News Progress in Afghanistan: What's Next After 6 Years of War?

[Art]

I am not questioning the justification for the original attack on Afghanistan I am questioning the need to stay there and try to change an unwilling populace to adopt Western values.

We may think life for women was hell in Afghanistan from our western viewpoint but it is not for us to impose our value system and morals on other people by force.

Britain, when at the height of it's international power, tried 3 times to subjugate Afghanistan and each time, after initial military victories, were comprehensively beaten and left with their tails between their legs.

This despite the lack of press coverage and rules of war at that time which allowed Britain to prosecute the war anyway it liked including using tactics that would nowadays be termed as terrorism.

Whether we like it or not there is absolutely nothing western gov'ts can do win over the Afghan people and persuade them to change their laws and customs other than, as I said before, wiping them all out and starting again.

Far better imo to stand back, observe, and use tactical strikes when and where deemed necessary to neuter international threats.

 

[mgb_phys]

The US went in precisely because the Taliban were sheltering bin Laden and al Qaida, who were using Afghanistan as a base and safe haven.

There are a lot of countries we could invade if they are harbouring terrorists. This one just happened to have an oil pipeline route.

The tribes and warlords could have reached an accomodation, and much of Aghanistan would have been hell for any woman.

Yep, think we used the same reason for ruling India for 300years.

Unfortunately, under the US control, opium production has recovered, and the warlords use the cash to buy weapons. On the other hand, those drug warlords don't like the Taliban and will fight them.

Which is why we allow them to grow heroin and sell them the weapons - it worked in Laos, Panama and even in Afghanistan/Pakistan last time.

The new head of ISI may be taking stronger measures against al Qaida and Taliban, and their Pakistani supporters.

Tricky since many of the Pakistani supporters are in government and we support the goverment.

The US is firing missiles from Predator drones into Waziristan against Taliban targets.

If past experience is anything to go by they are firing at something - might be people, might even be fighters and with a bit of luck they are enemy fighters.

 

[Astronuc]

Well, the crux of the matter at hand is that the US and other nations (NATO) have committed armed forces to Afghanistan now - rightly or wrongly - and they're going to stay - probably until it gets too expensive to do so. The US and NATO are there at the behest of the Afghani government.

At the moment the Bush administration is trying to get bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri.

In early September of 2008, Pakistan military claimed that they "almost" captured al-Zawahiri after getting information that he and his wife were in the Mohmand Agency, in northwest Pakistan. After raiding the area, officials didn't find him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayman_al-Zawahiri

At the moment, the US is trying to locate Taliban and al-Qaida leaders/groups close to the border with Afghanistan, and attack them. The US is trying to encourage Paksitan's ISI to do the same. There are some conflicts therein.

 

[Astronuc]

Well, the crux of the matter at hand is that the US and other nations (NATO) have committed armed forces to Afghanistan now - rightly or wrongly - and they're going to stay - probably until it gets too expensive to do so. The US and NATO are there at the behest of the Afghani government.

At the moment the Bush administration is trying to get bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayman_al-Zawahiri

At the moment, the US is trying to locate Taliban and al-Qaida leaders/groups close to the border with Afghanistan, and attack them. The US is trying to encourage Paksitan's ISI to do the same. There are some conflicts therein.

Most people there (Northwest Frontier Province) are pretty decent. The problem is al-Qaida and some of the Taliban. For example, al-Qaida and Taliban are making life difficult for the Kalash people in the Kunar Valley (just south of Chitral). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalash

Next door to Chitral is Nuristan and Kunar (with Nangarhar just south of Kunar), which are problematic places in Afghanistan. Taliban and al-Qaida have been floating back and forth across the border, although that is becoming increasingly difficult with intervention of the US in Afghanistan and ISI in Paksitan. On the other hand, US incursions into Pakistan will increase tensions with the ISI.

The tribal areas, particularly Waziristan (Pakistan) in conjunction with Paktika and Khost provinces in Afghanistan are problematic given the smuggling and weapons trafficking going on.


A good perspective on the problem is given in -
Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000H2NAW6/?tag=pfamazon01-20

 

[Art]

Well, the crux of the matter at hand is that the US and other nations (NATO) have committed armed forces to Afghanistan now - rightly or wrongly - and they're going to stay - probably until it gets too expensive to do so. The US and NATO are there at the behest of the Afghani government.

The Russians were there also at the behest of the then Afghan gov't so I'm not sure how much genuine legitimacy this bestows.

At the moment the Bush administration is trying to get bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri.

I'd like to think the Bush administration has been trying to capture Bin Laden since Sept 12th 2001.

At the moment, the US is trying to locate Taliban and al-Qaida leaders/groups close to the border with Afghanistan, and attack them. The US is trying to encourage Paksitan's ISI to do the same. There are some conflicts therein.

During the first world war snipers always aimed at officers first, to the extent both Britain and Germany complained at a very high level about each other's practices.

Despite tremendous success in wiping out each other's officer corp on a near daily basis it made not an iota of difference to the war itself. New officers were appointed and the war went on.

The same is now true today. The only good thing that comes out of killing Taliban leaders is the bragging rights in the paper the next day. In terms of defeating the enemy it is meaningless.

 

[mgb_phys]

Despite tremendous success in wiping out each other's officer corp on a near daily basis it made not an iota of difference to the war itself. New officers were appointed and the war went on.

In the British army WWI officer were so worthless that they actually received less training than the privates. Anyone from a public (ie private) school was made an officer and issued with only a side arm.

 

[Astronuc]

The Russians were there also at the behest of the then Afghan gov't so I'm not sure how much genuine legitimacy this bestows.

I'd like to think the Bush administration has been trying to capture Bin Laden since Sept 12th 2001.

They have, but they are trying a lot harder at the moment.

During the first world war snipers always aimed at officers first, to the extent both Britain and Germany complained at a very high level about each other's practices.

Despite tremendous success in wiping out each other's officer corp on a near daily basis it made not an iota of difference to the war itself. New officers were appointed and the war went on.

The same is now true today. The only good thing that comes out of killing Taliban leaders is the bragging rights in the paper the next day. In terms of defeating the enemy it is meaningless.

I don't agree with the US approach, especially because it produces results like - the Shinwar Massacre. That's one reason I could never wear a uniform, i.e. be part of a military.

 

[Art]

They have, but they are trying a lot harder at the moment.

I don't agree with the US approach, especially because it produces results like - the Shinwar Massacre. That's one reason I could never wear a uniform, i.e. be part of a military.

That massacre was vastly surpassed by the Nawabad massacre in August this year with the UN saying at least 90 civilians including 60 children were killed in a US airstrike

U.S. Killed 90, Including 60 Children, in Afghan Village, U.N. Finds

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/27/world/asia/27herat.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

 

[rootX]

I think the fundamental problem is that US is trying to make Afghanistan better from its own perspective and some people there don't like that. Like giving equal rights to women- and now woman are getting targets of the terrorists. Recently, a female police officer was killed in an attack.
I think US has to respect their society and try to follow the Islamic laws, provide assurance that US don't have any personal interests and it would leave soon. It should avoid military actions - it can never kill terrorism.

Killing Osama/taking revenge shouldn't be the prime target (Killing Osama or eliminating terrorism just sounds stupid to me).

 

[Astronuc]

Approximately 395 civilians have been killed by US and allied forces in 2008.

That massacre was vastly surpassed by the Nawabad massacre in August this year with the UN saying at least 90 civilians including 60 children were killed in a US airstrike

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/27/world/asia/27herat.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Killing civilians outrages Afghans, damages international troops popularity
http://www.afghanistannewscenter.com/news/2008/august/aug252008.html#4

--------------------------------------------------
Shinwar Massacre

The Shinwar Massacre refers to the killing of at least nineteen civilians, including an infant and three elderly men, by US Marines in the Shinwar district of the Nangrahar province of Afghanistan on March 4, 2007. At least thirty-three civilians were injured in the shootings.[1] The casualty figures continue to be disputed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_4,_2007_Shooting_in_Afghanistan

Marines killed civilians in Afghanistan: report
http://www.dawn.com/2007/04/16/top12.htm
---------------------------------------------------

Both DOD Secretary Robert Gates and Gen. McKiernan have acknowledge the need to avoid civilian deaths in combat areas.

U.S. commander calls for troops [McKiernan]
http://www.dailymail.com/News/NationandWorld/200809170283

A United Nations report issued Tuesday said that U.S. and NATO airstrikes have killed 395 Afghanistan civilians this year.

The issue of civilian deaths has been thrown into sharp relief by a U.S.-led raid in western Afghanistan last month in which the United Nations estimates 92 civilians were killed. The U.S. military has said only about seven civilians died, but it has begun a new high-level review.The incident has deeply angered the Afghan government. President Hamid Karzai, who is scheduled to meet with Gates on Wednesday, is expected to again press the issue.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/09/17/afghan-civilians.html
http://newsfeedresearcher.com/data/articles_w38/idw2008.09.17.16.18.57.html


OHCHR in Afghanistan (2008-2009)
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/AsiaRegion/Pages/AFSummary0809.aspx

Afghanistan continues to suffer from a pervasive culture of impunity and a weak rule of law.Worsening security conditions have substantially diminished the enjoyment of human rights, including the right to life and safety, freedom of movement, access to education and health, and access to livelihoods by communities in insurgencyaffected areas.

Illegal and arbitrary detention continues, and in a significant proportion of cases, pre-trial detention deadlines are breached, suspects are not given defence counsel, and ill-treatment and torture are used to force confessions. Very few people have access to redress mechanisms, especially women. There are frequent reports of arbitrary denial of justice in disputes over housing, land and property rights.

There are clear signs that freedom of expression is threatened, with continuing reports of arbitrary arrests, detention and intimidation of journalists. There has been limited progress towards the implementation of the transitional justice action plan (Action Plan on Peace, Reconciliation and Justice in Afghanistan) adopted by the Government in December 2005 and due for completion by end 2008.

 

[mgb_phys]

I think the fundamental problem is that US is trying to make Afghanistan better from its own perspective and some people there don't like that. Like giving equal rights to women- and now woman are getting targets of the terrorists. Recently, a female police officer was killed in an attack.

I think US has to respect their society and try to follow the Islamic laws, provide assurance that US don't have any personal interests and it would leave soon. It should avoid military actions - it can never kill terrorism.

The US is trying to do exactly what everybody else did.
You want a cooperative government in charge to keep neighbouring countries in line.
So you pick a group that seems amenable and declare the other side to be either;
barbarians (if you Alexander->British ), anti-revolutionary elements (if USSR) or terrorists (if USA) and spear/musket/shell/bomb the **** out of them.

 

[rootX]

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/10/04/afghan-war.html?ref=rss

Victory impossible in Afghanistan: senior British commander

 

[Astronuc]

Carleton-Smith's comment is troubling. It would certainly undermine efforts to establish a democracy in Afghanistan. I do think aggressive military action, with collateral damage, is harmful.

Commander expects no clear Afghan victory: report
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081004/wl_uk_afp/britainafghanistanunrestmilitary

LONDON (AFP) - The top military commander in Afghanistan said in an interview Sunday the public should not expect "decisive military victory" there, only the reduction of the insurgency to manageable levels.

Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith, commander of 16 Air Assault Brigade, which has just completed its second tour in Afghanistan, told the Sunday Times that people should "lower their expectations" about how the conflict will end.

He also said Britons should prepare for a possible deal with the Taliban.

"We're not going to win this war. It's about reducing it to a manageable level of insurgency that's not a strategic threat and can be managed by the Afghan army," he told the newspaper.

Carleton-Smith said his forces had "taken the sting out of the Taliban for 2008" but said it would be "unrealistic and probably incredible" to think that the multinational forces in Afghanistan could rid the country of armed bands.

Leaked diplomatic cable promotes 'acceptable dictator' in Afghanistan
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/10/05/europe/diplo.php

PARIS: A coded French diplomatic cable leaked to a French newspaper quotes the British ambassador in Afghanistan as predicting that the NATO-led military campaign against the Taliban will fail. That was not all. The best solution for the country, the ambassador said, would be installing an "acceptable dictator," according to the newspaper.

"The current situation is bad, the security situation is getting worse, so is corruption, and the government has lost all trust," the British envoy, Sherard Cowper-Coles, was quoted as saying by the author of the cable, François Fitou, the French deputy ambassador to Kabul.

The two-page cable - which was sent to the Élysée Palace and the French Foreign Ministry on Sept. 2, and was leaked to the investigative and satirical weekly Le Canard Enchaîné, which printed excerpts in its Wednesday issue - said the NATO-led military presence was making it harder to stabilize the country.

"The presence of the coalition, in particular its military presence, is part of the problem, not part of its solution," Cowper-Coles was quoted as saying. "Foreign forces are the lifeline of a regime that would rapidly collapse without them. As such, they slow down and complicate a possible emergence from the crisis."

Within five to 10 years, the only "realistic" way to unite Afghanistan would be for it to be "governed by an acceptable dictator," the cable said, adding, "We should think of preparing our public opinion" for such an outcome.
. . . .

Afghanistan mission not doomed: Britain
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/world/25747/afghanistan-mission-not-doomed-britain

The British government has denied a claim that the UK believes the military campaign in Afghanistan is doomed to failure, after a French newspaper quoted a report that London's ambassador to Kabul said foreign troops added to the country's woes.

France's weekly Le Canard Enchaine published what it said was a leaked French diplomatic cable recounting talks between Britain's Ambassador Sherard Cowper-Coles and a French official.

The newspaper said the French cable reported that Cowper-Coles had said Afghanistan might best be "governed by an acceptable dictator" and that the cable quoted him as saying foreign troops were adding to the country's problems by helping shore up a failing government in Kabul.

Cowper-Coles was quoted as saying that "the American strategy is destined to fail" and that the presence of foreign troops in Afghanistan was "part of the problem, not the solution."

The prospect of a dictatorship was "the only realistic one and we must get public opinion ready to accept it," the report quotes the alleged cable as saying.

The newspaper, a weekly publication known for its investigative stories, published excerpts of the cable, including a passage that quoted the British ambassador as criticizing both US presidential candidates over pledges to send more US troops to Afghanistan.

"It is the American presidential candidates who must be dissuaded from getting further bogged down in Afghanistan," an extract of the cable published by the newspaper quoted Cowper-Coles as saying.
. . . .

War in Afghanistan cannot be won, British commander Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith warns
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...nder-Brigadier-Mark-Carleton-Smith-warns.html
The war in Afghanistan cannot be won, Britain's most senior military commander in the country has warned.

Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith said the British public should not expect "a decisive military victory" and that he believed groups of insurgents would still be at large after troops pulled out.

In June, he claimed that British forces had reached a "tipping point" against a weakened Taliban after their leadership was "decapitated".

But on Sunday the army officer said it was time to lower expectations and focus on reducing the conflict to a level which could be managed by the Afghan army.

Brig Carleton-Smith, commander of 16 Air Assault Brigade - which has just completed its second tour of Afghanistan - said talking to the Taliban could be an important part of that process.

He insisted his forces had "taken the sting out" of the Taliban for 2008 as winter and the colder weather approaches, but warned that many of the fighters would return in May or June.

Meanwhile - Taliban said to be furious over US missile strike
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081005/ap_on_re_as/as_pakistan

DERA ISMAIL KHAN, Pakistan - The Taliban are furious about the latest apparent U.S. missile strike in Pakistan, indicating a senior militant may be among two dozen people killed, officials and residents said Sunday.

. . .

The U.S. rarely acknowledges cross-border attacks inside Pakistani territory by forces from Afghanistan. A U.S. military spokesman in Afghanistan, 1st Lt. Nathan Perry, did not deny U.S. involvement but said he had "no information to give."

Extremists based in Pakistan's border regions have been blamed for attacks on American and NATO forces in Afghanistan and for violence inside Pakistan. Al-Qaida leaders including Osama bin Laden are believed to be hiding somewhere in the lawless tribal regions along the border.
. . . .

Pakistan's fledgling civilian government has tried to convince the population it cannot duck the fight against militancy. But leaders also warn that American attacks in Pakistan inflame public opinion against the West and undermine the fight against terrorism.

On Wednesday, intelligence agencies are to privately brief lawmakers about the militant threat facing Pakistan during a special joint session of parliament.

. . . .

Security forces on Sunday killed two alleged Taliban commanders in Swat, one of whom was believed to be affiliated with al-Qaida, said Maj. Nasir Ali, an army spokesman.

In the Bajur tribal region, overnight clashes with security forces killed five suspected militants, police official Fazl Rabi said. A Sunday bomb blast wounded five people in a compound where tribal elders were meeting to discuss ways to rid the area of militants, Rabi said.

The military offensive in Bajur has earned praise from the U.S., but it has also prompted a mass exodus of civilians fleeing the fighting.

Many are in relief camps in Pakistan, but some 20,000 Pakistanis have crossed the border into eastern Afghanistan, according to the United Nations.

Meanwhile, a three-day ultimatum from the government for Afghans living illegally in Bajur to leave was due to expire later Sunday. Of an estimated 80,000 Afghans, only about 15,000 had left, said Abdul Haseeb, a local government official.

. . . .

The civilian population on the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan are could among US/Nato forces, Afghan military, Pakistani ISI and Taliban/al-Qaida.

 

[Astronuc]

Interesting interview with the new president of Pakistan, Asif Ali Zardari.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122307507392703831.html

When he discusses Pakistan's economic crisis -- the central bank has about two months' worth of foreign currency reserves left to pay for the country's imports of oil and food -- he says he looks to the world to "give me $100 billion."

So much for stability.

 

[Art]

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/10/04/afghan-war.html?ref=rss

It seems Britain's top military man on the ground in Afghanistan agrees with my assessment

 

[Astronuc]

Afghan war cannot be won militarily: U.N.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081006/ts_nm/us_afghan_taliban

KABUL (Reuters) - The war in Afghanistan cannot be won militarily and success is only possible through political means including dialogue between all relevant parties, the United Nations' top official in the country said Monday.
. . . .
I've always said to those that talk about the military surge ... what we need most of all is a political surge, more political energy," Kai Eide, the U.N. special envoy to Afghanistan, told a news conference in Kabul.

"We all know that we cannot win it militarily. It has to be won through political means. That means political engagement."

Eide said success depended on speaking with all sides in the conflict. "If you want to have relevant results, you must speak to those who are relevant. If you want to have results that matter, you must speak to those who matter," he said.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said: "We're not losing in Afghanistan, though there certainly is a recognition that there's more we could be doing there."

Asked about the possibility of negotiations with the Taliban, he replied: "This is not an element of our strategy. They have terrorized Afghan society for years."

The British ambassador to Kabul said a troop surge would only create more targets for the Taliban. The comments were made to a French colleague who sent a telegram to Paris which was leaked and published in Le Canard Enchaine newspaper last week.

But the U.S. general commanding NATO forces said last month he needed three more brigades -- possibly around 15,000 troops -- on top of an extra 4,000 soldiers due to arrive in January.

Faced with the persistent reluctance of some of its European allies to send more troops to Afghanistan or allow them to fight once there, the United States has asked Japan and NATO countries to help foot the $17-billion bill to build up the Afghan army.
. . . .

Meanwhile - Karzai's brother may be implicated in drug trafficking.
Reports link Karzai's brother to Afghan heroin trade
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/10/05/asia/afghan.php

When Afghan security forces found an enormous cache of heroin hidden beneath concrete blocks in a tractor-trailer outside Kandahar in 2004, the local Afghan commander quickly impounded the truck and notified his boss. Before long, the commander, Habibullah Jan, received a telephone call from Ahmed Wali Karzai, the brother of President Hamid Karzai, asking him to release the vehicle and the drugs, Jan later told American investigators, according to notes from the debriefing obtained by The New...

 

[Astronuc]

U.S. dismisses Afghan war comments as "defeatist"
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE49607N20081007
By Jonathon Burch and Kristin Roberts

KABUL (Reuters) - Britain's military commander and ambassador in Afghanistan are being "defeatist" by thinking the war cannot be won, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said, as Washington seeks more troops for the conflict that started exactly seven years ago.

The comments by the officials from Britain, a key ally to the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq, were echoed by the top United Nations official in Kabul, who said success was only possible through dialogue and other political efforts.

After the invasion of Afghanistan on October 7, 2001 to oust the fundamentalist Taliban government in the wake of the September 11 attacks on the United States, security has deteriorated markedly over the past two years.

"While we face significant challenges in Afghanistan, there certainly is no reason to be defeatist or to underestimate the opportunities to be successful in the long run," Gates said on Monday on his way to Europe to meet defense ministers.

Washington is reviewing its Afghan strategy in a similar way to the 2006 reappraisal of its Iraq policy that led to a "surge" of 30,000 troops and helped pull the country back from the brink of civil war.

Gates said part of the solution in Afghanistan would be negotiating with members of the Taliban willing to work with the government in Kabul. He compared that to reconciliation efforts in Iraq, where tribal leaders have switched sides to fight the insurgency and al Qaeda.

"What we have seen in Iraq applies in Afghanistan," Gates said of the possibility of peace talks with the Taliban.
. . . .

Afghanistan is more fractured than Iraq. I agree with Gates that the solution will be to work with Taliban and any tribal group who support the government and democracy in Afghanistan (which includes participation of women somehow including education). The problem remains al Qaeda and Taliban who do not share those views.

 

[Astronuc]

Petraeus sees increasingly durable gains in Iraq
http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE496A1720081007

The longer the violence remains low the less likely (hopefully) it will pick up again. I think people are finally getting tired and want something better.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Army Gen. David Petraeus said on Tuesday that security gains in Iraq are increasingly durable but warned that that methods which helped reduce violence there may not work in Afghanistan.

Petraeus, the former commander in Iraq who is credited by U.S. officials with saving the country from sectarian war, emphasized that progress in Iraq remains fragile and reversible despite an 80 percent drop in violence.
. . . .
Petraeus was the main architect of a 2007 build-up in U.S. forces known as the surge, which has been given much credit for reducing violence levels.

Violence also fell after Sunni tribesmen joined U.S. forces against al Qaeda and after radical Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr declared a ceasefire for his militia.

"The people realize more and more that they do not want to return to the ethno-sectarian violence that had their country on the brink of civil war," Petraeus said.
. . . .

Afghanistan is different than Iraq. There is a different history and a different dynamic.

 

[Astronuc]

U.S. inquiry shows Afghan raid killed 30 people: report
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081008/wl_nm/us_afgan_usa_civilians_report

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An inquiry by the U.S. military has concluded that U.S. air strikes on an Afghan village in August killed more than 30 civilians, far more than U.S. commanders have acknowledged, The New York Times said on Tuesday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/08/washington/08inquiry.html

The military investigator’s report found that more than 30 civilians — not 5 to 7 as the military has long insisted — died in the airstrikes against a suspected Taliban compound in Azizabad.
. . . .

The investigator, Brig. Gen. Michael W. Callan of the Air Force, concluded that many more civilians, including women and children, had been buried in the rubble than the military had asserted, one of the military officials said.

The airstrikes have been the focus of sharp tensions between the Afghan government, which has said that 90 civilians died in the raid, and the American military, under Gen. David D. McKiernan, the top American military commander in Afghanistan, which has repeatedly insisted that only a handful of civilians were killed.

The report was requested by General McKiernan on Sept. 7, more than two weeks after the airstrikes, in response to what he said at the time was “emerging evidence” about the raids. While American commanders in Afghanistan have contended that 30 to 35 militants were killed in the raid, the new report concludes that many among that group were in fact civilians, the military officials said.
. . . .

The US cannot win if the military continues to kill civilians like this.

 

[Art]

U.S. inquiry shows Afghan raid killed 30 people: report
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081008/wl_nm/us_afgan_usa_civilians_report



http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/08/washington/08inquiry.html
The US cannot win if the military continues to kill civilians like this.

What compounds the problem is their instinct always seems to be to try and lie about it. Even this final report is off by a factor of 3 compared to the UN's findings. By not admitting the truth it makes the next tragedy all the more likely as no lessons are learned.

 

[Astronuc]

U.S. Study Is Said to Warn of Crisis in Afghanistan
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/09/world/asia/09afghan.html

WASHINGTON — A draft report by American intelligence agencies concludes that Afghanistan is in a “downward spiral” and casts serious doubt on the ability of the Afghan government to stem the rise in the Taliban’s influence there, according to American officials familiar with the document.

The classified report finds that the breakdown in central authority in Afghanistan has been accelerated by rampant corruption within the government of President Hamid Karzai and by an increase in violence by militants who have launched increasingly sophisticated attacks from havens in Pakistan.

The report, a nearly completed version of a National Intelligence Estimate, is set to be finished after the November elections and will be the most comprehensive American assessment in years on the situation in Afghanistan. Its conclusions represent a harsh verdict on decision-making in the Bush administration, which in the months after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks made Afghanistan the central focus of a global campaign against terrorism.

Beyond the cross-border attacks launched by militants in neighboring Pakistan, the intelligence report asserts that many of Afghanistan’s most vexing problems are of the country’s own making, the officials said.

The report cites gains in the building of Afghanistan’s national army, the officials said. But they said it also laid out in stark terms what it described as the destabilizing impact of the booming heroin trade, which by some estimates accounts for 50 percent of Afghanistan’s economy.

The Bush administration has initiated a major review of its Afghanistan policy and has decided to send additional troops to the country. The downward slide in the security situation in Afghanistan has also become an issue in the presidential campaign, along with questions about whether the White House emphasis in recent years on the war in Iraq has been misplaced.

Henry A. Crumpton, a career C.I.A. officer who last year stepped down as the State Department’s top counterterrorism official, attributed some of Afghanistan’s problems to a “lack of leadership” both at the White House and in European capitals where commitments to rebuild Afghanistan after 2001 have never been met.

. . . .

Ummm - I think progress is headed in the wrong direction.

 

[Pyrrhus]

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200806/world-in-numbers"

Hope Through Better Highways?

Heavy fighting continues in isolated valleys, particularly in the Korengal Valley, where road building is under way. But a road through the Pech Valley, now complete, has provided the kind of economic and security boost that U.S. officers say they anticipated. Senator Joseph Biden, who visited Kunar province in February, told the Associated Press, “How do you spell hope in Dari and Pashtu? A-S-P-H-A-L-T.”

Bombs Away

U.S. commanders in Kunar province say that the number of roadside bomb attacks has been cut by more than half over the past year, in part because of road improvements—mines are more difficult to conceal on asphalt roads than on dirt ones. Overall, confirmed deaths of NATO and coalition forces in Kunar have dropped, from about 30 in 2006 to 10 or so in 2007, and to just one during the first three months of this year.

This is an article back in June, 2008. I thought it offered a point of view not many of us have heard.

 

[Astronuc]

A good program that was going on was the Alternative Livelihoods Program / Eradicating Drugs by USAid/Dept of State.

http://www.state.gov/p/sca/rls/fs/2005/52396.htm

The program principally targets core poppy-producing areas in southern (Helmand and Kandahar Provinces), eastern (Nangarhar and Laghman Provinces) and northern (Badakhshan Province) Afghanistan, but will include activities in other provinces where poppy cultivation is expanding or where there has been a concerted effort to eliminate narcotics production.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmand_Province
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Badakhshan_Province

 

[Art]

The best summary of the current status in Afghanistan was in a BBC report I read the other day where the reporter said the total extent of the Afghan gov'ts influence is the distance of one rifle shot from the fortified walls of Kabul.

 

[Astronuc]

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/david_d_mckiernan/index.html

David D. McKiernan, the American four-star general who led the allied ground forces during the invasion of Iraq in 2003, became the NATO commander in Afghanistan as of June 2008. As head of the International Security Assistance Force, he is the military leader in charge of the allied war effort in Afghanistan against increasingly deadly and aggressive attacks by Taliban and Al Qaeda militants, many of whom are based in western Pakistan.

General McKiernan was never a favorite of former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. In the months before the Iraq war, he pressed to begin the war with a greater number of troops than authorized in the plan he had inherited. After the invasion he was made the deputy head of the Army's Forces Command, which oversees the training of American troops in the United States. In 2005, he was awarded a fourth star and made the head of American Army troops in Europe.

General Says He’s Hopeful About Taliban War
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/world/asia/13afghan.html

Perhaps. I think the US can win all the battles, but unless there is a stable and non-corrupt government to lead the country, it would seem the victory(ies) would be in vain. My greatest concern and objection is the killing of non-combatants - women and children. I don't expect the Taliban to be concerned about that, but I do think that US and NATO forces should go the extra step not to kill civilians - that means no firing into villages or compounds unless one is sure that no women and children are present.

 

[Evo]

Perhaps. I think the US can win all the battles, but unless there is a stable and non-corrupt government to lead the country, it would seem the victory(ies) would be in vain. My greatest concern and objection is the killing of non-combatants - women and children. I don't expect the Taliban to be concerned about that, but I do think that US and NATO forces should go the extra step not to kill civilians - that means no firing into villages or compounds unless one is sure that no women and children are present.

But that's impossible. These people deliberately hide among civilians for protection.

 

[rootX]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7656745.stm

For Kuchi nomads like Rahmat Goal's family, survival is a daily struggle.

 

[rootX]

But that's impossible. These people deliberately hide among civilians for protection.

I think civilians hide them. If you go on killing civilians, what you expect from those normal people?

I think US cannot eliminate the Afghanistan people who don't like US.

 

[Astronuc]

But that's impossible. These people deliberately hide among civilians for protection.

It's difficult but not impossible. The Taliban and sympathizers simply live in their homes and neighborhoods/villages when they are not out fighting the Afghan government and US/NATO forces. It's their country. The US/NATO are propping up a government in what is eseentially a civil war that spans two countries.

If one calls in an AC-130, one is going to kill civilians. The US and NATO forces need to be smarter.

Meanwhile Pakistan and Afghanistan go hand in hand because the Pahstuns (e.g. Waziri) straddle the border.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtun

Intelligence report: U.S. antiterror ally Pakistan 'on the edge'
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20081014/wl_mcclatchy/3072503

WASHINGTON — A growing al Qaida -backed insurgency, combined with the Pakistani army's reluctance to launch an all-out crackdown, political infighting and energy and food shortages are plunging America's key ally in the war on terror deeper into turmoil and violence, says a soon-to-be completed U.S. intelligence assessment.

A U.S. official who participated in drafting the top secret National Intelligence Estimate said it portrays the situation in Pakistan as "very bad." Another official called the draft "very bleak," and said it describes Pakistan as being "on the edge."

The first official summarized the estimate's conclusions about the state of Pakistan as: "no money, no energy, no government."

Six U.S. officials who helped draft or are aware of the document's findings confirmed them to McClatchy on the condition of anonymity because NIEs are top secret and are restricted to the president, senior officials and members of Congress . An NIE's conclusions reflect the consensus of all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies.

The NIE on Pakistan , along with others being prepared on Afghanistan and Iraq , will underpin a "strategic assessment" of the situation that Army Gen. David Petraeus , who's about to take command of all U.S. forces in the region, has requested. The aim of the assessment — seven years after the U.S. sent troops into Afghanistan — is to determine whether a U.S. presence in the region can be effective and if so what U.S. strategy should be.
. . . .

 

[Astronuc]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081017/ap_on_re_as/as_afghanistan
Official: Afghans probing 17 civilian deaths

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan – Afghan authorities are investigating the deaths of at least 17 civilians during a clash between NATO forces and militants in southern Afghanistan, an official said Friday.

Villagers and a senior police official claimed Thursday that a NATO airstrike killed the civilians, including women and children, in Nad Ali district of the Helmand province.

The NATO-led force in Afghanistan confirmed that it carried out an airstrike in the area on Thursday — but not that it resulted in any civilian casualties.

NATO spokesman Capt. Mark Windsor said Friday the force was seeking more information and declined further comment.

Daud Ahmadi, spokesman for Helmand's governor, said Friday that authorities were investigating whether the airstrike or "insurgent action" caused the collapse of the house in which the civilians died.

Angry villagers brought more than a dozen corpses — including the badly mangled bodies of women and children — to the governor's house in the town of Lashkar Gah on Thursday, said Haji Adnan Khan, a tribal leader who had seen the bodies.

Nad Ali, about 6 miles from Lashkar Gah, has been a scene of heavy fighting between insurgents and Afghan and foreign troops. Militants control much of the area around the village.

Maybe some militants are angry with the US/EU (or some hate America and Europe) because invaders (US and EU/NATO military) kill their women and children, or parents, or siblings or other family members, or friends. Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan have not invaded or threatened the US, although Saddam Hussein threated the US/Israel with retaliation if attacked.

The hijackers who attacked the WTC and Pentagon on Sept 11, were from Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates (now headquarters for Halliburton), Egypt and Lebanon.

Osama bin Laden (al Qaida) is from Saudi Arabia and Ayman al-Zawahiri is Egyptian. One connection with Pakistan would be Khalid Sheikh Mohammed who was born in Kuwait to parents from Baluchistan (Pakistan).