Thursday, October 2, 2008


This is coolbert:

Here are several alarming headlines from the Chicago Tribune today:

"General wants more troops in Afghanistan now"

"WASHINGTON - The top American military commander in Afghanistan said today that he needs more troops and other aid 'as quickly as possible' in a counter-insurgency battle that could get worse before it gets better."

"Trio of warlords blamed for surge in Afghanistan violence"

"The three men, who sometimes cooperate with one another, work largely unhindered from bases in Pakistan. U.S. strikes against them have proved futile."

The three men - - Afghan warlords, piss-ants [insignificant persons who think they are significant!] of the Taliban persuasion - - now causing so much trouble in Afghan - - are:

* Mullah Mohammed Omar.
* Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.
* Jalaluddin Haqqani.

These villains alone - - Taliban warlords, command only a portion of the force now arrayed against NATO military units in Afghan? NOT counting Al Qaeda and adherents, a growing number from all over the Islamic world.

More troops - - more civic action - - more stable and decent Afghan government - - more bridges, more schools, more roads, that is what we need!! And NOW TOO!! This I have heard before! MORE!

NONE OF THIS SOUNDS GOOD!! Very worrisome!

Some general comments of mine on Afghan:

* I was very impressed by how easily and well the U.S. and allied forces put the Taliban and Al Qaeda to rout in 2001. About two hundred special operations troops on the ground, directing B-52 bombers dropping JDAMS from 40,000 feet is all it took. The rout as it occurred was not expected and created a lot of euphoria at the time.

* Afghan has never been - - and never will be - - easy to rule! I recall reading in the early 1970's a National Geographic magazine article concerning Afghan. This was while King Zahir was still in power. Lauded the superior rule of Zahir. The winning formula to being a successful ruler of the Afghan people - - so it was said - - WAS TO DO NOTHING!!! Leave your 16th century people [the Afghans] lead their 16th century lives unmolested was the winning way to go!!

* This current military situation in Afghan can go from bad to MUCH WORSE in the proverbial heartbeat. Of most concern to me would be the tenuous supply route. NATO FORCES IN AFGHAN DO NOT HAVE A LINE OF RETREAT!! No egress to the ocean or a friendly nation with a border contiguous to Afghan!!! If NATO must beat feet in a hurry, WHERE WILL THEY GO, AND HOW!!??

* It was ONLY in 2007 that NATO-mission-specific-aircraft got permission to fly over Russian territory en route to Afghan. This fly-over route too is now imperiled? NATO and Russian are now at odds and it is only to get worse in that direction also?

* Keep in mind, in the back of your mind at all times, when considering the Afghan situation, if and when it does deteriorate further, the fate of the British when they attempted to retreat from Kabul - - Christmas Day - - 1842. 17,000 troops and camp followers marching ninety or so miles to safety in British India. ONLY ONE MAN MADE IT OUT ALIVE!! Brrrrr!!


1 comment:

The Neutralist said...

Conclusions to draw from this post,

It's stupid to bug the Russkies when they can stop resupply from that direction.

It was stupid to invade Afghanistan and not catch Osama so we could bug out.

It was stupid to invade at all.

I was not impressed with the early rout. We had troops (Northern Alliance) on the ground happy to advance with vast air support.

The Taliban retired in somewhat good order to fight again.

The war has been lost. If not yet on the battlefield, then with the bailout of Wall Street.

Get the boys out before what happened to the Brits happens to us.