIA SECOND ONLY [perhaps]TO RUSSIA ANDOR CHINA, MORESO AS PAK CONTINUES WID ITS NUCWEAPS DEV PROGS???
versies
SAME > US-ARMED PAK will be DESTABILIZING + INCREASE LIKELIHOOD OF NEW INDO-PAK WAR, + exclusive of potens COVERT TECH TRANSFERS to Local, Regional Milterrs.
#2
The problem for the Brits is that too many still believe their MSM and their lurid tales of Bush and Obama. They still probably haven't figured out the cause and effect in that area.
#3
Lest we fergit, ME + 1990's NET > 911 + WOT = WAR FOR OWG-NWO INCLUD PRO-US-VS-ANTI-US OWG-NWO + GLOBAL SOC ORDER, among Other, + to also include WHAT GEOGRPAHIC ZONES = OWG REGIONS, TRANS-REGIONS, + CONTINENT(S)/CONTINENTAL GOVT AUTHORTIES WILL CONTROLL OR DOMINATE SAIDSAME OWG-NWO. The historic or traditional close relations between the US + mother country UK, + NATO, etc. is NOT and won't be immune from such pressures.
IMO 'TIS PAR FOR THE COURSE.
In more important News, SUBWAY is having a 2 for $10.00 FATHER'S DAY HOAGIE PROMO WHICH I LIKELY WON'T BE ABLE TO INDULGE.
#1
I find it curious that turkey means to leave its cozy benefactor and align itself with small-time players, albeit noisy ones. Iran, Hamas and Syria may seem like power players right now, but that's only because the real muscle hasn't decided to squash them yet, for reasons unknown to me.
#3
he [obama] will take you he knows not where, by way of a road he knows not which.
That is dangerous.
137 days until the 2010 elections.
872 days until the next Presidential election.
Hopefully, we will put this amateurish, embarassing administration in the rear-view mirror.
National attention on California's June 8 primary focused on two women with gilt-edged corporate credentials nominated to be the Republican candidates in races for governor and U.S. Senate. But voters also approved a proposition that its supporters hope will reverberate nationally.
The question is whether Proposition 14, which passed with 54 percent of the vote, will help or hinder the political process -- and not just for Californians. Given the size of the state and its reputation as an incubator of trends, this experiment may very well have a wider influence.
Modeled on a Washington state law in effect since 2008, the California measure replaces party primaries with a type of open primary. Starting in 2012, voters will cast a ballot for any candidate, regardless of party affiliation in most races (but not the presidential primary, which will remain partisan). The top two will go on to compete in the general election -- never mind that both might be from the same party.
As promoted by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, the idea of Proposition 14 is to help elect more centrist politicians who are not so beholden to their parties and so better placed to break through the partisan gridlock.
"It will make our legislators and the politicians more accountable to the people," Gov. Schwarzenegger said in applauding the results. "It will take power away from the parties, there's no two ways about that, and that's exactly what we wanted. We wanted to have the politicians be public servants and not party servants. We wanted to make sure that the politicians don't get stuck in their ideological corners, but they go and they can compromise."
That sounds fairly tempting -- we like moderates, too -- but parties exist for a reason: Their members freely combine around a series of sincere and often heartfelt beliefs. Certainly, partisanship causes problems, but changing the system so that those who feel the strongest will be heard the least is a dubious reform. Indeed, why have primaries at all if they are robbed of their essential function?
In aiming a dagger at the heart of the party system, California invites unintended consequences. Campaign costs, already steep and potentially corrupting, could rise as candidates have to compete for all voters across the board, not just the party faithful. Smaller parties -- Libertarians, the Green Party and others -- are likely to be further squeezed out and rarely seen on the November ballot. And, voters facing the prospect of picking one of two Democrats in November, or one of two Republicans, may not think they are getting much of a real choice.
California's experience will be revealing, if the inevitable lawsuits do not stop it cold. For now, the "top two" system looks over the top.
#2
It depends on the moderate. Are they the kind that will drag things out forever, or the kind that will actually pick a balanced path through a problem?
#5
A bad thing in my opinion. California is plagued by too much democracy, not too little. We have been emasculaitng the parties for the last 60 years. Where has it gotten us? Oh for the smoke filled rooms.
#6
a bad thing - parties exist to express platforms of positions. The point of primaries is to elect the candidate which most faithfully holds those general opinions AND can win in the general. This opens the road to shenanigans where a majority of Democrats can vote in a primary candidate that is weak and doesn't hold party values. In essence, Dem and Dem lite
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/18/2010 20:48 Comments ||
Top||
#7
IIRC, there was some mention during the 2008 of how the Wasilla area had a lot of oddball evangelical pot-growing libertarians, enough to make it a sort of regional "type".
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
06/18/2010 14:27 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
By Robert Spencer
