Ho Chi Minh City
Not many people know it, but the Fuhrer was a terrific dancer
--The Producers (1968)
There were many wonderful people in the Taliban.
--Hamid Karzai (1998)
_________
Forget Karzai, that toady-sometime-American lackey. He's an opportunist who always plays both sides against the middle. In this primary season, we are reminded that Karzai was an earlier political rock star, with those magnificent pashamina and silk shawls and yak caps. So exotic, a la Yul Brynner's King and I mode. But the substance didn't pan out. Too bad, so sad.
There are a few noteworthy quotes in this WaPo column ("Two Myths About Afghanistan"):
Similarly, the U.S. Army never lost an engagement with main force Vietcong or NVA in the Vietnam War. This bragging point, however, is irrelevant. Vietnam emerged a communist country, and by all accounts was victorious in achieving their war aims. Don't Army men like Colonel Schweitzer ever pull their head out of their fourth point of contact?
Simply applying arbitrary designations such as "green" is totally meaningless. It is like our own beloved Homeland Security's color designations for threat levels. It is so Captain Kangaroo, and one can picture the changing velcro color badges being stuck up on the easel in the front of the room each day, to little effect.
The writer, Marlowe, says, "I saw this as an embedded reporter in Ghazni province in November. The young captain in charge of Four Corners, once the 'worst neighborhood' in Ghazni, told me that in the spring of 2007 his base had taken fire twice a week, but as of late November it hadn't been rocketed in 60 days."
The fact that rockets have not fallen for 60 days does not mean that anti-government forces are not consolidating and reorganizing. In fact, New York has not been attacked recently but we have not called off the Phony War on Terror (PWOT ©).
Fighting for democracy in Afghanistan is like screwing for virginity.
Happy Valentine's Day ♥.
There are a few noteworthy quotes in this WaPo column ("Two Myths About Afghanistan"):
"Col. Martin Schweitzer, commander of the coalition forces in six provinces in Regional Command East, told me that the ANA [Afghan National Army] has not lost an engagement with the Taliban since last April."
Similarly, the U.S. Army never lost an engagement with main force Vietcong or NVA in the Vietnam War. This bragging point, however, is irrelevant. Vietnam emerged a communist country, and by all accounts was victorious in achieving their war aims. Don't Army men like Colonel Schweitzer ever pull their head out of their fourth point of contact?
"In 2007, the Army's counterinsurgency strategy of stationing platoons in district centers and delivering quick infrastructure aid started to produce visible results for ordinary Afghans in the east. . . When Schweitzer took command early last year, 20 of the 85 districts were "green," or on the side of the Afghan government. By year-end, 58 were classified as "green."
Simply applying arbitrary designations such as "green" is totally meaningless. It is like our own beloved Homeland Security's color designations for threat levels. It is so Captain Kangaroo, and one can picture the changing velcro color badges being stuck up on the easel in the front of the room each day, to little effect.
The writer, Marlowe, says, "I saw this as an embedded reporter in Ghazni province in November. The young captain in charge of Four Corners, once the 'worst neighborhood' in Ghazni, told me that in the spring of 2007 his base had taken fire twice a week, but as of late November it hadn't been rocketed in 60 days."
The fact that rockets have not fallen for 60 days does not mean that anti-government forces are not consolidating and reorganizing. In fact, New York has not been attacked recently but we have not called off the Phony War on Terror (PWOT ©).
Fighting for democracy in Afghanistan is like screwing for virginity.
Happy Valentine's Day ♥.
Labels: afghanistan myths, hamid karzai u.s. lackey, PWOT, war on terrror
posted by Lisa at 2:42 PM
8 Comments:
"as of late November it hadn't been rocketed in 60 days"
Isn't that a product of the season? It's winter. As I recall all the intelligence reports were talking about the coming spring offensive.
TW,
Please don't let facts collide with their stats.It's Un-Amurican.
they simply haven't learned a thing ranger. the lesson from vietnam that they refuse to learn is that there wasn't a single thing that nixon negotiated in paris, that wasn't available to LBJ, and every single thing that was available to LBJ was available to eisenhower. for that matter, truman, could have simply told the french to stay the hell home and let the vietnamese sort out their own affairs.
the only wise choice to have made in vietnam was to not go there in first place. we accomplished nothing. i constantly hear about how tet, was a military victory, but a public relations defeat. it's total made up bullshit. after nine months of pretty continuous combat which featured some of the bitterest battles of the war we achieved a draw. that's right. khe sanh held, but as soon as the siege was lifted it was abandoned. so who won that one? seems to my military mind that if you abandon a position that counts as a win for the other guys. for the rest of the country after tet, we controlled about 25% of the country. just about exactly what we had controlled before the offensive began. even if you count the battles of the ah shau in the summer of the next year as victories, the thing was, after the battles were over we did not hold that ground. as soon as the NVA pulled back, we didimaued the fuck right out of there. in that case, we even pulled back farther than we had originally been. so, yes, we stopped an advance, but then by pulling back into a tighter defensive stance, we actually ceded ground. so who won that? not hard to figure.
we should have sent our real military minds over there. we should have sent general motors instead of westmoreland. we should have sent colonel sanders (who now is occupying hanoi and bejing) instead of col. hackworth. we should have sent general foods instead of abrams.
any conversation about iraq or afghanistan that doesn't begin with "we were fucking stupid to be there in the first place" and does not have "how are we going to get the fuck out of there" as the main topic of discussion is pointless, stupid and wasteful of lives and money.
MB
we are walking history lessons, even if you factor in the limps and pains. But history and facts escape the can do military mind that really only produces can do-do.
What does this mean in the here and now is the relevent point.What is it that is important.Why are we even there and to what purpose.There must be something beyond slogans and feel good horseshit.Even calling it horseshit is a kindness.
This old Ranger wishes for optimism but it just isn't in the cards.You just can't bet into a losing hand repeatedly but yet thats policy.
On a personal note, pls read todays entry on Lurch, i believe you wre a reader of his blog. jim
"This bragging point, however, is irrelevant." This a paraphrasing of a statement made by a NVA Colonel to Colonel Harry Summers as recounted in Col. Summers' book, On Strategy
roger,
I shamelessly used this quote, since the VN Col. doesn't read my blog. Should have attributed it; you caught it. Thanks.
--Jim
I am not sure what the standard is for footnoting in blogs. I am familiar with Col Summers's work from one of my several enrollments in the reserve component version of Command and General Staff which I eventually graduated from. I still have my army issue copy. One of my uncompleted projects is to write an essay on Iraq paralleling his analysis of Vietnam. My thesis is that there is a similar list of violations of Clauswitzian theory.
Roger
In all fairness my irrelevent comment was about Iraq and not RVN, so it was used as a counterpoint.
I would like to write about the Civil War and the mistakes the Confederates made that are exactly the same as those made in RVN and Iraq/afgh.There are some interesting parrallels.
I am also a graduate of CGSC and this is my exposure to Harry O. I really don't remember much except that Summers book was the flavor of the month.The study to compare the two should start with building careers on sand and empire building within the service.
The entire study would question the basis of the enterprise and what is the mission ?All follows from this, if the mission is false all that follows must be false. jim
Post a Comment
<< Home