Afghanistan

[lI1|1!]

Afghani

[ken4ord]

Afganistan is mess, there is no doubt about that and there is not going to be an easy solution. From what I understand there are three options on the table for the Afgan people, one go back to the days of warlord and regions controlled by small military factions (not so popular). Two go under the control of the Taliban at least there is some stability throughout most of the country (from a western view not popoular from and Afgan view more popular because there stability though it may be too restrictive and conservative). The third is to wipe out the Taliban and put in place democratic government, but really I don't that this can be sucessful there at least now. It not because Afgani's don't want there freedom, but they realize just getting rid of the Taliban is going to allow short term gains like building infrastructure (though I am not sure how much we will be able to build due to the fact that we have streched ourselves so thin in Iraq). Once we leave though and what is feared is that the warlords will eventually takeover again.

 

I really sort of believe our best bet is to get out of there, but working in conjunction with the Taliban. Try to get them to agree on adressing particular issues, of course this would have to be done through the current Afgan administration.

 

No surges or influx of troops going to stop them. Currently we have less troops than the Russians had and less Afgan troop support. The Taliban still have major controll over most of the country and have been closing in on Kabul. They have enough power to get the cell companies to shut down reception at night, track people movement through cell reception, a friend says she can't keep any phone numbers in her phone cause if they stop her and find out who she is working for she could be taken hostage. The Taliban have also still be able to pull off attacks in what are "considered safe zone".

 

I have friends living there now and who have lived there, basically everyone makes it sound like a lost cause. Out of everyone I know who has been there or is there, none seem to feel that their organizations are having a positive impact. All of them agree that they are a risk everyday they are there.

 

I am curious to see how the Obama administration is going to deal with Bush/Rumfield mess.

 

 

What I know about this place is because I am here, and because I've been here for 4 straight years.

 

The way you tell it, based on 2nd or 3rd hand knowledge holds a small amount of truth, but in general it is alarmist bullshit rhetoric. Stop stink bombing this place with defeatism.

 

The problem with 'your friends' is that a lot of them are short timers, marking time until they move out to their next USAID assignment or move to a plush embassy in Europe. Or they come in here with expectations which are unrealistic. They won't be here long enough to make a difference, so in their heads it's a done deal. Do they think they are going to defeat the Taliban with the information in their cell phones? How is that making a difference. In the business we call people like that REAR ECHELON MOTHERFUCKERS. You have to get out amongst them every day, go a little native so to speak.

 

You have to have character, commitment, and spine to make this place work, or to get inside the head of this place. It's never going to be Dubai, and right across the border is a haven of nutters intent on subjugating everyone and everything to some arcane law which bears no resemblance to decency or modernity. You're dealing with caveman.

 

How do I know that? Once again, because I am here and have been here long enough to have earned a masters degree in US/Afghan relations.

 

Good luck with your opinions, but I have to raise the bullshit flag on some of it. This is a FIFTY year deal, not a 'were going to tidy this thing up in 2-3 years". Mistakes were made, mistakes continue to be made. However, with some spine things will get done here, just know it's NEVER going to be up to a western standard. Don't expect such.

 

Yes I agree my knowledge of the area is second hand, but from people I consider that have a lot of integrity and commitment in making this world a better place to live. As far the folks I know, they have not come in with great expectation, but are still commited to their work (btw, none are embassy people or usaid and none short timers, expect for one who had a gun at his head but the shooter din't pull the trigger after that he called it quits).

 

As far as being alarmist and stink bombing the place, I call bullshit. Just look at the freaking history of that place, (30 year fighting off Russians, what are we at 6 year or 7 year fighting off US). And now look at the way America and rest of the developed world like to deal with places like this, (basically go in throw a lot of military might and/or money and call victory, job done). Yes I agree if we really want change and to help stabilize the country it is a 50 year deal like you say, will we as American and other nations behind this project do that? My best guess is NO, it is really too bad because it is one of those countries and culture I love to explore and see, but I have a feeling it won't hapen in my life time.

 

And you talk about going native, I hardly doubt you are sitting down with village elders having tea discussing how to work together to make Afganistan a better, safer and freer place. That is what I would consider going native is. If you are I highly respect you.

 

 

 

btw- the whole cell phone point more about not making change with cell phones, I don't know where the fuck you got that one. It was point out that the Taliban are not stupid bunch of hillbillys, they are fighters and dedicated fighters and will not stop fighting. They are smart and know how to use technology to their advantage, even if it is much more limited than the technology US troops are using. They will expose and find any type of weakness to keep fighting for the cause.

[ken4ord]

Afganistan is mess, there is no doubt about that and there is not going to be an easy solution. From what I understand there are three options on the table for the Afgan people, one go back to the days of warlord and regions controlled by small military factions (not so popular). Two go under the control of the Taliban at least there is some stability throughout most of the country (from a western view not popoular from and Afgan view more popular because there stability though it may be too restrictive and conservative). The third is to wipe out the Taliban and put in place democratic government, but really I don't that this can be sucessful there at least now. It not because Afgani's don't want there freedom, but they realize just getting rid of the Taliban is going to allow short term gains like building infrastructure (though I am not sure how much we will be able to build due to the fact that we have streched ourselves so thin in Iraq). Once we leave though and what is feared is that the warlords will eventually takeover again.

 

 

A mess indeed. I don't think that going back to the Taliban would work out so well at this point because there are so many warlord and northern alliance types that have been armed and funded by us for so long that they could keep a full on civil war going without our continued support. The Taliban were a pretty bad group live under and I don't think that the Afgan people would let themselves go back to living that way without a fight. Going back to the days of warlords seems like a better bet, but I would assume that the Taliban or whoever has the most guns would rise up and take everyone over. As for your third point, that's what we have been trying to do, but there is no end in sight. Afganistan has a long history of beating off foreign influence. It's a terrible situation. Hopefully someone who is smarter than most of us will come along with some better ideas.

 

Another good book on the subject is "The Lion's Grave" written by a journalist named Jon Lee Anderson, who was in Afganistan in the late 80's, and went back just after 9/11. It talks about the assassination of Ahmed Shah Masood, a northern alliance leader who seemed to have more support than anyone else in the country. He was killed on 9/10/01.

 

 

You raise good point about weapons that have been given out to warlord and northern alliance, definitely complicates matters worse in having either warlord or Taliban control. There is that saying that few apples spoils the bunch, in this there maybe a little more than a few, but in general from the sounds of it the Afghanis, who are the bystandards really sound wonderful. I live in Muslim culture and there are some real nice aspects to it.

[Fairweather]

I live in Muslim culture and there are some real nice aspects to it.

 

Like never having to worry about which spouse is going to do the laundry?

[prole]

You have to get out amongst them every day, go a little native so to speak... or to get inside the head of this place... You're dealing with caveman.

 

[Serenity]

From what I've just read you're basically at a level where you have read the excellent book Ghost Wars, possibly a few other sources that give a country profile, talked to some friends, and spent some time overseas. I think you have a good basic read on the situation, but it's not quite as surgical or simple as people would want it to be.

 

I take some issue with your 'matter of fact' statements that read as regurgitated press releases from AP sources with names like Mohammad and Khalil. While there is validity to some of these reports, they in themselves do not paint the entire picture, and often focus on items that draw readers in to sell news. For a growing segment of the population, news IS entertainment. After all, truth is stranger than fiction as has been said. Some of the more mundane day to day victories paint a clearer picture.

 

Let me clear up a few things. The Northern Alliance does not exist anymore. Those 'types', primarily Tajiks from the Panjshir regions were absorbed by the government or returned home.

 

The amount of hardware for conducting warfare sent into the country of Afghanistan during the eighties is staggering. However, the majority of that weaponry was not well maintained, or was pilfered by various entities supporting the Jihad. Post 9/11 the US did not send vast amounts of weapons or munitions to Afghanistan. It has attempted to utilize and deplete existing resources. The Taliban was a Pakistani creation through its military intelligence arm often referred to as ISI. If they maintain a strong logistics ability it is often suggested that they are receiving outside support.

 

The Taliban IS a strong insurgency, but not as strong as say the Viet Cong during the Vietnam conflict. The Viet Cong were largely defeated during the Tet Offensive during the Lunar New Year. The Taliban suffers repeated defeats militarily every time it masses. They have had some success, and there is some increasingly fierce fighting along the border. No one is denying any of that.

 

To gain better comprehension of the issue with insurgency I suggest reading "The USMC Small Wars Manual" and "The Bear Came Over The Mountain" by Lester Grau.

 

However, understand that the Soviet War does not bear any resemblance to the current situation. It was a unique war, and the Soviets were not prepared to fight the type of warfare they found here. Also know that I have heard Afghans say that things were 'better' during the Soviet era, probably because the country was not as devastated as it is now. The nineties civil war did more to destroy the infrastructure than the Soviet Jihad. This is not in reference to the effort of ISAF and the US to create a better life in Afghanistan. The current situation is probably closer to the situation the British Empire encountered in the 1800's.

 

This is a link where you can download a free .pdf version of Lester Grau's study taken from vignettes found in the Soviet War College archives.

 

http://www.ndu.edu/inss/books/Books%20-%201996/Bear%20Went%20Over%20Mountain%20-%20Aug%2096/BrOrMn.pdf

[STP]

4th generation (and 5th generation) warfare imply taking the primary focus away from physical areas of conflict to magnify attention to the conceptual realm of warfare. Seems key to this strategy is the elimination of sources of refuge or sanctuary.

 

In the final analysis though, will this evolution (if it actually exists) imply the elimination of warfare itself so that it is replaced by policing?

[Serenity]

Presumably the end result will likely be political absorption of competing ideologues. A sharing of the pie. This is unfortunately not far off from the iterations of the past several generations. The catalyst which might break the mold is the use of modern communications tying isolated regions together. This is where Ken Ford sort of touched on the subject, but not in the manner in which it has to be fully evaluated.

 

A modern road system would also significantly begin the process of breaking down regional and hence cultural barriers.

 

The modern paradigm of asymmetrical style warfare; it has become somewhat of a live and let live environment where only the most heinous targets are actioned for complete servicing. The Rules of Engagement (ROE) are generally stringent across the board, and only select areas, and select units are conducting offensive style operations. The majority of the military, both the US and coalition forces, are involved in many rebuilding programs. All the way from veterinary medicine, to the establishment of modern legal systems, to key infrastructure such as modern telephony, digital communications, sewage, roads, as well as the full gamut of security concerns.

 

The big picture is indeed HUGE. We are talking about very few people trying to mingle with and help a great many. And yes, there are some who desire nothing more than to be left alone. It is these people who are often caught in the middle. The US has a great deal of experience in these matters, but has had in many cases found itself reinventing the wheel, or learning those lessons on the job.

 

It is widely known that the key insurgent sanctuaries are in Pakistan, and that Pakistan is a nation in deep turmoil. While not a wholly reliable ally, it is indeed a necessary one. With recent events in India, and the need for India to develop a response, the entire region has the ability go up like dry tinder.

 

[JosephH]

It seems to me that the persistent underlying themes of the scale of opium production, lack of infrastructure, and terrain-driven tribalism represent governance "anti-patterns", to borrow a phrase from the coding world. Providing 'Governance', such as it is (and ala Hamas), appears to be the Taliban's principal schtick as far as being tolerated is concerned.

 

To what degree are we 'hunkered down' in Kabul, Kandahar, and a couple of outlying bases, and not competing on the 'governance' front? Have the PRTs been effective at all? If not, how should that charter be addressed? Overall, the entire effort still seems under-funded and under-manned by orders of magnitude and held hostage by the [continuing] legacy of BushCo's early 'domino-theory' priorities.

[akhalteke]

And you talk about going native, I hardly doubt you are sitting down with village elders having tea discussing how to work together to make Afganistan a better, safer and freer place. That is what I would consider going native is. If you are I highly respect you.

 

You might be suprised bro. I think you have a jaded idea of what goes on with some of the other elements of the military. Read up on the guys who first went into Afghanistan. You will understand a little more about what some in the military are doing over there. "The Hunt for Bin Laden" is a good place to start to see the kinds of people I am talking of. Drinking gallons of tea and talking is a huge part of how so many battle victories took place over there.

[STP]

KNOWN UNKNOWNS: UNCONVENTIONAL “STRATEGIC SHOCKS” IN DEFENSE STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT

[Serenity]

Totally correct. Some of the embassy personnel never leave station. Certain military MOS's in logistics positions will never leave the confines of their base compound either. It's just the nature of their particular jobs.

 

I was sort of ignoring that part of Ken's response, but I have spent hundreds of hours drinking tea in somewhat inane, but formal meetings with many people. I have also spent time in the countryside, always been a keen observer of the people, and the surroundings. There is a beauty to Afghanistan, that the underlying dangers seem to magnify.

 

There are varying reports of the PRT's effectiveness, and like most things in life it appears to fall along the lines of personal relationships. All of the conventional services are, and have been, going to great lengths to finally shed their mantles of Cold War warfighting mentalities, and embrace the new paradigms of COIN and other styles of UW. It is interesting to observe this firsthand.

 

In essence the SOF community got dragged into the head to head fighting, some of which they were suited to, and some of which their TOE and METL's were not designed for. Not all ODA's are running foreign internal defense operations, but this was the original premise of the Green Beret's mandate. To act as a force multiplier moving amongst the indigenous peoples as ambassadors as well as warriors. Their missions have become diverse, and now their special skills, when needed most, are unavailable due to many factors. Despite many years in country, the language barriers are still present, but many have adapted, and the gap is closing.

 

The various FSO agencies seem to be operating, at least in my opinion, with less effectiveness than their military counterparts. I believe they are also adapting to the changing world, but I still run into some pretty green folks who have never been outside a station that wasn't plush and almost Colonial in perspective. Also, a lot of those staffers are females, and like it or not, the culture in Afghanistan is strongly male dominated. It does not look like they have any interest in changing their ways on that one.

 

I'll write some more later, and try to define our definition of victory. We're somewhat back to Victorian-Edwardian era chaos, and although the center of gravity is often centered on Pakistan, the whole region is amorphous. An analogy would be like cutting the arm off a starfish. It will just grow another one.

 

One school of thought gaining favor involves NOT occupying and attempting nation building, but simply gaining the concession from the Afghan government that come what may for them, that they will guarantee denial of any group which might desire to cause the west or the US harm. The government would be free to simply deal with these organizations as they see fit, with some oversight and advisory support I presume.

 

[akhalteke]

Werd on da street here is that we are going to double our strength within the next year in Afghanistan. Should be interesting to see what that will do. Depends on who they send. I know I have my biases. I would think that the people that made such a difference in the outset should regain control, but what do I know?

[olyclimber]

so where is this new direction coming from? the current prez or the next? or is the direction from within ranks?

[akhalteke]

If I had to guess, it is a sequella to the fact that we are anticipating the pull-back of forces in Iraq to comply with the timeline that the Iraqi government has set forth.

 

The current government has had Iraq as a priority for some time now. Now that it is obvious that getting the conclusion that we had hoped for will be impossible, diverting troops and assets to the other war we are waging will be the next task.

 

I think that this will be beneficial as much more of the hardline insurgency seems to be focusing on Afghanistan given our recent propensity to ignore it.

 

Afghanistan, as Serenity stated earlier has many problems with its infrastructure, culture and geography which will make any semblance of victory difficult. Places like these are gold mines for insurgent forces. If we can use Civil Affairs and other units to bring this country up to speed, so to speeak, it might make one less place where the bacteria of terrorism might use as an agar plate.

[STP]

Haven't you heard its a battle of words

The poster bearer cried.

Listen son, said the man with the gun

There's room for you inside.

--Pink Floyd, Us and Them

 

The base conflict appears to involve the clash of persistent conservative cultural memes that do not mesh with contemporary progressive cultural memes. It is a conceptual war but the hard reality is that people die.

 

Then again, “useful idiots” might come in handy to propagate change leading to greater social political and economic control.

 

Maybe it's time to review why.

[Serenity]

Werd on da street here is that we are going to double our strength within the next year in Afghanistan. Should be interesting to see what that will do. Depends on who they send. I know I have my biases. I would think that the people that made such a difference in the outset should regain control, but what do I know?

 

This is an often quoted lament from members of the SOF forces. "Not a Good Day to Die" is an excellent read into the mentality that permeated Bagram in the early days of the war.

[Serenity]

 

The base conflict appears to involve the clash of persistent conservative cultural memes that do not mesh with contemporary progressive cultural memes. It is a conceptual war but the hard reality is that people die.

 

I disagree. We go to great lengths, bend over backwards so to speak, to demonstrate respect for the culture. There is no underlying effort here to promote western mores on the locals. Instead what you have is an effort to promote independence, and security. This is the country in which the order to launch the largest terrorist attack on US soil came from. The idea is to remove the impetus for further such actions in the region.

 

Believe me, we do more to protect their identity than they do for ours.

[STP]

 

The base conflict appears to involve the clash of persistent conservative cultural memes that do not mesh with contemporary progressive cultural memes. It is a conceptual war but the hard reality is that people die.

 

I disagree. We go to great lengths, bend over backwards so to speak, to demonstrate respect for the culture. There is no underlying effort here to promote western mores on the locals. Instead what you have is an effort to promote independence, and security. This is the country in which the order to launch the largest terrorist attack on US soil came from. The idea is to remove the impetus for further such actions in the region.

 

Believe me, we do more to protect their identity than they do for ours.

 

I guess I'm looking at terrorism differently, as a broader phenomenon. Consider McVeigh, Kaczynski, Rudolph.

 

Some people have suggested that Islam requires a reformation movement similar to Christianity's development, however, others have also pointed out the resultant turmoil of religious wars that occurred in the wake of the Protestant Reformation. That said, I respect the tact to preserve their culture that yet at the same time seeks to encourage a sort of sovereignty. Even though, that way too seems fraught with pitfalls. There seem to be incompatible elements that will withstand integration into an evolved culture, if that is the ultimate goal.

 

It seems there’s a paradox between security (control) and liberty, i.e., that one gains at the expense of the other. One solution appears to involve cultural backwaters that do not have to be integrated into a global system; rather these areas should be allowed as alternatives having a lower standard of living. The problem appears when these areas become breeding grounds for extremist ideology. But extremist ideology does not necessarily imply a fundamentalist religious worldview with its corresponding ethical restrictions rather the ideology is characterized by a nihilistic or transcendent element that looks to the future or to another plane of existence for fulfillment. So maybe the strategy should focus on encapulation or isolation, similar to a quarantine.

 

You deal in realities. I dabble in ideas. So is there a grand military goal or is it just reaction to hotspots, "putting out fires"?

 

Maybe Pakistan was always the target. It seems quite likely that Pakistan may emerge as Obama’s trial by fire predicted by Biden. The manifestations may arise variously through one or more scenarios: as a conflict between the US and Russia or China, as a continued destabilization and loss of control over nuclear weapons, as a Muslim-Hindu conflict, etc.

 

 

4th generation (and 5th generation) warfare imply taking the primary focus away from physical areas of conflict to magnify attention to the conceptual realm of warfare. Seems key to this strategy is the elimination of sources of refuge or sanctuary.

 

In the final analysis though, will this evolution (if it actually exists) imply the elimination of warfare itself so that it is replaced by policing?

 

As far as using the terminology of generational warfare, a linear process where one generation is superseded by the next generation does not exist. Fourth generation warfare can be followed by first generation, for instance, and multiple generations can exist en echelon within a broad temporal frame. Fourth generation warfare can also be fostered as proxy wars through conventional adversaries who provide funding and intelligence.

 

It seems premature to see the end of warfare by replacement with what is essentially a police force through the integration of domestic law enforcement and military functions (e.g., homeland security), although it doesn’t appear too difficult to foresee in a globally connected world.

 

[tvashtarkatena]

If we just took individual humans out of these situations, we could properly pit 'meme' against 'meme' in a purely virtual fashion.

 

So much more intellectually tidy.

 

[tvashtarkatena]

Hey, I'm trying to organize my rock collection over here.

 

Is a dirt clod igneous, metamorphic, or sedimentary?

[STP]

Gib it a significant amount of time first.

[Dechristo]

Hey, I'm trying to organize my rock collection over here.

 

Is a dirt clod igneous, metamorphic, or sedimentary?

 

In your case, it would be excrementary.

[ken4ord]

I live in Muslim culture and there are some real nice aspects to it.

 

Like never having to worry about which spouse is going to do the laundry?

 

 

Go back to your blinders on STFU. Idiot that is not what I was talking about.

[pc313]

HAPPY HOLLIDAYS, KEN4ORD!!!