Choose Your Fights
Your conscience awakes
And you see your mistakes
And you wish someone
Would buy your confessions
--Part of the Plan, Dan Fogelberg
For nothing can be sole or whole
That has not been rent
--Crazy Jane talks with the Bishop,
William Butler Yeats
________________
And you see your mistakes
And you wish someone
Would buy your confessions
--Part of the Plan, Dan Fogelberg
For nothing can be sole or whole
That has not been rent
--Crazy Jane talks with the Bishop,
William Butler Yeats
________________
Everyone accepts that al Qaeda is a terrorist organization with significant Taliban linkages, but let's debunk some presumptions underlying out current wars in Iraq and AFPAK .
As a terrorist organization, al Qaeda would be compartmentalized and would not have shared intelligence with the Taliban on the WTC attacks. Even al Qaeda military operatives would not have had access to the operational plan.
So, if the Taliban was not complicit in those attacks, how have they become an implacable enemy of the U.S.? It is unreasonable to equate the destruction of the Taliban with the the security of der homeland.
It is equally faulty to advocate their destruction as the seminal event in the creation of a to-be democratic Afghanistan. Since there will never be a democratic Afghanistan, why bother with the destruction of the Taliban?
The conventional wisdom is that both wars will meet a salubrious termination when the respective armies and police forces are recruited, equipped and trained up. However, using our last great counterinsurgency op, Vietnam, as template, this hoped-for ending doesn't necessarily come true.
In Honduras, we have a U.S.-equipped, trained and funded army which has led a successful coup (or whatever one wishes to call it.) Because this is what Armies and militarized police forces do in Third World countries (on the backs of U.S. taxpayers.)
In short, militarizing failed states is not the solution, but rather, the problem. It is like handing out free guns during the L.A. riots. Why is this so hard to grasp? Perhaps it is not, but the lure of the almighty dollar trumps reality.
Neither al Qaeda, Iran nor North Korea are strategic threats to the U.S., so why are we portraying them as such? In Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. has created police forces that will vie with those of any dictator. And in fact, whoever wields their power will be a dictator, despite any showcase elections to the contrary.
We broke Iraq, and cannot impose wholeness. The country will heal in the same way North and South Vietnam did -- after we exit the scene.
As a terrorist organization, al Qaeda would be compartmentalized and would not have shared intelligence with the Taliban on the WTC attacks. Even al Qaeda military operatives would not have had access to the operational plan.
So, if the Taliban was not complicit in those attacks, how have they become an implacable enemy of the U.S.? It is unreasonable to equate the destruction of the Taliban with the the security of der homeland.
It is equally faulty to advocate their destruction as the seminal event in the creation of a to-be democratic Afghanistan. Since there will never be a democratic Afghanistan, why bother with the destruction of the Taliban?
The conventional wisdom is that both wars will meet a salubrious termination when the respective armies and police forces are recruited, equipped and trained up. However, using our last great counterinsurgency op, Vietnam, as template, this hoped-for ending doesn't necessarily come true.
In Honduras, we have a U.S.-equipped, trained and funded army which has led a successful coup (or whatever one wishes to call it.) Because this is what Armies and militarized police forces do in Third World countries (on the backs of U.S. taxpayers.)
In short, militarizing failed states is not the solution, but rather, the problem. It is like handing out free guns during the L.A. riots. Why is this so hard to grasp? Perhaps it is not, but the lure of the almighty dollar trumps reality.
Neither al Qaeda, Iran nor North Korea are strategic threats to the U.S., so why are we portraying them as such? In Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. has created police forces that will vie with those of any dictator. And in fact, whoever wields their power will be a dictator, despite any showcase elections to the contrary.
We broke Iraq, and cannot impose wholeness. The country will heal in the same way North and South Vietnam did -- after we exit the scene.
Labels: afghanistan, consequences of phony war on terror, Iraq, militarizing failed states, PWOT
posted by rangeragainstwar at 1:12 PM
19 Comments:
I've been saying this since the old days of "Intel Dump": I fully expect a military coup in Iraq within a decade, and one within five years would not surprise me.
We've spent six years there now dumping assloads of cash and training time on their army and "police". Government? Courts? Newspapers? TV? Local community organizers?
Not so much.
So the only real institution we've "built", as much as we could or can build one, is their military.
Ol' Nick Machiavelli would tell you what happens in states where the prince is weak but the soldiers are strong.
Game, set, match.
and let us not forget that both clinton and bush administrations lauded the taliban government of afghanistan for its efforts to curtail the drug trade.
a mere 15% of the land in afghanistan is arable. and a big percentage of that is fit only for poppies and hashish. alexander had problems with drug abuse among his troops, and took extra care to ensure that there were ample supplies of wine. genocide is tough work you know.
like them or not, and i never liked them, the taliban was a duly elected government of a soveriegn nation. with their cover story of muslim hospitality, al-qaeda and their imported "arabs" were wearing their welcome thin. they could have explained the presence of our marines, who would have been able to attack them at their bases and then leave with a subtle shrug and say "the great satan swooped down with their big guns and air power, what could we do?"
with all the empires that have come to grief in this region, some historic military geniuses at the head of the most dominant forces of their respective ages, all of them having the same exact problems with the same exact motherfuckers, in the same exact places.
alexander once had his force concentated to deliver what he intended to be a killing blow to attaxerxes in what is now helmand province. just as it happened with our marines a couple weeks ago, the afghan resistance slipped on their shower shoes, loaded up their burros and dis ah fucking peared. poof! into the twisting arroyos and goat paths. under the overhangs where they couldn't be seen from any vantage points, over the barren rocks where they couldn't be tracked.
it takes a special hubris to look at nearly three thousand years of military disasters and say "but we are different."
probably alexander said "my greeks are not the persians of cyrus." ghengis khan probably said "i am not alexander..." babur said "i am not the khan..."
and folks, those who do not remember the past are doomed to keep voting republican.
p.s. i think it's safe to say we ain't bringing no alexanders to this fucking fight niether.
MB,
"it takes a special hubris to look at nearly three thousand years of military disasters and say 'but we are different'."
A special hubris, indeed.
Or as Bob Herbert called it in the NYT, a "new level of chutzpah".
MB,
Will the wind ever remember the names it has blown in the past-jimi hendrix.
It seems to me that we could publish a thesaurus type book that outlines all the combinations and usages of the word f..k.
jim
"p.s. i think it's safe to say we ain't bringing no alexanders to this fucking fight niether."
roflmao!
Sorry, but I love the snark there...and I can appreciate it, too.
"So, if the Taliban was not complicit in those attacks, how have they become an implacable enemy of the U.S.?"
The same reason why get away drivers are charged the same as their partner who robs the bank...Accessory, Aiding and Abetting, and Harboring a known fugitive, and with all that...Conspiracy, even though they were probably not part of the planning, they were giving succor to Al Qaeda.
Certainly, as far as the Taliban goes in terms of real politik, they would probably have said, "whoa no'ah! OBL, you are so on your own if you go manno-on-manno with the US." if given the opportunity...and they were...but they opted to keep OBL close to their chest.
However, opportunity only comes around once, and that was given a wave through way back at Tora Bora, so...yeah, we've been trying to "create" opportunity in the hopes that we can find absolution through doing something for something's sake.
Which is one of the reasons why I think it's all a lost cause...once any organization, nation, cause, whatever reaches the point of "Doing something for somethings sake" because they screwed the pooch to many times in the past...yeah, time to pack it up and go home.
No matter what the US, or any of the other nations do in Afghanistan now the cause has come and gone...Bush, Cheney, and most certainly, Rumsfeld have totally screwed over our...was...just cause.
There is nothing left to do but leave...the Afghani's are not interested in us "reforming" their country, they certainly aren't interested in our form of government sans the cultural influences, and personally, they haven't earned the right to our form of freedoms...which, all things considered...hang by the very thin linkages to a very tattered, shot through Constitution that is looking more like an overused wash rag that has seen to many cheese graters than the document we all promised to uphold.
Sheerah,
Yes, our own freedoms seem to hang precariously in the balance. This is no time to go expeditioning.
When one's morality is suspect, one does not gain legitimacy by casting aspersions elsewhere.
Sheer,
You are using the concept of conspiracy , which is a legal term and trying to apply it as an addendum to the principles of war. You are sorta mixing up concepts here.
I do not accept the legitimacy of a war that is not proportional in it's response to a criminal event.It's a good thing the AQ didn't steal one of our women because then we may have launched a 1000 ship armada. The weak logic applies in both scenarios and the prideful response equal in both scenarios.
The bottom line is that any culture must have a educated healthy middle class if they want any type of advanced quality of life in a social environment.
Now for my biggy, and i hesitate to say this since you are a solid friend.--How do you know that the links between the Talibs and AQ are so tight and inviolable as you indicate.?? Do you have any intel to verify this other than the propaganda put out by the US gov't?You may be satisfied with the pap put out as truth BUT I will not accept it. This is our disconnect-you're buying the party
line and I question it's validity. Show me the beef.
your friend
jim
MB
As to the temporary abstention of the Talibs harvesting Opium.....They were sitting on a huge backlog pile. Thus, the price was going down. They had to quit producing in order to create an artificial shortage to drive the price to new highs.
It's exactly like Derivatives trading. Maybe the Boys n Gal from Goldman Sachs Splained to them.
The witless gooberesque NCA/congresscritter CoOp failed to grasp what was going on. As if the US gave a flying fuck overall, since the crop went to satisfy Central Nausea, Russia and Euroland.
"Now for my biggy, and i hesitate to say this since you are a solid friend."
Jim,
A friend speaks the truth to one he considers worthy of speaking the truth too...and a real friend doesn't shirk from the spoken truth, but contemplates it carefully before responding.
--How do you know that the links between the Talibs and AQ are so tight and inviolable as you indicate.??
Uh...hmmm...
Do you have any intel to verify this other than the propaganda put out by the US gov't?
Um...uh...oh boy...you know...I got nothing other than...oh G-d, this is embarassing...I got nothing but "assumptions" that...t'ah...standard diplomatic protocols were followed...yeah...how bout I just buy the beer and wings and we ignore my previous post.
Sheerahkhan,
Just for kicks why don't you google a simple search---taliban offer to surrender obl. hint spell out obl.
The results of such a search call into question the assertion that the links are strong between taib/aq.
This belief and acceptance of propaganda as fact is similar istm as believing that the words in the bible are actual reflections of what somebody like King David or a guy called Jesus said 2000 years ago. Both require a level of faith and fly in the face of logic and critical thinking. Or should I say they exceed my simple abilities of applying logic. The fact is that the Bible/Koran are works of fiction as are the COIN manuals and intelligence reports.
I am not attacking your religous posture but simply pointing out that religion has no place in my trying to figure out our place in the world or in the PWOT.
jim
This comment has been removed by the author.
"When I said no negotiations I meant no negotiations," Mr Bush said. "We know he's guilty. Turn him over. There's no need to discuss innocence or guilt."
%$&# me!
I did not know.
/facepalm@self
sheera, you wouldn't be able to count the number of times I've done that same thing, "face to palm" over the last few years.
As late as 2003 and into early 2004, I did believe that Dubya was doing the world a benefit when he took us into Iraq.
The discussions we've had with our friends here have been a significant part of a cultural and political education for me, trite as that sounds, but true for me.
Before we orthodox take communion, we say a bit that includes the words, "that came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the chief", which if wholeheartedly believed flies in the face of all this pride that believes that whatever we do is right, whatever they do is wrong.
I'm sure that to many, these are just words to say on the way to get church over with so they can get to what they really want to do.
So we have drones dropping ordinance here and there in Central Asia, and the reports on the news say so many such and such were killed.
Who? Very bad people, I guess. Why? Terrorists, I guess.
Murder by sophisticated electronics and weaponry is our justification. "Good. Bad. I'm the guy with the gun."
Imagine the rampant patriotism if Hugo of Venezuela had drones to drop ordinance on heads in DC.
Some might say pre-emptive strikes against terrorism is OK.
bb
Sheerah,
Thank you for this:
"A friend speaks the truth to one he considers worthy of speaking the truth too...and a real friend doesn't shirk from the spoken truth, but contemplates it carefully before responding"
Or as Thoreau said, "True friendship can afford true knowledge. It does not depend on darkness and ignorance."
Amen.
Minstrel Boy,
Your history is inaccurate. Fasteddiez is right about the Opium. I would add that an additional reason besides raising the price was a gambit to gain political recognition.
Also, the Taliban were NOT duly elected - they controlled about 80% of the country after a civil war and were still engaged in that war when the US intervened.
Ranger,
I did your googling and the results leave out some important context and relevant facts. I think this declassified state department summary of relations with the Taliban on the UBL issue is instructive. There are many others in the GWU archive that are worth reading.
IMO the links between the Taliban and AQ could not be clearer. After all, they remain allies and have been so for 15 years now. I agree that the Taliban probably did not know operational details of 9/11 and other attacks, but they were not completely in the dark as to AQ's goals, targets, etc. The real question, in my mind, is who was the tail and who was the dog? I think there is a case to be made that the Taliban become dependent on AQ and not necessarily the other way around.
Regardless, the Taliban were given plenty of opportunity to "solve" the UBL issue. The offer they gave the Bush administration after we started bombing the shit out of them was no different than what they'd been saying for years, as evidenced by the numerous declassified documents from the period.
Andy,
The links are clear between AQ/Talib, this we all accept but why do we forget the ISI links to both organisations? Did AQ get more help from ISI than it did from the Talib? Are our basic assumptions about this war even reality based?
I find it hard to accept any intel coming from US agencies on any topic pertaining to the PWOT. It's been too politicised.
If AQ and Talib were hand in glove the US response still was not proportional nor just. How can we justify millions of refugees and countless civilian deaths as a result of 911.? We are avenging a 10 billion$ criminal act by spending untold billions ;and to what end?
jim
Ranger,
I'm not sure who is forgetting the ISI links - that is an angle that's frequently covered in the press and elsewhere.
I try to maintain a degree of skepticism on everything, particularly press reporting. Overall, though, I tend to trust primary sources, including declassified government documents. Obviously, YMMV.
If our response was not proportional, then what was the alternative, realizing that proportionality is subjective? A comparable number of people died in the Pearl Harbor attack - our response was certainly not proportional there. I think it's pretty rare in history that responses to attacks are proportional.
IMO, our initial actions were completely justified but we have since lost our way.
Andy,
We agree that we've lost our way. So far so good.
It is apples to oranges to compare ph/41 TO 911.The two are not equivalent concepts. The US reaction to PH atk was the only acceptable c/a unless we were willing to cede all leadership in Asia.We had to fight to keep white men in domination of yellow guys. White colonies were ok but not yellow spheres of influence. Hence war. No sweat.
I'm inclined to deal with Terrorism as a legal issue which in fact it is. Our legal codes verify this concept. If my response to 911 was simply to stick my thumb up my ass this would have been as effective as the PWOT. The only thing that we defeated was ourselves. Very impressive that.
jim
Post a Comment
<< Home