• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Afghanistan: Why we should be there (or not), how to conduct the mission (or not) & when to leave

(Part 2, continued)

Deciding to Fight

Inside the old city walls of Peshawar, Pakistan, a half-hour drive from the Afghan border, in a bazaar named after the storytellers who enthralled Central Asian gold and silk merchants with their tales of war and tragic love, sits the 17th-century Mohabat Khan Mosque. It is a place of cool, marble calm amid the dense market streets. Yousaf Qureshi is the prayer leader there and director of the Jamia Ashrafia, a Deobandi madrasa. He had recently announced a pledge by the jewelers’ association to pay $1 million to anyone who would kill a Danish cartoonist who caricatured the Prophet Muhammad. Qureshi himself offered $25,000 and a car. I found Qureshi seated on a cushion behind a low glass desk covered with papers and business cards — ambassadors, N.G.O. workers, Islamic scholars, mujahedeen commanders: he has conversed with them all. His office resembles an antiques shop, the walls displaying oversize prayer beads, knives inlaid with ivory and astrakhan caps. It was day’s end, and Qureshi was checking the proofs for his 51st book, called “The Benefits of Koran.”

Qureshi told me that he meets with Pakistan’s president, Pervez Musharraf, about twice a year. Qureshi understands Musharraf’s predicament: “The heart of this government is with the Taliban. The tongue is not.” He didn’t claim total insider knowledge, but he said, “I think they want a weak government and want to support the Taliban without letting them win.” Why? “We are asking Musharraf, ‘What are you doing,’ and he says: ‘I’m moving in both ways. I want to support the Taliban, but I can’t afford to displease America. I am caught between the devil and the deep sea.”’

Not long ago, Qureshi said, he received three emissaries from Mullah Omar who wanted Qureshi to warn another religious leader to stop preaching against the Taliban. “I refused,” he said. Later Sheikh Yassin, one of the messengers, was arrested by the I.S.I., Pakistan’s military intelligence service. So why, I asked, does Qureshi say the I.S.I. is supporting the Taliban? “That is the double policy of the government,” he replied. Even in the 1990’s, he said, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was supporting the official Afghan government of Burhanuddin Rabbani while the I.S.I. was supporting his opponent, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, as he rained thousands of rockets upon Rabbani’s government and the citizens of Kabul. Qureshi told me that if he and local traders didn’t want Al Qaeda or the Taliban to flourish, then they wouldn’t. “We are supporting them to give the Americans a tough time,” he said. “Leave Afghanistan, and the Taliban and foreign fighters will not give Karzai problems. All the administrators of madrasas know what our students are doing, but we won’t tell them not to fight in Afghanistan.”

The new Taliban fighters in Afghanistan are of three basic types. There are the old war-addicted jihadis who were left out of the 2001 Bonn conference, which determined the postwar shape of Afghan politics and the carve-up of the country. There are the “second generation” Afghan refugees: poor, educated in Pakistan’s madrasas and easily recruited by their elders. And then there are the young men who had jobs and prestige in the former Taliban regime and were unable to find a place for themselves in the new Afghanistan.

Coincidentally, there are also now three fronts. One is led by Mullah Omar’s council in Quetta. The second is led by Jalaluddin Haqqani, a hero of the jihad against the Soviets who joined the Taliban. Although well into his 80’s, he orchestrates insurgent attacks through his sons in Paktia, Khost and Paktika, the Afghan provinces close to Waziristan, where he is based. Finally, there is Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the former leader of Hezb-i-Islami, the anti-Soviet fighters entrusted with the most money and arms by the U.S. and Pakistan. He had opposed the Taliban, living in uneasy exile in Iran until the U.S. persuaded Tehran to boot him out; he sneaked into the mountainous eastern borderlands. Since the early days of Karzai’s government, he has promised to organize Mullah Omar’s followers with his educated cadres and finance their jihad against Karzai and the American invaders. Old competitors are coming together in much the way the mujahedeen factions cooperated to fight the Russians. Hekmatyar adds a lethal ingredient to this stew: his ties and his followers extend all through Afghanistan, including the north and the west, where he is exploiting factional grievances that have nothing to do with the Pashtun discontent in the south.

An Afghan I met outside Peshawar — for his safety he asked me not to use his full name — was typical of the 20-something Talibs who had flourished under the Taliban regime. He was from Day Chopan, a mountainous region in Zabul Province, northeast of Kandahar. When the Northern Alliance and the Americans took Afghanistan, he escaped through the hills on an old smuggling route to the North-West Frontier Province.

It was familiar terrain. A.’s father had been a religious teacher who studied in Sami ul-Haq’s famous Haqqaniya madrasa near the Khyber Pass and preached jihad for Harakat, one of the southern mujahedeen parties whose members filled Mullah Omar’s ranks. Those old ties still bind and have provided a network for recruiting. A. grew up in madrasas in the tribal Pashtun lands of Waziristan, where he learned to fire guns as a child in the American-financed mujahedeen camps. As a teenage religious student in Wana, the capital of South Waziristan, he would go door to door collecting bread for his fellow Talibs. Behind one of those doors, he saw a girl and fell in love. When his father wouldn’t let him marry the girl, he threatened to go fight in Afghanistan. His father would not relent, and A. signed up at the local Taliban office in Peshawar. “We got good food, free service, everything was Islamic,” he told me. “It was the best life, rather than staying in that poor madrasa.” His father soon did relent, and A. became engaged, but he was only 15 and had no money. So he went back to the Taliban and was soon working beside the deputy defense minister. “Of course, then there were bags of money,” he said.

A., now 28, was living in an Afghan refugee village that used to belong to Hekmatyar’s group. Weak with malaria, he was nevertheless plump and jovial, even funny at times. Only when the Pakistani intelligence services came up did his already sallow hues pale to old bone.

After fleeing the American bombardment in 2001, he told me, the Taliban arrived in Pakistan tattered, dispersed and demoralized. But in the months after the collapse, senior Taliban leaders told their comrades to stay at home, keep in touch and wait for the call. Some Taliban told me that they actually waited to see if there was a chance to work with Karzai’s government.

“Our emir,” as A. referred to Mullah Omar, slowly contacted the commanders and told them to find out who was dead and who was alive. Those commanders appointed group commanders to collect the underlings like A. Weapons stashed away in Afghanistan’s mountains were excavated. Funds were raised through the wide and varied Islamic network — Karachi businessmen, Peshawar goldsmiths, Saudi oil men, Kuwaiti traders and jihadi sympathizers within the Pakistani military and intelligence ranks.

Mullah Omar named a 10-man leadership council, A. explained. Smaller councils were created for every province and district. Most of this was done from the safety of Pakistan, and in 2003 Mullah Omar dispatched Mullah Dadullah to the madrasas of Baluchistan and Karachi to gather the dispersed Talibs and find fresh recruits. Pakistani authorities were reportedly seen with him. Still, neither Musharraf nor his military men in Baluchistan did anything to arrest him.

It was a perfect job for Dadullah, whose reputation for bravery was matched by his savagery and his many war wounds, collected in more than 25 years of fighting. In 1998, his fighters slaughtered hundreds of Hazaras (Shiites of Mongol descent) in Bamiyan Province, an act so brutal it was even too much for Mullah Omar, who had him disarmed at the time. Dadullah’s very savagery, filmed and now often circulated on videotape, coupled with his promotional flair, were just the ingredients Omar needed to put the Taliban back on the map.

Today, Quetta has assumed the character of Peshawar in the 1980’s, a suspicious place of spies and counterspies and double agents. It is not just the hundreds of men in typical Afghan Pashtun clothing — the roughly wound turbans, dark shalwar kameez, eyes inked with kohl — who squat on Thursday afternoons outside the Kandahari mosque in the center of town, comparing notes on the latest fighting in Helmand or the best religious teachers. Rather, as I wandered the narrow alleyways of the Afghan neighborhoods, my local guides would say, “That’s where Mullah Dadullah was living” or “That’s where Mullah Amir Khan Haqqani is living.” (Haqqani is the Taliban’s governor in exile for Zabul Province.) Mullah Dadullah is now a folk hero for young Talibs like A. And all the Taliban I met told me that every time Dadullah gives another interview or appears on the battlefield, it serves as an instant injection of inspiration.

By 2004, A. said, he was meeting a lot of Arabs — Saudis, Iraqis, Palestinians — who taught the Afghans about I.E.D.’s (improvised explosive devices) and suicide bombings. “They taught us how to put explosives in plastic,” he told me. “They taught us wiring and triggers. The Arabs are the best instructors in that.” But now the Afghans are doing fine on their own. Pakistani jihadis in Afghanistan received their training, they told me, from Pakistani officers in Kashmir.

The southerners have also forged ties with the Pakistani Taliban in Waziristan. There is a free flow of arms and men between Waziristan and the Afghan provinces across the border. According to A., even Uzbeks from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan have joined some of the fighters now in A.’s home mountains in Day Chopan.

It was disheartening to hear A. describe his first encounter with Americans, who were trying to set up a base in a remote region of Zabul. Though they were building a road where no roads had gone before, he could perceive that asphalt only as a means for the Americans to transport their armored vehicles and occupy Muslim lands. A friend of his joined us as we were talking. He had just arrived in Pakistan from the Day Chopan region and said that the Americans were like a cyclone of evil, stealing their almonds and violating their Pashtunwali (the Pashtun tribal laws). In this instance, he meant the law by which even a cousin will not enter your house without knocking first.

A. is now a media man in Pakistan, coordinating the editing of films for discs, censoring them in case there are commanders who don’t want their faces seen and distributing them. He proudly offered me the latest disc of Mullah Dadullah beheading some “spies for the Americans.” He said he had sold 25,000 CD’s about the fighting in Waziristan.

He was full of contradictions. He said that if he didn’t have a house in Day Chopan, he would never spend a single night there because there was no education, no electricity, no power, nothing, just a heap of stones. Yet he did not want America to change all that. “We don’t like progress by Americans,” he declared. “We don’t like roads by Americans. We would rather walk on tired feet as long as we are walking in an Islamic state.”

Was it all just bravado speaking? Was an opportunity to build bridges to young men like A. somehow lost or just neglected? It was hard to tell. But when the I.S.I. subject came up again, his tone changed. “They are snakes,” he told me. He said that they were trying to create a new, obedient leader and oust the independent-minded Mullah Omar, and for that, the real Taliban hated them. Then he said: “I told you that we burn schools because they’re teaching Christianity, but actually most of the Taliban don’t like this burning of schools or destroying roads and bridges, because the Taliban, too, could use them. Those acts were being done under I.S.I. orders. They don’t want progress in Afghanistan.” An Indian engineer was beheaded in Zabul in April, he said, and that was also ordered by Pakistan, which, from fear of the influence of its enemy, India, was encouraging attacks on Indian companies. “People are not telling the story, because no one can trust anyone, and if I.S.I. knows I told you,” he said, he would be dead.

Pakistan’s Assets

There are many theories for why Pakistan might have wanted to help the Taliban reconstitute themselves. Afghan-Pakistani relations have always been fraught. One among the many disputes has to do with the Durand Line, the boundary drawn up by the British in 1893 partly to divide the Pashtun tribes, who were constantly revolting against the British. The Afghan government has never recognized this line, which winds its way from the Hindu Kush mountains of North-West Frontier Province 1,500 miles down to the deserts of Baluchistan, as its border. Nor have the Pashtun tribes. The Pakistanis may hope to force Karzai to recognize the Durand line in exchange for stability.

Another theory is that Musharraf must appease the religious parties whom he needs to extend his power past the end of his term next year. Musharraf bought them off, gave them control of the North-West Frontier Province and Baluchistan and let them use the Taliban. And finally, the Pakistanis see Afghanistan as their rightful client. They want an accommodating regime, not Karzai, whose main backers are the U.S. and India, Pakistan’s nemesis.

Pakistan’s well-established secular Pashtun nationalist political leaders remain distraught that their lands have again become sanctuaries for the Afghan Taliban and the Pakistani religious parties, which, since elections in 2002, rule these provinces and are completing a Talibanization of the region. The secular leaders point to another layer in Pakistan’s games: keeping the tribal areas autonomous enables Pakistan’s intelligence services to ward off the gaze of Westerners and keep their jihadis safely tucked away.

One thing you notice if you visit the homes of retired generals in Pakistan is that they live in a lavish fashion typical of South America’s dictatorship-era military elite. They control most of the country’s economy and real estate, and like President Musharraf, himself a former general, they do not want to relinquish power.

Although there is a secularist strain in the Pakistani military, it has been aligned with religious hard-liners since the army’s inception in 1947. Many officers still see their duty as defending the Muslim world, but their raison d’être has been undermined by the fact that though Pakistan was founded as a refuge for South Asia’s Muslims, more Muslims today live in India. They seem to envy the jihadis’ clarity. The militants had no identity crises. According to Najim Sethi, a prominent Pakistani journalist, military officers often have “a degree of self-disgust for selling themselves” to the Americans, and they still bear a grudge against the United States for abandoning them after the Afghan jihad and, more recently, for sanctioning Pakistan over its nuclear program. The standard army phrase about the Americans was, he said, “They used us like a condom.”

Officers spoke to me as if they were simply translating the feelings of the jihadis for a tone-deaf audience, but they sounded more like ventriloquists. One retired colonel I spoke to was a relative of a Taliban leader from Waziristan, Abdullah Massoud, who had earned both sympathy and reverence for his time in Guantánamo Bay. Massoud was captured fighting the Americans and the Northern Alliance and spent two years there, claiming to be a simple Afghan Talib. Upon his release, he made it home to Waziristan and resumed his war against the U.S. With his long hair, his prosthetic limb and impassioned speeches, he quickly became a charismatic inspiration to Waziristan’s youth.

Since 2001, some of Waziristan’s tribes have refused to hand over Qaeda members living among them. Under intense American pressure, Pakistan agreed for the first time in its history to invade the tribal areas. Hundreds of civilians and soldiers were killed. American helicopters were seen in the region, as were American spies. The militants (with some army accomplices) retaliated with two assassination attempts against Musharraf late in 2003. He struck back, but as the civilian casualties mounted and the military began to balk at killing Pakistanis, Musharraf agreed to a deal in the spring of 2004 whereby the militants would give up their guests in return for cash. Pakistani officers and the militants hugged and shed tears during a public reconciliation. But the militants did not relinquish their Al Qaeda guests, and they took advantage of the amnesty to execute tribal elders they said had helped the Pakistani military. The tribal structure in Waziristan was devastated, and the Taliban took to the streets to declare the Islamic emirate of Waziristan. Since Musharraf signed a truce with the militants last month, attacks launched from Waziristan into Afghanistan, according to NATO, have risen by 300 percent.

“Muslim governments are not able to face the Americans,” the retired colonel from Waziristan said, explaining the mujahedeen mind-set. “If Muslim governments should stand up against duplicity and foreign hegemonic designs, and they don’t, who will? Someone has to stand up to defend the Muslim countries, and it’s this that gives the jihadis the courage and zeal to stand up to the worst atrocities. This is the core issue of the mujahedeen movement. You call it the war on terror. The mujahedeen call it jihad.” And so, essentially, did he.

One afternoon, in the midst of a monsoon, I sought out one of the founders of the pro-jihadi strategy, the retired general Mirza Aslam Beg. He lived in Rawalpindi, the military capital half an hour from Islamabad, in a brick and tile-roofed mansion with a basketball hoop, flowing greenery and Judy, his one-eyed cocker spaniel. The house was immaculate, with marble floors, rugs, fine china and porcelain on display behind glass and an amusing portrait of Aslam Beg as a young, Ray-Banned, pommaded officer. His mansion sits across the street from Musharraf’s.

Aslam Beg played a leading role in the military’s creation of “asymmetrical assets,” jargon for the jihadis who have long been used by the military as proxies in Kashmir and Afghanistan. He was chief of the army staff from 1988 to 1991, while the Pakistani nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan was selling the country’s nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea. Beg held talks with the Iranians about exchanging Iranian oil for Pakistani nuclear skill.

Aslam Beg likes to remind visitors that he was one of a group of army officers trained by the C.I.A. in the 1950’s as a “stay-behind organization” that would melt into the population if ever the Soviet Union overran Pakistan. Those brigadiers and lieutenant colonels then trained and directed the Afghan jihadis.

In the 1980’s, “the C.I.A. set up the largest support and administrative bases in Mohmand agency, Waziristan and Baluchistan,” Aslam Beg told me. “These were the logistics bases for eight long years, and you can imagine the relations that developed. And then Chechens, Uzbeks, Tajiks, Saudis developed family relations with the local people.” The Taliban, he said, fell back after 2001 to these baselines. “In 2003, when the U.S. attacked Iraq, a whole new dimension was added to the conflict. The foreign mujahedeen who’d fought in Afghanistan started moving back to Afghanistan and Iraq.” And the old Afghan jihadi leaders stopped by the mansion of their mentor, Aslam Beg, to tell him they were planning to wage war against the American occupiers.

As the rain outside turned to hail, banging against the windows, Aslam Beg ate some English sandwiches that had been wheeled in by a servant. “As a believer,” he went on, “I’ll tell you how I understand it. In the Holy Book there’s an injunction that the believer must reach out to defend the tyrannized. The words of God are, ‘What restrains you from fighting for those helpless men, women and children who due to their weakness are being brutalized and are calling you to free them from atrocities being perpetuated on them.’ This is a direct message, and it may not impact the hearts and minds of all believers. Maybe one in 10,000 will leave their home and go to the conflicts where Muslims are engaged in liberation movements, such as Chechnya, Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan and Kashmir. Now it’s a global deterrent force.”

The Authentic Jihad

The old city of Lahore, with its broad boulevards and banyan-tree canopies, remains the cultural and intellectual heart of Pakistan. It is home to a small elite of journalists, editors, authors, painters, artists and businessmen. Najam Sethi, editor in chief of The Friday Times, and his wife, Jugnu Mohsin, the publisher, are popular fixtures among this crowd. Like so many of Pakistan’s intellectuals, they have had their share of run-ins with government security agents. For pushing the bounds of press freedom, Sethi was dragged from his bedroom during Nawaz Sharif’s reign, beaten, gagged and detained without charge. Musharraf, in his new autobiography, claims that Nawaz Sharif wanted him to court-martial Sethi for treason, an act that seemed ludicrous to him, and he refused.

I met him one afternoon at the newspaper’s offices as he was preparing his weekly editorial. He is a tall, affable man with smiling eyes and large glasses. And he got right down to business, providing an analysis of why Pakistan had decided to bring its “assets” — by which he meant the Taliban and Kashmiri jihadis — off the shelf.

In the days following 9/11, when Musharraf gathered together major editors to tell them that he had no choice but to withdraw his support for the Taliban, Sethi raised the touchy issue of the other jihadis. He said that if Musharraf was abandoning the Taliban, he would have to abandon the sectarian jihadis (fighting the Shiites), the Kashmir jihadis, all of the jihadis, because they were all trained in mind by the same religious leaders and in body by the same Pakistani forces.

In January 2002, Musharraf gave an unusually long televised speech to the nation. He reminded the people that his campaign against extremism was initiated years before and not under American pressure. He vowed that Pakistan would no longer export jihadis to Kashmir, that he was again placing a ban on several jihadi organizations, that camps would be closed and that while the madrasas were mostly educating the poor, some were centers of extremist teaching and would be reformed. A month later, Musharraf was at the White House next to President Bush, who praised him for standing against terrorism.

Sethi characterized Pakistani authorities as believing that the U.S. in Iraq “will be a Vietnam.” He said: “Afghanistan will be neither here nor there. So we cannot wrap up our assets. We must protect them.” The I.S.I. realized it could help deliver Al Qaeda to the U.S. while keeping the Taliban and the jihadis on the back burner. At the same time, Musharraf’s moderate advisers were telling him that holding on to those assets would eventually boomerang. And soon enough, the assets began to come after Musharraf — while the people of Pakistan were turning against him for being pro-American. “So going after jihadis who were protecting the Taliban came to a halt,” Sethi said.

Meanwhile the landscape next door in Afghanistan was changing. The warlords were back in action. The drug economy was surging. By 2003 and 2004, Musharraf’s men were becoming hysterical about what they saw as a growing Indian presence in Afghanistan, particularly the Indian consulates in Kandahar and Jalalabad, the Pashtun strongholds that Pakistan considered its own turf. Karzai was doing business with Indians and Americans and was no longer a Pashtun whom Pakistanis would want to do business with.

As Sethi spoke, I recalled a meeting I had with one of Kandahar’s prominent tribal leaders. He recounted a visit from a former Pakistani general who had been active in the I.S.I. The general invited Kandahar’s leaders to lunch and warned them not to let the Indians put a consulate in Kandahar and to remember who their real benefactors were. Today there is a consulate there, and Indian films and music are sweeping through the Pashtun lands. What is more, many Pakistanis believe India is backing the Baluch insurgency in Pakistan’s far south, clouding the prospects for the new, Chinese-built port in Gwadar. The port is Pakistan’s single largest investment in its economic future and has been attacked by Baluch rebels.

In many ways, Pakistani policy is already looking beyond both Karzai and the Americans; they believe it is prudent to imagine a future with neither. That future will be shaped by the past: the past with India, the past with the Soviet Union, the past with America. For Pakistan’s hard-liners, at least, the obvious choice was to take their assets off the shelf and restart the jihad.

A Difficult Choice

On the wall outside the Eid Ga madrasa, in Kuchlak, a parched town near Quetta, Afghan students and teachers were debating the merits of jihad. One boy had just fled an American assault on Day Chopan in Zabul Province. He had never been to Pakistan before. He was frenzied, in shock. As a student from Kandahar led the others in dusk prayer, a young boy whispered to me, “I like America.” They were hardly a unified group. One young Helmandi told me, “We want our traditions of Islam and Sharia, not your democracy,” while another argued for peace. Then the Helmandi asked, with genuine confusion: “Why are Muslims being tortured everywhere in the world, and no one is there to stand up for them? But if you touch one Westerner, the sky is on your head?”

Most madrasas in Pakistan are run by the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, the religious-party alliance that has joined with Musharraf to keep the popular parties of Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif from regaining power. The J.U.I. madrasas usually endorse jihad, although even here I met madrasa students who were against the war. They subscribed to a vision of jihad as a struggle for self-improvement and the improvement of society. Mawlawi Mohammadin, a cleric from Helmand, went so far as to tell me that these are the true roots of jihad, though he confessed that his is a lonely voice. He was afraid of everyone — Taliban, Pakistani intelligence, even his pupils. “If we start openly supporting Karzai, we could be killed by our own students,” he told me with nervous laughter. Only a month earlier, a Taliban official from Helmand who had reconciled with Karzai’s government was gunned down by assassins on a motorbike in Quetta.

Mohammadin said that it is now open season for jihad in Afghanistan under J.U.I. guidance. Government ministers were even attending funerals to praise Pakistani Pashtuns who had died fighting in Kandahar. He estimates that there are some 10,000 Taliban fighters in Baluchistan. Despite the intimidation, he says he feels that his mission is to steer his students away from war.

One of these was Mohamed Nader, who had just attended a cousin’s funeral and was wondering what it all meant. His cousin’s family was poor, and without their knowledge, he had gone to earn money first by harvesting poppies in Helmand and then by fighting for the Taliban. Finally he was killed. Among the biggest problems, Nader told me, was that the cohesion of the Afghan family has been shredded by decades of poverty and refugee life in Pakistan. In a typically strong Afghan family, young adults obey their parents, even asking for permission to go fight. But here, boys just run off.

Rahmatullah was one of those who had run off and returned. He was skinny and disheveled, having just faced heavy fighting in Kandahar. Though an Afghan, he had grown up in Baluchistan, near the border, in an area where he said 200 fighters were now living. The mullah at his madrasa told all the students that it was time for jihad. And the I.S.I. was paying cash. But his father was old and against the war; he pleaded with him to abandon fighting. So he sent Rahmatullah to his friend Mohammadin, hoping he might open another path for his son. Rahmatullah told me that he wasn’t sure yet which mullah he would listen to.

(Next week, Part 2: How U.S. and NATO forces have been battling the Taliban and fighting for hearts and minds.)
 
Hey,

That was very informative. A little depressing though - the situation [edit: seems to be getting harder and harder to solve] :( I'm really looking forward to Part 2 of that article.

- CD
 
First strike policy of hit them first before they hit us....is it really working? Or are we just poking a stick at a sleeping giant that could wake, and bite us in the bum??
 
Apollo13 said:
First strike policy of hit them first before they hit us....is it really working? Or are we just poking a stick at a sleeping giant that could wake, and bite us in the bum??
Interesting take. I'm seem to recall Al Qaida striking first on Sept 11th, followed by the Taliban's refusal to clean up their own backyard.
 
Apollo13 said:
First strike policy of hit them first before they hit us....is it really working? Or are we just poking a stick at a sleeping giant that could wake, and bite us in the bum??
What are you talking about?
 
MCG said:
 
Apollo13 said:
First strike policy of hit them first before they hit us....is it really working? Or are we just poking a stick at a sleeping giant that could wake, and bite us in the bum??
What are you talking about?
truly. That makes absolutely no sense. We didn't hit them first, we got hit. We don't go picking fights over there, we respond. Canadian troops don't engage until engaged. They shoot in self-defence, or defence of others.

If Timmie laid down his arms, swore off violence, and entered the democratic process, there wouldn't be any violence in Afghanistan. "Don't start none, won't be none, Dawg. Word."
 
paracowboy said:
Canadian troops don't engage until engaged.
We are a little more proactive than that, but this is certainly fitting:
paracowboy said:
"Don't start none, won't be none, Dawg. Word."
 
MCG said:
We are a little more proactive than that, but this is certainly fitting:
Okay, if ya wanna be all literal about it. I'm bein' down-home and folksy. Point being, if Timmie wasn't trying to blow shit up, murder civilians, burn down schools and hospitals, etc, etc...we wouldn't be going after him. We don't hunt down people in Canada, let alone foreign lands, if they cause no harm.
 
Not even the NRA is going to argue that half a dozen men with assault rifles, a light machine gun, and a pair of RPG are just peacefully out walking their goat.  We do not engage civilians going about their daily business, but only those of manifestly hostile intent, who we do not give an even break.  And if a man points a 25mm cannon at you and demands that you halt, driving full speed  towards him is considered hostile as well as stupid.  Afghans who are just trying to live their lives have nothing to fear from Canadian troops, and much to gain from our presence.
 
Why we may yet loose (and not in the field):

http://cjunk.blogspot.com/2006/10/losing-afghanistan.html

27 October 2006
Losing Afghanistan

As a supporter of the NATO and ISAF mission in Afghanistan, and as a parent of a Canadian Armed Forces soldier, it pains me to give my Afghanistan prediction. The Afghan mission will fail.

First, let me say that I believe that the Afghan conflict is winnable. I believe that if NATO were made of the right stuff, 10 years from now would have Afghans living in relative peace and security. Contrary to what the majority of media pundits and those who stake their political ground on the “talk-don’t-shoot” side of the aisle have to say, beating the Taliban militarily is not only possible, but not that difficult. The problem lies, as it has from the start in Iraq, and as it did in Vietnam, in mustering the political and domestic will to do what it takes to win. To this end, there are several realities at play that will make winning in Afghanistan problematic; if not impossible.

NATO: Our NATO allies must remove the caveats that prevent their troops from “fighting”. Unfortunately, the Canadian example scares the pants off of most European states which must contend with a pacifist mindset and rampant anti-Americanism within their voting publics… not to mention ever growing Muslim enclaves that can, like in Belgium, determine electoral success or failure. Canada’s military casualties in Afghanistan stand as a clear reminder to our NATO allies that getting serious in Afghanistan means taking casualties, and for Europeans, that would spell a million Jack Laytons marching in the streets of Berlin, Paris, and Copenhagen ranting against the Bush/Blair/Hitler war. It is possible that only the UK government can politically survive the Afghan shooting war.

The reality though, is that killing Taliban and risking troops is the only way to win. Without increased security, schools will be burned down faster than they can be built, construction crews murdered while applying asphalt, and female leaders butchered as a warning to others. It takes months to build a school, yet it takes only a can of petrol and one Jihadist to burn it down. It takes enormous trust and faith to fill a school with girls and only one grenade to murder and maim them. It takes education and trust to inspire “progressive” Afghans, yet they can be exterminated faster than they can rebuild their country. It takes incredible amounts of money to rebuild a shattered country, yet drug lords can generate that and more in one growing season. Living, breathing, radical Taliban, can not exist in harmony with any peaceful Afghan state.

The problem is that Non-English Europe, as in 1939, doesn’t have the stomach for armed conflict, and would rather capitulate (as it did in 1939), than stand up for democratic principles, stand up to Islamic Fascism, and stand with the Afghan people. Without the Taliban being hunted down and killed where they lurk, development will be a failure. Development is the greatest enemy of Jihadists; and they know it.

Punditry: Critique of the Afghan mission must become concrete and based in reality; not on utopian fantasy, or for pure political gain. I read scores of opinion pieces a week from which I select a few to go into the MediaRight.ca opinion section. What I have found is that for the most part, opposition to the war effort amounts to an incessant drumbeat of doom and gloom all with two purposes in mind; to defeat conservatives in elections, or to promote a utopian view of the world. This world view theorizes that all conflict can be solved with dialogue, development, and multilateralism. Seldom is contrary opinion on the Afghan conflict based in a truly balanced critique and analysis drawn from all partisan viewpoints. Literally, most critique is structured solely to tear down those administering the conflict.

The end result is that ordinary citizens must ignore the constant negative spin inflicted on them via the MSM, and come to conclusions that seem contrary to a misleading consensus view. The chances of this happening are slim; and no matter how intellectually robust and how well informed citizens are, the constant nay saying is bound to sap public support.

Every Canadian casualty on the battle field causes a convulsion of moaning, hand wringing, navel gazing, and second guessing on the part of the majority of pundits and MSM scribes. And worse, it causes that much more pacifist drum beating from the utopian left and that much more shrill criticism from the opposition in parliament. Canadian deaths, handed us via the Taliban, are used by opposition parliamentarians as leverage to knock the ruling conservatives out of office; not as a call to share in the ISAF mission. In other words, the goal of opposition parties to win elections supersedes that of beating the Taliban.

Safe Havens: Virtually every single successful insurgency or guerilla war has had a donor and safe haven. Afghanistan has Iran on one side and Pakistan on the other. Both act as did Cambodia and North Vietnam during the Vietnam War. Pakistan and Iran play the disingenuous neutral or even allied game, soothing with the right words and just enough action to keep their territories from being targeted. Yet, from each comes a steady, even growing, supply of suicide murderers and foot soldiers. Unless Pakistan first, and then Iran, are dealt with, the Taliban can maintain the current tempo of conflict for decades and Canadians can count on 20 to a 100 dead soldiers every year with nothing but a little development to show for it.

The Taliban: Victory for the Taliban is straightforward. Casualties must be inflicted on NATO forces not in order to win on the field of battle, but to sap support for the mission in the West. This task is, in fact, fairly simple. A suicide murder here; a bicycle bomb there, an IED tossed in for good measure, and specifically targeted countries can be influenced. Knock off enough Canucks and the likes of Craig Oliver of the CTV will almost wet themselves with anxiety on national television. Gone are the WW2 days when a defeat at the hands of fascists meant that much harsher a response.

Then, there is the Taliban war on progress; destroy infrastructure, terrorize relief and aid efforts, break whatever is fixed by NATO, and you will win. Not only will Afghans begin to despair, but NATO home front pacifists will crow all the louder and demand withdrawal. If NATO wants to talk, the Taliban will talk… then they’ll do as Muslims do all over the world… say one thing, do another… make promises, break them… talk peace, then commit murder. It’s Muslim skullduggery at its best, and it’s a method as old as Mohammad and the way business is done in almost every single Muslim country on earth.

Conclusion: In the end, if NATO is not ready and willing to confront, root out, and kill Taliban, we might as well pack up and go home now. Sure, wonderful warm and fuzzy development projects with cute little girls sitting in school make “progressives” coo; but development will continue to be an illusive dream if those who wage Jihad are not ruthlessly and mercilessly engaged in war. That, is the pure, simple, realistic, and unavoidable fact of combating evil.

Consider the supreme irony. The goal of the Taliban is to remove Canadian Armed Forces from Afghanistan… this is also the goal of Canada’s “progressive” party, the NDP. The goal of the Taliban is to remove the most “hawkish” Western administrations from power… this is also the goal of the Liberal oppositions in both the United States and Canada. In other words, the Taliban need only play to the home front in Europe and Canada, and they will win.

I fully trust that my son and his fellow soldiers are up to the task, but I don’t trust the “progressive” opposition and the Liberal press to set aside it’s partisan rhetoric in order to deny the Jihadists a target here at home and to give our forces a chance. If given the full weight of Canadian support and NATO cooperation, the Taliban will be literally bled into submission as has been every other enemy we have ever defeated, and Afghanistan will become peaceful enough for the real work of development to begin. I don’t trust though, for a moment, the decadent Western Liberal elite; to keep it’s critique constructive; and to play the part of a team player. That would be asking too much.
 
As an aside, this conflict started well before the 9/11 attacks, so I'd caution those who stake their argument to who did what in late 2001.  World War II didn't begin with Pearl Harbour.....
 
Infanteer said:
As an aside, this conflict started well before the 9/11 attacks, so I'd caution those who stake their argument to who did what in late 2001.  World War II didn't begin with Pearl Harbour.....

http://www.scs.uiuc.edu/~mcdonald/WorldHaplogroupsMaps.pdf

A Haplogroup is a chunk of genetic material.  Racial, Tribal, Clan theory would suppose that all one race would be of all one Haplotype as in the case of the maternal DNA (mtDNA) of the Eskimo/Inuit (designated as ES).  Or at least of predominantly one type.  There are are number of examples of that.

Nation-State theory would suggest that one set of borders should belong to one people with one colour of Haplotypes.

However, if you look in the neighbourhood of Afghanistan and check out the Hezaras (HZ), Uzbeks (UZ), Persians (PE), Kurds (KU), Turks (TU), Han Chinese (HA) then you will see what a pretty array of colours make up each "Ethnic" group, each "Race".  And they are all inter-related.

Interestingly enough there is not much to choose amongst the Scots, English, Irish and French either.

It takes a long time for that degree of intermixing to occur.

Whatever the underlying causes of dispute are it isn't a "natural" antipathy.  Nor is it about "natural" races.  As alway it is about people and individual choices and leadership and belief.
 
How far back do you want to go to find root causes?  :)

We make them up as we go along.
 
I was kind of hinting at the fact that 9/11 was the second time that these fellows hit the WTC.  :-*
 
Just throwing this out there but perhaps if the government had some sort of propaganda campaign going on, sort of like what you see from WWII, it could help raise public support.
 
warspite said:
Just throwing this out there but perhaps if the government had some sort of propaganda campaign going on, sort of like what you see from WWII, it could help raise public support.
for that, you need the tacit support of the popular media. And the Taliban have that in Canada.
 
warspite said:
... perhaps if the government had some sort of propaganda campaign going on, sort of like what you see from WWII, it could help raise public support.
Don't need the propaganda campaign.  Just need to keep Canadians informed with the truth & not to let attention seekers toss-out lies without being corrected in the media.
 
Back
Top