Whats your opinion on Afghanistan?

If we're going to do it properly, wre'll still be there in 20 years.

To piggyback on what Bri had to say. The key theme in Afghanistan is that no one trusts the central government, and with good reason. Karzai's brother is the biggest drug-lord in all of Afghanistan, and much like the provincial governments of Somalia, the central government has zero control outside of the capital city.

In reference to the division of the country by the tribal powers. I lay this issue directly at the feet of the British Empire. Rather than taking their time and setting the boundaries back the way they were before they came along and mucked everything up, the Brits essentially created countries that exist solely on maps out of hundreds of tribal kingdoms and chiefdoms. If the option to secede from the nation of Afghanistan was given to each district, I think you'd see at least half the country wish to break into their own little kingdoms.

So, to achieve what we would wish to see, a peaceful, whole, and most importantly sustainable Afghanistan, we need to quit supporting a corrupt government, recognize the desire of the tribal groups to have at least some autonomy, and secure the border with Pakistan to keep insurgents from coming across and stirring up a hornets' nest.

Are you talking militarily, or the strategic long term view?


Militarily is simple: Take the kiddy gloves off.

Long term? Totally different story which Bri has pretty much hit on.

You can be brutal in your fight against enemies and still be just and right in your dealings with the innocent.

Limited warfare as we practice it has a serious flaw. The Rules of Engagement vary too much for the individual soldier to understand the concept of the operation he/she is on. As I understand it from son, he and his unit can not fire unless fired upon and only after positively identifying the hostiles. Now in a land where every male carries a weapon amd in a ville with these locals walking around armed and you take incoming, what are your options? By the ROE you only can fire on the individual that fired on you, and any threat you percieve. But with every male in sight carrying a weapon Mr. Murphy will ensure you shoot at the wrong individual(s) with the media right there filming the "attrocity" as the wrong target(s) is hit. That is the purpose of the insurgent/guerilla to get the more powerfull force to commit these acts, and lose in the living rooms of that forces home country.

Initially we grabbed all the weapons we could from these villes. Now in the infighting among the warlords, the villes are rearmed with more modern weaponry, as the drug trade and warlords arm the villes. So like my boy states, he drives into a ville and everyone is armed, now who is the true "g" in this mass of humanity, and when he shoots one of my boys people how does he retaliate, and not commit an "attrocity" in front of the media.

My boy states his Hummer has at least 20 bullet scars on the body and gun shield, and he could not return fire because of the inability to locate the individual(s) responsible in the mass of armed people now running around after hearing the inbound rounds.

What a way to run a war.

"Kid Gloves" is the ROE's we are forced to operat under. We put the word out, you are armed you are considered a hostile. Give it 2-3 weeks to sink into the populace, and resume operations. You see an individual with a weapon you warn them to drop weapon, if they do not they are now a hostile and a threat and you engage. Problem will soon sort itself on its own as locals will no longer be armed, some sort of civl control can be installed, and a more controled combat enviornment installed. For those of you who have no concept of combat operations with limiting ROE's just imagine you are playing baseball, and your coach states you can not swing at any pitch other than a fastball or you will be fined. How can you tell its a fastball as it leaves the pitchers hand, and if you swing are you wrong in the eyes of the coach and the fans.

Edited by oldsoldier - 20 September 2009 at 12:55pm

When you have a president that doesn't have the guts for a long lasting war, and significant goals in mind. You end up with another vietnam...

FreeEnterprise wrote: When you have a president that doesn't have the guts for a long lasting war, and significant goals in mind. You end up with another vietnam...

Edited by brihard - 21 September 2009 at 2:51am

I have a feeling FE wont be returning to this thread..

I think one of the main areas Obama and the media have failed to communicate are the lumping of different factions together as "The Taliban". You have a bunch of different tribes, smuggling interests, poppy cultivation and drug running interests that will occasionally ally with, or indirectly support the Taliban by allowing them to operate in an area they control. During the campaign when Obama suggested that we engage some elements of the Taliban, he got blasted. If the Taliban's latest propaganda peice claiming that they no longer have a problem with women getting an education and will work to end mutilation etc. of non-cooperative civilians and want to limit suicide attacks, we may be able to work with them. Stoping the proliferation of terrorism is our main goal in Afghanistan, and as bad as it looks politically I don't really care if Karzai's government falls flat on its face. It's been currupt and ineffective so far.

Economically they need power and irrigation where possible, it'd be nice for them to be able to export pomegranits again and have some economic diversification beyond opium and IED's. I have a distinct feeling that congress is going to balk at sending more troops, and if the President can't convince them to do so, or to come to some sort of consensus on health care, his presidency has FAIL written all over it. Bush may have dropped the ball by keeping Afghanistan a holding operation [although he did (successfully?) pressure Pakistan to act in Waziristan] but it's Obama's job to comminicate a clear set of prioritized objectives for Afghanistan and to convince congress to grow a pair and give the generals what they need and not freak out about the opinion polls. 

Ps yes I know I'm over simplifying this whole thing and there are many smaller nuiences... It's just a general overview.