209 Comments

1. wildernesscalling:

America needs to pull out COMPLETELY! And immediately! We have no business building a “Nation” in a dysfunctional area of the world as Afghanistan, this is where the big stick gets used, simply put! Plan, Organize or Launch an attack against the US and we punch your lights out, we kill all those involved and walk away and let the rest pick up the pieces, if a group of peaceful, honest life loving people are found then we should give them as much Financial and Hardware support we can but otherwise we won’t shed American blood for people who won’t stand up and fight for their own freedoms! Like I have said before and others too “Freedom ain’t for all”! it has to be earned it can not be given!

Feb 10, 2009 - 4:35 am 2. Peter Boston:

Afghanistan is not a nation. It was not when Alexander’s troops nearly revolted there from bad temper and sheer frustration. 2,300 hundred years ago is yesterday. Muhammadanism only helps to keep the tribal areas locked out from any possibility of modernity.

Maybe Kabul can be made to resemble a Western city but the hinterlands are as alien as Mars. US troops can prevent Taliban/AQ from establishing safe havens on the Afghanistan side of the Pakistan border but nation building appears to be the proverbial bridge too far unless and until all parts of Pakistan become a fully functioning nation state. The odds against that happening in this lifetime are too long to estimate.

Our objective in Afghanistan is to deny Taliban/AQ a victory. That is something far short of nation building but good enough for now.

Feb 10, 2009 - 5:27 am 3. Mike Sylwester:

It is an absolute certainty that President Obama never will sustain a strategy and effort on the level of Fred Kagan’s proposals. Obama is looking for a clever way to declare victory and get out. (He can’t just get out, because he promised during the election campaign that he would get out of Iraq and achieve victory in Afghanistan.)

So, the USA will have to accept some other resolution to our Afghanistan problem.

Hmmmm. You know, our new Vice President Biden seems to have a proclivity for chopping up problem countries into ethnic sectors. That was his famous idea for Iraq. Perhaps Obama should assign Biden to put his mind to the case of Afghanistan. This might become Biden’s one opportunity to excel and thus get himself mentioned in a few footnotes of future history books.

The USA has a longer, closer relationship with Afghanistan’s Northern Alliance, which was essentially the non-Pashtun ethnic groups along the northern border. Maybe Biden could arrange with Tadjikistan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan to bite off the appropriate chunks of northern Afghanistan. Biden could go to some state funerals in those three countries — and then the next thing we know, Afghanistan will have been chopped up, to everyone’s surprise.

What’s not to like about this proposal?

We might make ourselves more popular with the Tadjiks, Uzbeks, Turkmen and even the Pashtuns.

Russia should not object. Russia hates Afghanistan, and Russia itself recently bit off chunks of Georgia.

And the USA can leave Afghanistan and let the Pashtuns stew in their own juices forevermore. Such a stew might even dissipate the Al Qaeda groups in that region now.

Feb 10, 2009 - 5:56 am 4. newscaper:

I agree that Iraq has a fundamentally greater strategic import, and that Afghanistan is more just a place for killing bad guys when needed.

Feb 10, 2009 - 6:29 am 5. Cannoneer No. 4:

I did not know the significance of the high water pants when I was there.

Look at these guys.

If current trends continue these “people” are going to beat us.

Feb 10, 2009 - 6:32 am 6. newscaper:

If Obama doesn’t completely cut and run there, I expect him to go to the other extreme of turning Afghanistan into the real “next Vietnam”, after having set the bar too high in his campaign posturing with the token ‘actually tougher than Bush’ BS that served as cover for being craven on Iraq.

Our options in Afghanistan are truly limited given that we can’t really do anything about Pakistan next door.

Feb 10, 2009 - 6:39 am 7. Cannoneer No. 4:

On the front lines with U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan

“We have to help them so they can govern themselves and provide their own security,” Tack said. “I won’t say we dislike them – it’s just that they don’t have their [expletive] together.”

It’s been over seven years, and they still don’t have their [expletive] together. Was there ever a time when they did?

What are we going to have to do to square them away?

How squared away do they need to be for our purposes?

What are our purposes, anyway?

Feb 10, 2009 - 6:51 am 8. dan:

The answer in Afghanistan is a client government supported by an army and composed of notables whose influence extends to a reasonable radius from each city and whose loyalty can be guaranteed at least with bribes. There is apparently an insufficient minimum appetite among Afghan individuals to accomodate themselves to Western expectations with respect to individuality, economy, violence, and morality. The best plan would probably be for India to invade and destroy Pakistan while we are free for offensive combat in the tribal belt, but that is a grand plan with zero chance of working. Our Afghan experience is beginning to resemble the Soviet experience to an uncomfortable degree, and with the recent Kyrgyz base closing I’m beginning to believe I’m right about the plan there. Our hold in Afghanistan is very, very tenuous, particularly with domestic politics (and economics) being what they are (and those are easily influenced to benefit our enemies). There is no answer short of world-changing punishment to alter that population’s perverse inclinations. If we cannot co-opt the local notables, then we might as well inflict one last spasm of intelligent, targetted violence in the Kush and Swat and then leave. We may become the target very soon.

Feb 10, 2009 - 7:05 am 9. Cannoneer No. 4:

. . . despite the vast foreign interference in Afghanistan, dating from, oh, let’s say, just after the Kushan Empire and especially during the time of Timurlane, most of the present problems of Afghanistan are because of the Afghans themselves, albeit “recently” with a large dose of “negative” assistance from the Soviet Pushtun genocide, the Pakistani efforts at control and the Deobandi/Wahhabi Arabization efforts by the Saudis and their ilk. The 1990s were all about the Afghans, and look how well they did in fixing their country and situation. Many Afghans have a huge reservoir of business initiative but when preyed upon by smugglers, criminal gangs, corrupted local leadership elites and “fundos,” they have little recourse but to go along, lest they be killed. No amount of aid, reconstruction, externally applied COIN or hand wringing protestations about women’s rights, the children, or drug cultivation versus subsistence crops will change that, especially if that hand wringing is done in Europe or America.

Time, lots of time, is needed, along with real work by the Afghans themselves, and a realization that NOBODY “owes” them anything. To alleviate their pain so we (Americans, Europeans, liberal do-gooders, military control freaks, etc) “feel” better is to continue to institutionalize it for the majority of the populace. Only pain will force the Afghans to stop hurting themselves. Pain from shattered lives and society, pain from lost opportunities and present oppresion; only pain will force the Afghans themselves to correct themselves. — Anonymous Vern, at Old Blue’s blog.

Feb 10, 2009 - 7:06 am 10. NahnCee:

I have Taliban fatigue. I skimmed Roggio’s post (must go back and read it slower and deeper), and thought to myself, “Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn.”

If the Afghans and the Iraqi’s and the Pakistani’s and the Saudi’s *enjoy* being blowed up so much that they keep joining these organizations and allowing them to be resurrected in their backyards, then why should we spend an ounce more blood or money in trying to fight them?

It’s like they’ve made a cultural choice and have an affiliation with rape, murder and mayhem just as deep as their affiliation with Islam, and I don’t know how we can possibly change it. And I’m tired of trying.

I would have no problem with pulling out of that part of the world entirely, putting them in quarantine with no one allowed in or out, and letting them merrily kill each other off until the last barbarian is left standing. (Maybe allow the Russians in, if they want to go again, because the methods they used against Chechnya speak to me now.)

Either that or nuke these Taliban- and Al-Queda-loving countries, because I just don’t think it’s worth any more American lives to keep trying to show them the good side of the Force.

Feb 10, 2009 - 7:30 am 11. Stones Cry Out - If they keep silent… » Things Heard: e54v2:

[...] COIN and Afghanistan. [...]

Feb 10, 2009 - 7:33 am 12. Pseudo-Polymath » Blog Archive » Tuesday Highlights:

[...] COIN and Afghanistan. [...]

Feb 10, 2009 - 7:34 am 13. Herb:

Cannoneer #4:

I dont think we can help them.

That whole area in central Asia is uncivilized and will remain so. Its like Africa – only without the conflict between islam and everything else (and only because islam won).

I think we should wall it off.

Feb 10, 2009 - 7:46 am 14. joe buzz:

I’m with you Nahn and Herb. We gave it a shot, took down some bad guys, lost some very good soldiers. What is there to win there now? As long as they prefer to grow poppies they will always be tied to the dark side.

Feb 10, 2009 - 8:02 am 15. joe buzz:

Sorry forgo to provide this link…this guy seems to know a bit about the region, war fighting and intelligence:
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/

Feb 10, 2009 - 8:08 am 16. Insufficiently Sensitive:

Kagan believes that the Obama administration have a real opportunity to make a difference. Can they do it? Or will the shadows win?

Kagan’s probably right, about having an opportunity to ‘make a difference’ in Afghanistan. However, when the cadres of the Obama administration hear the phrase ‘make a difference’, it’s not likely to be something altruistic like getting organized Muslim thugs off the backs of Afghan villagers.

In the lifetimes of those cadres, ‘making a difference’ always been far more like BEING the organized thugs who exploit the inner-city villagers of American urbs for end runs around American laws and institutions, to gain power and wealth and street armies for themselves.

They’ve just scored an unheard-of success with the monstrous ’stimulus’ bill, and without much doubt expect to spend the next few years consolidating and expanding their own power bases in America.

Perhaps for window dressing, they’ll exploit those silly Red-state military volunteers for a few show operations overseas, always with the proviso that ‘negotiations’ will furnish eagerly-grabbed opportunities to declare victory and bug out.

But I don’t see anything altruistic about this administration yet. They have stuck it to the Man, and expect to reap the harvest for a long time coming.

Feb 10, 2009 - 8:37 am 17. geoffgo:

Stay or leave? I often agree with wildernesscalling, thinking that the effort while worthy, is perhaps too similar to everyone else who failed miserably in nation-building, or even enacting change in Afghanland. The indigs have thousands of years of evidence that tribal + time beats colonial, no matter the upside. And, we’re not willing to carryout what’s necessary, and it may never be worth it; because they don’t want to advance.

So, getting our troops home and re-integrated/working back in the US economy is becoming important. Of course, that all depends on whose side they take in the coming struggles. We need their experience and leadership amongst the people.

My nagging fear is that the near-term play of events are catapaulting us into a Fortress America mindset. One that most are rationally forced to adopt. That’s the first giant step for mankind into facism and the bownshirt brigades; all in the name of homeland security. Fascism is the form of socialism where the state owns all means of production and the rulers are upfront dictators.

So, leaving our borders open, while reducing our projection of power abroad invites a tsunami of illegals, some seeking jobs, some to loot and/or destroy our society. It’s really hard to differentiate the good from the bad, and everyone deserves the presumption of innocense, right?

When imploding Mexico becomes even more uninhabitable, because the ensuing bloodshed becomes too horrible to bear, more than 50 million illegals can storm across our border, all claiming asylum from narco-terrorism. Some will be/get pregnant, effectively making their extended families all citizens.

The government down there is at war with a mob of tens of thousands of killers that’s better funded and more mission-oriented. That’s tens of thousands of “death sentences” to be tried, sentenced and carried-out, in a country that doesn’t do capital punishment, except to its citizenry. It’s hard to imagine our feeding these starving masses, so crime would be rampant. Like a horde of locusts that we’re required to nourish.

Obviously here at home, the conventional wisdom response will be the rapid creation (BTW, by the time it’s evident to the public, then it can not happen fast enough) of that “internal security force” that President < 0 was alluding to/promising during his campaign…the one that needs to be as well-funded, equipped and powerful as our military.

Since leftists just see those unmanageable, unsustainable hordes as “more slave labor,” they become expendable assets to achieve the goal of enlarging the scale and scope (and jurisdiction) of the internal security forces, all with gov’t salaries and pensions.

It is this force that will face anyone who’se unhappy with, or seeks to change the state of affairs, and they’ll have nukes.

It’s seems from a planning standpoint that we still have a choice. We either redeploy those troops now hunting Talibanis to man our southern border and leave the Afghanis to stew, as recommended by many here, or we begin building a no-go barrier, as in WiFi-controlled minefields and autonomous staged non-lethal to lethal constraints, and armed drones.

Many offer up a head-in-their-*ss alternative view that we don’t need to act, because many illegals are returning home due to the down economy, which doesn’t address the potential that this exodus is temporary, and that they just might be going back get their families.

Feb 10, 2009 - 8:45 am 18. Captain Ramen:

Wasn’t this the whole point of Iraq? I believe our generals took one look at Afghanistan and said ‘nope, ain’t gonna work.’ I may be an uneducated peon, but even I can tell that trying to sustain a major military campaign in a country that can only be supplied through hostile territory (Pakistan, Russia) is a mistake. And yet my liberal friends don’t get it. We are going to lose in Afghanistan ANYWAY. And the libs propose to solve that by punishing the Iraqis. Like they love to say, it’s about ‘what’s fair.’

Feb 10, 2009 - 9:34 am 19. buddy larsen:

o/t –take a look at the stock mkt –over n out –

Feb 10, 2009 - 9:36 am 20. wildernesscalling:

Afghan was never a nation to be built, it’s a wasteland filled with the memories of many dead westerners, “0″ will turn this into a Vietnam if he don’t get out ASAP and the MSM will play the “Yank doodle” for him long past the 4K death mark, watch as this grows past Iraq, This Stimulus bill (What a joke!)This is the usual MO for Democrat’s, call it something the useful idiots will believe in while making it anything but what the name implies. Really the nightmare of deceit is just beginning, the sun has not set and the lights have not gone out, this gentleman will get very, very scary and it has only just begun!

Feb 10, 2009 - 9:58 am 21. steveaz:

What if the insurgency is in Washington, and the America’s military counter-insurgency efforts are aimed at DC?

I ask this because, having made much of Bush’s “failures” in Iraq, the current governing clique in Washington may be botching Afghanistan. And, coming in the wake of Iraq’s successful democratic elections, and at a time when Baghdad’s economy is recovering nicely, the insurgent DC-crowd owns a real “failed war,” which, by comparison, is beginning to make Bush’s execution of Operation Iraqi Freedom look downright perfect.

Whic is to say, the military’s efforts are hitting home, and the new DC clique is feeling the heat. All that’s left for Obama’s insurgents to do is ramp up the shooting war in Afghanistan, or get their media-organs to paint lipstick on this pig and call it victory.

Either way, Bush’s legacy wins.

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:05 am 22. buddy larsen:

We’re putting together the mother of all hostage situations. The logistics problem is only part of it. MAD is a fantasy, esp if POTUS is shall we say ambivalent as to whose side he would be on if say, Israel attacks Iran, and the region boils up into the ring of nations around Afghanistan deciding that Nato in Afghanistan is “destabilzing Asia”. At least the choppers flying off the roof of the US Embassy in Saigon in 1975 had the sea full of USN nearby. i have a sick, sinking feeling that the crew operating POTUS would not mind at all bringing home 50,000 disarmed, helmetless, barefooted demoralized American soldiers. We could kiss India and Japan goodbye, too, at least for a year or two before they were forced by reality to align against us.

No, i’m not defeatist –i’m just realizing how critical it is for an expeditionary force to NOT have an unreliable –at best –CiC behind it.

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:07 am 23. steveaz:

Doh! You made me look, Buddy.

‘Taint pretty! (I may’ve spoken too soon.)

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:10 am 24. buddy larsen:

i mean, from where comes O’s dedication to victory in Afghanistan? Exactly and precisely from the BDS theme that OIF is a scam, a meme which needed a ‘pro-America’ bona-fide to carry weight –and that bona-fide being “Afghanistan is the REAL war”. That’s really about it –just some BDS horeshit. Those people around O aren’t commited to a freeeking thing but gaining absolute and permanent control over USA.

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:12 am 25. Dave:

Initial success in Afghanistan was because the Sneaky Petes took over the rural areas first, then marched into the cities.

Since then, everybody has tried to control ruralities from the urban points. Got everything bass-ackwards.

Look, buy the opium and other crops. Pay somebody to set up the processing plants. Then convert said crops to petroleum and sell locally. Hire friendly tribesmen to provide both manual labor and security for that enterprise and any others you can concoct.

You can get the Sioux isolated by making deals with the Pawnee, buying horses from the Blackfoot, hiring the Crow as scouts and maybe making a few presents to the Piegan is they will stay out of things.

Afghanistan is not a whole heck of a lot different from what our ancestors had to deal with on the Great Plains.

Only externalities are kind of obstacles Pakis and otehrs can throw in our path.

Rhis one is too solvable.

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:26 am 26. buddy larsen:

dave you kinda ran out of spelling gas there toward the end

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:30 am 27. geoffgo:

I conclude that a tax revolt, soon, is the only viable way we can get the message to the pols of both parties. After all it’s voluntary, no? And the bureaucrats don’t pay.

If we could get 5-10 million taxpayers by April 15th to declare they are witholding their tax payments until changes are made to what the bureaucrats are intent on building, then I think we can stop it cold. Otherwise…we have no chance.

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:32 am 28. buddy larsen:

Cannoneer #4 @ #7; What are our purposes, anyway?

iirc, once upon a time we had Iran in a pincer between Iraq and Afghanistan. A long time ago, before the 2004 election caught the Dems with no issue, and they had to create one, and decided upon “your president is a war criminal”.

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:38 am 29. buddy larsen:

Geoffgo is right. It’s the only way.

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:40 am 30. Mongoose:

SO buddy, was that a shovel ready presser, or what?

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:41 am 31. dan:

read the article: we are not fighting the Taliban. as the intel source complains: “ra-tag? they have staved off several attacks by combined armor and air assaults.” they have better weapons and communications than the pakistan army. they have sophisticated networks of bunkers and tunnels. i don’t care if Waziris can fabricate AK-47s out of Kush rock, they are being supplied and organized and trained and hardened by an outside force that does not come from within Pakistan or any other overtly Islamic country. The Roggio article virtually screams it.

I wonder: could the closing of the Kyrgyz base, could “hitting the reset button,” could the major attacks on Pakistan supply line, could backing off European missile defense, could any of this, O, any of this, having anything to do with a Russia-Taliban connection? What kind of weapons, for example, and communications systems are this vanguard of the Revolution – excuse me, Caliphate – using?

And we should look again: is that oil price inflation and then sudden depreciation really entirely accountable by particular economic situation? Forgive me if “economics” seems a little more like meteorology or astrology than I had previously imagined.

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:47 am 32. Unsk:

Buddy, not to go off topic but,

Rush Limbaugh just backed your run on the financial system theory. He quoted Congressman Kanjorski (D-Pa) as saying the morning of September 18, the Fed noticed that someone or something had withdrawn in one or two hours, $550 billion from the money market system that has assets of $3.4 Trillion . The Fed quickly infused the system with $105 billion, and starting to work on what became TARP.

Rush asks the same question. Who did it? Was it Soros? Was it a consortium of countries like Russia, China and Venezuela?

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:47 am 33. Mongoose:

Some one should turn Rush onto the Lehman stock build up of Soros, and explain to him how naked shorts work. Off shore shorts too.

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:52 am 34. Roderick Reilly:

I understand the sentiments running through these posts, but it appears that almost every one of them has missed the HUGE elephant in the room:

We abandoned Afghanistan (and Pakistan in the bargain) before, and got 9/11 as a direct consequence.

Now I don’t know what the cause and effect of abandoning the region will be this time around, but you can bet your bottom dollar that the region will become a center for spreading world terrorism again.

I have no solutions to offer, but while the temptation to say “screw ‘em” is on the tip of my tongue, I need to know that there are effective alternatives to preventing attacks on our homeland and our world-wide interests other than re-building Afghanistan and pacifying the tribal regions. If anyone wants to offer plausible means of doing so without us having to hunker down, take off our shoes at the airport and strip-search grandma, I’d like to hear them.

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:55 am 35. joe buzz:

Blue Dog with a decent plan ALERT;

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/02/10/freshman-blue-dog-offers-a-new-start/

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:58 am 36. Mongoose:

The bill has passed the Senate.

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:59 am 37. Eggplant:

The question about what to do in Afghanistan maybe rhetorical. The Taliban and Islamic fascists are radicalizing Pakistani politics. After the radicals fully take over in Pakistan, their first action would probably be to play games with India. If the Islamic fascists inflicted a 100,000+ terrorist outrage on India that would probably trigger an Indian military response against Pakistan. Pakistan would almost certainly lose a conventional war against India. If Pakistan was run by religious fanatics and facing military defeat, they would probably feel compelled to use their nuclear weapons and put their fate into the hands of Allah. India would then respond with their nuclear weapons to slaughter most of Pakistan and a significant part of Afghanistan.

Again, we were correct to focus our attention upon Iraq after we drove al Qaeda and the Taliban leadership out of Afghanistan into western Pakistan. Trying to completely pacify Afghanistan is probably too hard as long as the Islamic fascists have safe havens in western Pakistan supported by funding from the Arabian peninsula.

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:00 am 38. programmer:

unsk notices:

the morning of September 18, the Fed noticed that someone or something had withdrawn in one or two hours, $550 billion from the money market system that has assets of $3.4 Trillion .

programmer observes:

Pretty smart dude/group, whatever, if you ask me. Someone with more sense than I had.

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:09 am 39. steveaz:

Buddy, and market-watchers, OT, but…

Did you notice that oil’s holding at the $49/barrel level. Used to be it’d drop with the markets as futures traders anticipated declining demand.

But, now, no. I’m telling you, OPEC been itching for a replay of the seventies, baby!

A running skit called Forced Scarcity:
American consumer: “Maybe, now, oh Democrats, can we drill in ANWR, or off Texas, or off California?”

Democrats: “Hell No! We’re in a crisis. And, now, why don’t you all go play with those nice plastic hybrid cars we bought for you with your own money.”

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:18 am 40. programmer:

IMHO – Get the troops out of Afghanistan now, as quick as possible. Most every body on the BC has read Xenophon’s Anabasis. Seems some prescient right now, as we hillbillys say.

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:19 am 41. Eggplant:

programmer:

Unsk said:

“the morning of September 18, the Fed noticed that someone or something had withdrawn in one or two hours, $550 billion from the money market system that has assets of $3.4 Trillion.”

Programmer observed:

“Pretty smart dude/group, whatever, if you ask me. Someone with more sense than I had.”

I don’t think even Soros controls that much money ($550 billion). It’s not in the interests of the Chinese or the Russians to hose our economy.

Surely it’s possible to trace the money and find out who pulled the trigger?

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:23 am 42. programmer:

Okay, narrative for a fictional war story (I’ve had too much tea today). Our troops are cut off. Our government (the one in Washington) directs them to surrender. The Generals in the ’stan say, “Hell, no”. They go all medieval and take over the country. What happens then? What is the climax of the story? Do the Generals set up their own sovereign government, make appropriate treaties OR turn the country over to the government of the USA, in keeping with their oaths? If they turn the country over to the USA, what happens to them? They disobeyed a direct order from the CIC. What next?

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:27 am 43. Mongoose:

Sure it is in their interest if Obama gets in, particularly if he is in their pockets.

The Russians and the Arabs have benefited so far.

Soros could just be leading it, it does not have to be just his money.

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:29 am 44. programmer:

Eggplant,

Da*ned good observation. Money flows of that size surely are tracked in some way by investment groups of all sorts. I will see what I can find in the “deep web”.

As you can probably tell, I am seriously caffeinated this morning.

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:31 am 45. buddy larsen:

re Soros, that FT rticle he wrote was the purest tell you should need. The holes he had to leave to construct the alt. hist. weren’t scaled prperly accxording to his his historical MO.

Another tell is the speech Geithner just made (which set off a 300 pt Dow fall); the rococo, barouque structure he has built should come after and if it fails, the return of mark-to market rule back to historical cost model.

search William Isaac (ex FDIC chief) –he was just on Fox talking about this. do two searches, first, his name, and just scan the credentials. then leaving the name in add [ mark to market ] to the search.

The rule, which Isaac says (my paraphrase) “…economists were all over SEC not to do it, saying it would cause a credit crisis and bank insolvencies as soon as eco growth slowed –but they did it anyway.”

Isaac just said it has destroyed, in this crisis, $600 bbl of bank capital.

Back to Geithner, the mkts do not like him, the rump banks least of all. it’s important here to remember that many of the execs in place in these banks two years ago are now gone, almost always on parachutes of gold, and the rumps are being worked by, uh, different sorts. Lately Barney Frank hinted mark to market might be dropped (the mkt zoomed up on that word), then a day later came word that, no, it won’t be dropped. NO ONE is asking WHY? What is the reasoning? Nobody says, nobody asks. oh there’s some mumble about ‘credibility’ but the analogy is blowing your head off with a shotgun because you have a headache.

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:36 am 46. Captain Ramen:

It was a panic. Soros doesn’t need top control $550 billion, he only needs to control a fraction of that, pull the money out and spread the rumor.

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:38 am 47. Unsk:

Eggplant:

Maybe not China, but Russia, particularly Vlad and friends, could care less about our economy. And one doesn’t need the full $550 billion to pull it off. Just start a big run, and alert other big players to the run and Voila! you’ve achieved your objective.

Seems to me the Dems and the foreign bad guys or whomever they are , have a symbiotic relationship; the Dems set up the situation so the system it is vulnerable, and the Foreign bad guys pull the linchpin. Rinse and Repeat.

The next question is what is Obama setting up next to fall?

BTW, in this Marxist Health Care Stimulus Fraud, the Democrats buried the proposal and didn’t inform the public. Kinda hard to say the Dems didn’t know it was wrong, or didn’t think the public would believe it was good for America.

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:40 am 48. buddy larsen:

remember, it’s the bank capital problem causing the house prices to fall causing consumers to not spend causing business to lay off emplyees giving the unemployment dramatics that O is using to sell the stimulus bill which the debt of is causing interest rates to rise pushing down house intrinsic value. At some point, assuming liquidity, potential home buyers will note the rising rates and jump im before the risce still more. This is probably a percent or two in the future and will need momentum but there’s a hope. but if the admin is using this, then the ”little guy champion” is even more besmirched (higher mortgage rates added expense for the payer), it will look like the play of the people who got out of financials early, and will by then have bought back in at half price, or twice the shares, in the front of that reflation.

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:50 am 49. geoffgo:

OT,

Case you missed the MSM coverage – Chairman of the Dallas Fed (search on May 2008 .pdf) says:

the unfunded liabilities of ss and medicaid add up to $99 trillion, or about $335,000 per person or more than $1.2 million per family of 4

(that was in May ‘08 before the spending of the fall and now)

in order to deal with it then, discretionary spending needed to be cut by 97%, starting now and lasting forever . . .

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:58 am 50. buddy larsen:

“Dark pools” are unregistered hedge funds, and i am not at all sure there’s any statutory access to the identity of the owners. of course CIA always has other tools –if there’s no fix in (maybe just the arched eyebrow) that includes any of the spook high ups.

Feb 10, 2009 - 12:00 pm 51. buddy larsen:

geoffgo, the only way is eco growth –which Bush and Greenspan knew, and gambled on –esp after the new congress of 2006 made it impossible to reform a friggin’ thing, with a moron/commie coalition in the majority.

Feb 10, 2009 - 12:03 pm 52. exhelodrvr:

The worst thing to do would be to leave; that WILL result in a much worse situation. You will have Islamic extremists emboldened by a significant victory with a place to base out of. And we will be left trying to convince all our other allies that we won’t “cut and run” with them, either.

Feb 10, 2009 - 12:15 pm 53. buddy larsen:

steveaz @ 38; some traders are talking about two things, [1] the baltic indexes (dry up 140% since Sept/Nov lows), the 15% domestic stock mkt rise in ‘09, other clues, indicate China (whose stocks crashed by half six months before USA’s downturn began) is on the recovery, speaking to oil demand going fwd, and [2], the Dollar/oil link, that as the Dollar is perceived as inflating [see TARP, stim bill], oil dollar-price will rise to hold the same value. Enough oil is now readed in Euros to see that effect –as at $140 the Europeans were paying about 305 less for that few mnths –the first decoupling, actually.

Feb 10, 2009 - 12:21 pm 54. buddy larsen:

305 = 30%

Feb 10, 2009 - 12:23 pm 55. Mongoose:

Buddy, but how can the Eurosupport itself in this new world?

Feb 10, 2009 - 12:27 pm 56. buddy larsen:

EU could recommend all member nations decrease social spending and increase defense spending with the savings. if they don’t do this, they’ll be on the Ruble soon enough, and the Euro will be just a proxy.

Feb 10, 2009 - 12:57 pm 57. programmer:

For anyone interested:

Re: run on money markets.

Note publish date!!

Note source!!!

Feb 10, 2009 - 1:01 pm 58. Jrod:

@16 geffgo–this just in:

“CIUDAD JUAREZ, Mexico, Feb 10 (Reuters) – At least 21 people were killed in Mexican drug gang clashes near the U.S. border that culminated in a shootout with the army, Mexican media reported on Tuesday.

At least one soldier was killed in the battle in the town of Villa Ahumada, south of Ciudad Juarez near the border with Texas, local newspapers reported.

The attorney general’s office in Chihuahua state confirmed there had been a gunfight between soldiers and suspected drug gangs, and said at least 15 people had been killed.

Mexico is seeing drug-related killings on a daily basis in an escalating drug war between powerful trafficking cartels and security forces. Some 5,700 people were killed last year, and daylight shootouts are on the rise near the northern border.”

Feb 10, 2009 - 1:02 pm 59. buddy larsen:

exhelo @ 51 –but does CiC agree? or care? that’s the fear –these same sort of people have twice now ==Vietnam and Iraq, had no problem with abandoning an American war effort. if they’re gonna do it again anyway, shit let’s save the army –think Dunkirk –a defeat for GB, but those troops pulled off the continent wet and weaponless were the ones who went back when the time was right and finished off the bad guys. i guess what i’m saying is CiC just scares the livin’ doo doo outta me.

Feb 10, 2009 - 1:08 pm 60. Cosmeau Bugleweed:

Concerning the Afghanistan thingy, I know a guy in Montreal from there. He’s 37, smart, articulate and fashionably leftwing in his politics.

He travels to Quebec City to throw rocks at the recent international clusterf**k. Goes to McGill University to shout down conservative knuckledraggers like David Frum.

Does the whole Che Guevara wannabe number.

So I ask him since he’s progressive and all, how come he doesn’t do something to protect his sisters in Afghanistan who get acid thrown in their faces for trying to go to school to learn how to read.

He doesn’t answer at first, then he implies that it’s someone else’s job since he couldn’t do much by himself. (His Daddy lives in Amsterdam, not Kabul.)

Probably a lot more comfortable over here and anyway the dumbass Americans will do it for him and he gets to hate them at the same time. Two for one, a nice deal. Clever lad.

Help them out, naive American friends, same way clever Billy Clinton helped out the wrong side in Bosnova/Kosithing, from 15,000 feet, no closer.

Feb 10, 2009 - 1:10 pm 61. Mongoose:

I meant more on the economic side.
You have 35% to 40% export lead enonomies, with the USA as the major market. There will not be a Chinese r Japanese market for them, Russia is marginal.

I am particularly talking about a reserve switch.

Also, I am not so sanguine as you about China hitting a recovery.

How does that happen if we are in recession/depresson? Not regionally.
The Baltics may be some sort of backlog, or prior scheduled quarterlies. maybe some of it is momentary, smart deals.

I think that there is a move to replace the dollar here, wither with the Euro or a basket. The flaw is that it is a political action supprted by market manipulations (including ForEx markets) and not a real “economic” attack, in terms of fundamentals. It is possible to tke us down but the rest come with us.

It is also risky, what if the people just toss the bums out? What if the plot is uncovered.

A lot of people are really PO today. Will it get worse?
As a corollary anecdote, I was in a local dog park today, and the ever present, overwhelmingly Yuppie Liberals there were mocking Obama. Now who knows what sort of legs that has, but it surely says that we have moved on to somewhere else in the political landscape.

Terrible times, but pride goesth before the fall.

Feb 10, 2009 - 1:13 pm 62. Cannoneer No. 4:

We didn’t “abandon” them, Rod. We achieved our objective, accomplished what we set out to do, and left them to sort themselves out. We weren’t really “there” in those days, anyway. Our mules were there. Our Stingers were there. A handful of CIA were there. People there were killing Russians. We helped them. Russians left. Mission accomplished.

This charge of “abandonment” is made by people who seek to make us feel guilty for not keeping Afghanistan on the gravy train after the Soviets were run out, for not intervening in the civil war that followed, for cynically using the brave mujahadeen as proxies in our quest for global hegemony . . . and feeling guilty, we’re inclined to be more generous to the “victims.”

I encourage all to read what Vern said.

Feb 10, 2009 - 1:16 pm 63. Mongoose:

goeth^

Feb 10, 2009 - 1:17 pm 64. sirius_sir:

Buddy, I’m getting a big headache and looking evermore lovingly at that shotgun. May use it to just blow out my t.v.

Exhelodrvr, I think you are right. We’ve seen this picture before. Hopefully the sequel (as it did in Iraq) can go better.

Afghanistan may not be the strategic center that Iraq is, but it’s still vitally important. I’d argue, though, that Pakistan is at least as much if not even more so.

Is there a counterinsurgency plan for next door?

Feb 10, 2009 - 1:22 pm 65. sirius_sir:

I meant next door to Afghanistan, but next door to southwestern U.S. is equally pertinent.

Feb 10, 2009 - 1:24 pm 66. Eggplant:

I was reading the Wikipedia article on the “Credit Default Swap” (CDS) and was immediately blown away by the technical jargon and mathematics. Satyajit Das describes them in his book “Traders Guns and Money”. Das begins his explanation with the sentence “The basic idea of a CDS is simple…” and then proceeds with an incomprehensible explanation. People claim that these CDS things represent a financial liability of about $145 trillion (yes trillion not billion). People also claim that the CDS is at the root of this whole financial crisis. I find the CDS concept so confusing that I can’t make any sense out of it (it appears to have deliberately been made incomprehensible). The claims and counter claims on the Internet about CDS have effectively brought the signal-to-noise ratio down to zero.

Does anyone here have a clue about CDS?

Feb 10, 2009 - 1:29 pm 67. programmer:

Exhelodrvr says:

The worst thing to do would be to leave; that WILL result in a much worse situation. You will have Islamic extremists emboldened by a significant victory with a place to base out of. And we will be left trying to convince all our other allies that we won’t “cut and run” with them, either.

programmer responds:

A significant victory for the enemy is where our troops get cut off, and are defeated in detail while being hung out to dry by an administration that truly does not understand combat power and it’s appropriate uses.

“The art of using troops is this:
……When ten to the enemy’s one, surround him;
……When five times his strength, attack him;
……If double his strength, divide him;
……If equally matched you may engage him;
……If weaker numerically, be capable of withdrawing;
……And if in all respects unequal, be capable of eluding him,
……….for a small force is but booty for one more powerful.”
- Sun Tzu, the Art Of War

Feb 10, 2009 - 1:36 pm 68. Mongoose:

Seems to me that we need to understand the CDS business as it affected AIG, Lehman EU banks, Goldman Sach, morgan stanley and Citi. I also would like to know where JP Morgan fit into this, we do not hear much about them. I think the trigger is buried somewhere in there.

Feb 10, 2009 - 1:37 pm 69. wildernesscalling:

Don’t need no stink’n “tax revolt” just need the tens of millions to do their returns by the ol’ paper method with paper checks to boot! the IRS is not set to handle the old method and this would cause absolute chaos take’m years to figure it all out and it would do more to stimulate the economy then the current porkulus bill going thru now, just think how many people the IRS would have to hire to process all them forms…Talks cheap, we’re on a crazy train and it ain’t stopping anytime soon, glad my son’s are too young to be draft yet and most my relatives are already out of the services and almost past their call back time, petty the other folk, kiss and hugg’m while ya can, “0″ and Charlie R will be calling’m in a draft soon…

Feb 10, 2009 - 1:40 pm 70. Roderick Reilly:

“”"”"”This charge of “abandonment” is made by people who seek to make us feel guilty for not keeping Afghanistan on the gravy train after the Soviets were run out, for not intervening in the civil war that followed, for cynically using the brave mujahadeen as proxies in our quest for global hegemony . . . and feeling guilty, we’re inclined to be more generous to the “victims.””"”"”"”"

I was not using a touchy-feely meaning to “abandonment,” just pointing out that we needed to stay engaged in that area because it affected our interests. Again, I repeat, one. more. time: 9/11 was a DIRECT consequence of our neglecting that area. Neglect includes the cold feet that Clinton got in special ops efforts to take out Bin Laden, or to really wreak havoc on the Al Qaeda training camps. We didn’t take care of business post-Cold War. No rationalization about “mission accomplished” against the Soviets can obscure the fact that our neglect helped bring about 9/11.

Feb 10, 2009 - 1:40 pm 71. Captain Ramen:

@61: I am not convinced that an Iraq style nation building is even possible in Afghanistan or Pakistan. Comparatively speaking, Iraqis are far better educated and far less ‘Islamic’ than the rest of the Arabs. Doubly so for the Taliban, who are basically the rednecks of Pakistan. Large scale nation building worked in Europe after WWII because there was something there to build on. Ditto Iraq.

Wretchard says the entire world needs to get into Pakistan and remake it to prevent the convergence of the three conjectures. I just had a thought… instead of spending a trillion bux on spendulus, why not use that money to create ObamaCorps whose sole function would be to nation build in Pakistan? It would be an interesting experiment… tons of people with worthless degrees in french poetry would go over there and find out first hand how much they are hated. When (if) they come back they would have a more realistic perspective on life.

Feb 10, 2009 - 1:48 pm 72. dan:

If only we had the CIA’s or other relevant agencies’ inside knowledge as to what, exactly, was a front company, what not, what their trading and financing activities were, and at what time. Buddy – if you could expand on your financial markets interpretation I think more than just I would be obliged.

As for leaving Afghanistan, it is very problematic. On the one hand, it appears that having not imposed some sort of post-Soviet settlement may have left the field open to many actors, of whom the strongest proved to be – with ISI support – the Taliban. I note that this “pure army of Islam” was not the only player; I think the Wikipedia article on Hakmeytyar is suggestive. Many “warlords” were in fact notables in the Communist party which ran Afghanistan, at least officially, between 1974 and the liquidation of their leadership by the KGB in 1979. These are extremely venal people animated by a basically sociopathic moral sensibility; these are the most vulnerable to subversion and use by clever powers with deep pockets and a lot of guns.

The point is that whomever could be manipulating the situation to have drawn us in in the first place, knowing that any substantial commitment would render us helpless to the surrounding wilds sooner or later. Regardless of whether it was an intentional strategic, that now seems to be the position towards which we are tending. It may be the case that a defeat/withdrawal would monumentally energize the jihadis; I have argued that for years myself. But the pressure is clearly on, and with recalcitrant passive-aggressive allies in Europe, Anglosphere electorates with predominantly liberal sensibilities vulnerable to even gross manipulation, an adventurous Russia, and a financial collapse that increasingly looks like the proximate cause of a Western version of perestroika – these may be a combination of circumstances so favorable to one or more enemies that they just might decide to strike our forces, connected to modernity by the slender supply line beginning in Karachi. India may be too far gone to act as a reliable counterweight. We also have a very exposed forward base in Qatar. With the Unwitting Leninist at the head of the army, this may be too opportune a moment to pass up, whatever the wisdom of the strike. But we ought to consider that some kind of ordered withdrawal may be the better option at some point in the near-medium future.

Feb 10, 2009 - 2:00 pm 73. buddy larsen:

Eggplant @ 65 this shows us what “too big to fail” really, really means.

Feb 10, 2009 - 2:11 pm 74. Cannoneer No. 4:

9/11 had more to do with us neglecting al Qaeda than with us neglecting Afghanistan, Rod. It is just an accident of history that 9/11 was launched out of Afghanistan and not Somalia, or Sudan, or Yemen or any of a dozen other crappy places which, were it not for their potential as terrorist sanctuaries, would be of no strategic significance to us.

The abandonment issue is the argument of nation builders and stability seekers who would expend American blood and treasure in these otherwise insignificant hellholes.

Feb 10, 2009 - 2:19 pm 75. Michael Hoskins:

But,,,suppose, just suppose, a functional, winning strategy could be developed. What would that mean?
For example, the entire US effort is turned into a spec ops training ground. Green Berat A and B teams all over the place, hundreds and hundreds of teams, add some Seals, Marine Spec Ops and call it advanced spec ops training. Add some logistics…and let it play out.

I am thinking in terms of 20k to 30k Green Berets plus all the others. The war will be one by Sargents and Captains, most on a second or third 6 month tour.
Then we have to do the hard part. Wait, have patience and watch.

Just thinking

Feb 10, 2009 - 2:28 pm 76. Michael Hoskins:

won

Feb 10, 2009 - 2:29 pm 77. steveaz:

Eggplant @ 65,
My economics professor called his chosen field as “the easily understood in the terms of the incomprehensible.”

Seems the incomprehensible has become the preferred habitat of our post-modern agitators, no matter whether it cloaks environmental sciences, gender-expression, or economics.

Feb 10, 2009 - 2:32 pm 78. NahnCee:

I wish someone would tell me what an official “failed Mexico” would look like. How much more failed does it need to get before we decide that as a country it’s hopeless and either invade them and overthrow their dope-running government or start pouring billions of aid dollars in a la Africa / the Phillippines / Vietnam / Iraq trying to turn it around so they quit bothering us.

Feb 10, 2009 - 2:37 pm 79. RWE:

“…9/11 was a DIRECT consequence of our neglecting that area.”

9/11/01 was the DIRECT result of us neglecting the fact that the world is a dangerous place and that greater, not less, competency is the way ahead. As it has always been.

9/11/01 was the DIRECT result of us expecting that the usual bureaucratic approach to security will handle any threat. Don’t have a gun. Call the cops and wait. Cooperate with the bad people. That is what they told the airline pilots.

9/11/01 was the DIRECT result of us thinking that if we would be nice to people we were fighting and only blew up places at night when no one was there or cratered runways while making sure we did not actually damage anything valuable that they would reciprocate.

Does it matter which Godforsaken mountain range the crazies hold up in when they plot and plan? No. It only matters that we stop them in the act and make it clear that they and anyone they ever sipped tea with will pay with their lives.

Feb 10, 2009 - 3:04 pm 80. Mongoose:

Hoskins: You realize that SOCOM has about 46k people in it max, right?

I do not think that there are 20k operators within it.
(maybe you could draft other seasoned units for support–any combo of MEU’s might do)

But the point is that you would have to pull SOCOM operators/teams off of all other theaters or zones.

Now..

With the US pullout in Kyrgyz, there is both an intel and containment problem. This borders are really porous.

A lot of the plus with Manas was not so much the “base” (which was just one airstrip on the field and an hanger/warehouse), but the whole US intel infrastructure that could be situated there. All the other US “development” stuff gave some leverage too. Little discussed about the Kyrgyz deal, but of great value, was that it put not a little pressure on the Russians and the Chinese to behave themselves up there (they are completing a kyrgyz-china highway you know, and talking about rail links too.) They can all get up to lots of mischief now in the region. And you cannot forget that we could approach any of the other CIS ’stans to counter this stuff.

I do not see how we can leave Afghanistan soon for three obvious reasons:

1) It will be seen as a defeat and a weakness and place us in an awkward position internationally, particualrly the next time we have to build a coalition and act decisively in this or any region. What ever the goal is, it must be a clear and reasonable one in terms of the WOT, the region and our position in the world, and it must be decisively dealt with and brought to a clear, winning and honorable conclusion.

2) We have to do something about Pakistan. Afghanistan’d importance here is obvious.

3) It still has strategic and tactical value in the struggle with Iran

So it seems to me that the issue of nation building has to be put off, and the usual hand waving must ensue. So we need to see it in terms of its strategic and tactical use in the near and mid term of the WOT. Is nation build really the issue at this point?

If Obama has decided to pretty much end the WOT, then now we have a different question, and then it becomes a matter of just #1 above, but that will become difficult indeed to do. It will certainly look like a defeat in the wide world, no matter how well he hustles the American people.

It seems fairly clear that Obama has no interest in American security, and may even be in the enemy’s pockets. Thus the deciding event would be a major terrorist attack, some actual nuke acquisition connected with the area, or a confrontations or exchange between India and Pakistan, or Iran and anyone around here (probably Israel). It maybe that ironically that acting in their own interests, India and/or Israel saves the day for us.

There is just a small moment of balance now–a brief lull as actors assess the situation. We cannot know yet which way it will go. I rather doubt that it will go in any way that Obama has imagined or planned for. Whatever his agenda, I doubt that he is experienced or clever enough to avoid being used, and used badly. Whatever the scenario there, the whole mess is so volatile, and so linked to broader issues and actors, I doubt if anyone has gotten it right. I believe that Obama thinks he can just play it out and gradually play it down and draw it down. I do not see this happening.

Feb 10, 2009 - 3:12 pm 81. Mongoose:

NahnCee: With Obama and Co. going the way they are, we will look a lot like Mexico in a few years.

Mexico seems to be one of their key models.

Feb 10, 2009 - 3:14 pm 82. whiskey:

Obama has, as he is fond of reminding the World, many Muslim relatives. He himself was born and raised a Muslim.

He has no interest in defeating the Taliban and AQ. He is pro-Pakistani, having spent time there during College. He wants a big defeat of the US in Afghanistan, to force America into accommodations and surrender to Islam and Muslims.

Among his goals: recognition of Hamas and Hezbollah which raised money for him, opposition to Israel, opposition to India, in the sense that both should “not exist” which is the Muslim position. Also recognition formally of Polygamy in the US and Sharia for Muslims (as a start) and a whole host of other things.

Already his Administration is according to the LAT fretting over the lack of Miranda Warnings for Gitmo terrorists and leaning towards letting them all go free. Including Khalid Sheik Mohammed, beheader of Daniel Pearl and 9/11 Architect, the author of the Cole bombing, and many more.

What else could you expect from a man with many Muslim relatives, who is born and raised a Muslim, and represents a party that is Pro-Muslim (because they are anti-American)?

I suspect most Democrats and Liberals would be secretly happy or overjoyed if the US had a massive Alamo-style defeat in Afghanistan, or Corrigedor, or what have you.

Feb 10, 2009 - 3:39 pm 83. buddy larsen:

dan, re the strange stuff in the mkts –i hardly know where to start. just today, Sen. Demint asked Geithner in the hearings “why is there an entire part of this conversation not being had?” and Geithner evaded. Last year our 1.2 tt fed budget included 470 bb debt service, this year it’ll be 700 bb, yet Geithner continues to go right to the threshold of being obvious about driving away the people who will have to lend us the money. if they don’t, or if rates go so high we can’t afford it, we’ll print, and the hyperinflation will be on because the world markets are now watching spellbound and there are no more shadows. Today, while the markets were tanking 400 points and breaking down thru tech supports in SP500, Salazar announces *there will be no OCS drilling*! You can bet the Kremlin jumped for joy, the oil weapon just got more deadly.

Today’s market drop (and gold run up) are much worse signals than even the numbers, as so much anticipation was on this big Geithner speech. Then Geithner basically said nothing about the real steps –not the accounting ruffles & flourishes –but a ”bad” bank, and an end to mark to market –neither of which he mentioned, and both of which he evaded in the senate hearing afterwards. GM, now in bed with the gov’t, conveniently lays off 10,000 the morning of the senate vote on the Stim Plan –which is hiding a socialist coup behind O’s Elmer Gantry act on the unemployed.

i just wonder if these guys, to keep from having to reform Medicare and Social Security, and becuse of the situation in my link at #72 and these last months having already revealed how baldly Dems and the rotten end of high finance will cooperate, would prefer to simply drive us into default/reset. Many analysts are already placing odds of UK default at 25% and USA at 5%. That would sure be the Red Dream of Dreams, just wipe out private wealth and start fresh soviet style. Of course, the ‘existence of the United States is in question’ line from that 08-15-07 Nyquist (which of course may be baloney but no one has impugned the source) swims into the question of default.

Ok, that’s my nightmare scenario. the only thing worse is the Masonic Conspiracy and Revelations.

To counter all that, folks seem to be calm by and large and going about their business, so maybe all the dark forces are just imagination. but, on the financial mess, as to whether it was set up and tipped over by design, i’m thinking something was designed, and that as usual with these sorts they screwed up and let it get out of hand, ands are now on a double track, on the one hand trying to fix it back toward normal and on the other hand thinking about how to exploit the chaos should the system be unfixable. Start with, why isn’t mark to market being dumped? There just too much out there, best organized under names of players, with track records showing connections, who have been doing inexplicable things, and who keep appearing at this crisis’s turning points.

Then you look at that 700bb, debt service will soon be –this year or next? –half the entire federal budget, well, i can’t help but recall that first Nyquist i ever read, someone in finance sent me, the August 15 2007 entry (read if you haven’t, then ask re Medvyedev “how did he know?”) where Medvyedev is instructing diplos that very soon USA will have to dry up military spending –then here the Rus are, bad cop closing the airbase and then good cop offering a route thru their own territory, and then we have a CiC that may for all the hell we know be working with those guys, to ’stabilize the world’ despite America’s ‘bitter clingers to guns and religion’ –and then we have 2 trillion coming up to fund Stim and Tarp2 via auctions to foreigners who have in the past always bought in the end on safety, because in the end the US military guarantees USA will always be Last Man Standing, and our courts are non-politicized, –and then you realize how easy it would be to tip that deal over from the inside –even by rube ideologue dumbassness –if nothing more sinister –then well, i hardly know where to start. i’ll try later –at least some links –gotta go get some air now tho.

Feb 10, 2009 - 3:54 pm 84. Roderick Reilly:

“”"”"9/11/01 was the DIRECT result of us neglecting the fact that the world is a dangerous place and that greater, not less, competency is the way ahead. As it has always been.

9/11/01 was the DIRECT result of us expecting that the usual bureaucratic approach to security will handle any threat. Don’t have a gun. Call the cops and wait. Cooperate with the bad people. That is what they told the airline pilots.

9/11/01 was the DIRECT result of us thinking that if we would be nice to people we were fighting and only blew up places at night when no one was there or cratered runways while making sure we did not actually damage anything valuable that they would reciprocate.”"”"”"

Well, yes, thank you RWE. I failed to put my comments about “direct consequences” and “neglect” into the context you just did.

Feb 10, 2009 - 4:38 pm 85. exhelodrvr:

sirius_sir,
Pakistan and Afghanistan both need to be dealt with. You can’t “solve” Afghanistan without addressing Pakistan; I don’t think the reverse is true, but if Pakistan were addressed Afghanistan would be MUCH easier. Involving India is probably necessary (they could be either the carrot or the stick) as well as being wise.

There needs to be enough “nation building” so that the Afghanis feel secure without going to the Taliban for their security; it doesn’t need to include creation of a democracy.

We need to accept a non-PC version of Afghanistan, and not try to impose our culture there.

programmer,
It is a virtual guarantee that if the U.S. leaves Afghanistan now there will be significant problems as a result. The U.S. forces there being destroyed is not realistic (short of multiple WMD attacks). We have too much air power, which could be used for resupply if necessary in that type of situation.

Feb 10, 2009 - 4:41 pm 86. Old Blue:

The enemy tells you what’s most important in an insurgency. AQ says it’s in Afghanistan/Pakistan, then that’s where it is. Based on outmoded geopolitical thinking, there is no apparent strategic value to Afghanistan, other than to hem in Iran. So outmoded thinkers cry out, “let them stew in their own juices!”

Afghanistan is important because it is the dark corner where the roaches hide. If we accomplished our mission, as the first poster here says we did, then why is AQ so robust that they can form Shadow Armies? We have done nothing but build the ANA into a fairly capable force and buy time for the Afghans to produce a fairly viable Constitution while screwing up its implementation. The State Department phones their work in, and the Army… the de facto lead agency in all of this… is interested in only two things; building the ANA and killing bad guys.

Blame the Army… I’m totally serious… and put the blame where it belongs. Our execution of COIN is verbal-only in most cases. We don’t even train COIN to junior NCO’s, but we send them on what should be COIN missions every day. They take their kinetic skills and apply them to counter-guerrilla warfare, which is a minor part of COIN. They can’t do what they don’t know.

Most Staff Sergeants can tell you who Clausewitz was, but they have never heard of Galula and think Trinquier is an Afghan boy on Thursday night.

Feb 10, 2009 - 4:42 pm 87. Mongoose:

Here is an interesting article about the administrations current response tot he financial mess. Not very faltering.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9ebea1b8-f794-11dd-81f7-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1

Feb 10, 2009 - 4:53 pm 88. Eggplant:

buddy larsen said:

“… so maybe all the dark forces are just imagination. but, on the financial mess, as to whether it was set up and tipped over by design, i’m thinking something was designed, and that as usual with these sorts they screwed up and let it get out of hand, ands are now on a double track, on the one hand trying to fix it back toward normal and on the other hand thinking about how to exploit the chaos should the system be unfixable….”

There maybe(?) some truth in this. It would not surprise me that some ultra-wealthy moonbat (e.g. George Soros) or group of moonbats, who were completely deranged by BDS chose to deliberately sabotage the US economy in order to insure Obama’s election (the timing was perfect). Unfortunately for our financial wizard(s) (and the rest of us), they summoned a daemon without knowing the spell of dismissal.

I suspect that tracking down whoever did this and proving it was premeditated is probably impossible. It would be poetic justice if the people responsible were themselves cleaned out.

Feb 10, 2009 - 5:19 pm 89. Mongoose:

Eggplant: That is (sorta) what I think:

Either they started something to push Obama over the top, and it got way out of hand.

Or

They start something to push Obama over the top, they were played by some foreign actor or actors which had their own agenda, and it got way out of hand (for the Democrats). (there could be some inner American cabal that was in the know.)

But I agree that now they are running two tracks, and one of them is to just “reset” into a communist model by destroying most of the wealth in the country.. There has to be, however, some pretty fierce infighting (and not doubt desperate calculations) between the Political and Business/Money wings of the Democrat Establishment. The Business/Money wing has to be worried about the growing arrogance of the Political wing–they might not stop at destroying the ‘Middle Class”.

One of the problems is that they really cannot bring the wealth back to the level that people really expect, or the even quality of life and, most particularly, the liberty and freedoms.

They might have dumbed down enough people to manage the expectations, but I doubt it.

So then they can only keep power by corrupting the electoral process, corrupting the people and by covert and overt oppression. I am not sure that this will work for them.

Of course, the working out of this will at the very least set us back as a world power, but as just a nation we may find that they will over reach. They think that we are the same as Europeans or Latin Americans. Are we?

The deciding factor will be the character of the American people.

Feb 10, 2009 - 5:39 pm 90. twobyfour:

Esteemed colleagues, one is sorely tempted to make simple and popular decisions in times of crisis. However, we could face far greater complications if we merely treat the symptoms of the disease.

Naturally, all national governments and business leaders must take resolute actions. Nevertheless, it is important to avoid making decisions, even in such force majeure circumstances, that we will regret in the future.

This is why I would first like to mention specific measures which should be avoided and which will not be implemented by Russia.

We must not revert to isolationism and unrestrained economic egotism. The leaders of the world’s largest economies agreed during the November 2008 G20 summit not to create barriers hindering global trade and capital flows. Russia shares these principles.

Although additional protectionism will prove inevitable during the crisis, all of us must display a sense of proportion.

Excessive intervention in economic activity and blind faith in the state’s omnipotence is another possible mistake.

True, the state’s increased role in times of crisis is a natural reaction to market setbacks. Instead of streamlining market mechanisms, some are tempted to expand state economic intervention to the greatest possible extent.

The concentration of surplus assets in the hands of the state is a negative aspect of anti-crisis measures in virtually every nation.

In the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the state’s role absolute. In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly. I am sure nobody wants to see it repeated.

Nor should we turn a blind eye to the fact that the spirit of free enterprise, including the principle of personal responsibility of businesspeople, investors and shareholders for their decisions, is being eroded in the last few months. There is no reason to believe that we can achieve better results by shifting responsibility onto the state.

And one more point: anti-crisis measures should not escalate into financial populism and a refusal to implement responsible macroeconomic policies. The unjustified swelling of the budgetary deficit and the accumulation of public debts are just as destructive as adventurous stock-jobbing.

- V. Putin, January 2009

I personally don’t like the dude, but he is not stupid. They have an advantage of lesson learned over 70 years, and they know what is not working, in contrast to US regressives (calling themselves progressives, but they want to regress to a failed experiment).

Feb 10, 2009 - 5:51 pm 91. programmer:

Exhelodrvr puts forth the following:

It is a virtual guarantee that if the U.S. leaves Afghanistan now there will be significant problems as a result. The U.S. forces there being destroyed is not realistic (short of multiple WMD attacks). We have too much air power, which could be used for resupply if necessary in that type of situation.

programmer responds with:

On your first point, you are absolutely correct. Pulling out the troops now will cause problems. I disagree with your second point. I highly recommend Bernard Fall’s book, “Hell in a very small place” (the siege of Dien Bien Phu). Granted, our air arm is far superior to the French equivalent during the siege. However, air resupply presupposes a friendly Pakistan or a friendly Russia, or perhaps a friendly China. In todays geo-political mess, I would not like to base my chow line on any of those “friendlies”. In fact, as sad as I am to say it, I would not like to base my continued existence (as a soldier) on the current administration (Mogadishu comes to mind, only worse).

In any case, my major concern is that a devastating defeat of American Armed Forces would cause most of the American voting public to curl up into the fetal position, turn the electric blanket up to 9, and start sucking their thumbs. Point, Set, Match to the Enemy.

Feb 10, 2009 - 6:39 pm 92. Michael Hoskins:

Mongoose
You are of course correct. I believe, however, that I postulated a massive training program. It seems to me that total SOCOM needs to approximately double or maybe a little more.

I would suggest also, that a well trained SOCOM team, of whatever sort, (I am not a Spec Ops Tactitian, thus am pointedly avoiding the details) could be levered with some very good straight leg infantry…say USMC/Airborne etc.

The point is the same. No one has ever, ever, ever tried anything so bold in the Afghan Hills. No one. It is relatively low risk, relatively low cost, quick to abandon if not panning out…and it just might do the trick.

Feb 10, 2009 - 6:41 pm 93. Eggplant:

twobyfour said:

“calling themselves progressives, but they want to regress to a failed experiment”

I prefer to call them “retrogrades”.

It’s hilarious how the language thing has gone back-to-front. “Conservatives” are accused of wanting to keep things as they were but in truth conservatives want to make the world better for everyone. On the other hand liberal/retrogrades want to set everything back to 1937 when President Roosevelt was in charge. If you ask them why, you get smiles and shrugs (they don’t really know why).

Concerning Vladimir Putin: He’s one of the sharpest guys out there (a worthy adversary). He’s a dangerous enemy but at least he’s an enemy that we can respect.

Feb 10, 2009 - 6:44 pm 94. Mongoose:

Hoskins: Gotcha.

Feb 10, 2009 - 6:58 pm 95. NahnCee:

Why are we basing overseas political decisions on what other people think? Really, it seems just as insane to me to go around asking “why do they hate us” and caring what the Yurpizoids say as to claim that “the world” will see it as an American defeat if we pull out of Afghanistan.

Why do we care what “the world” or “the terrorists” think? Why is that popularity contest predicated upon boots on the ground? Clinton was able to win a victory over the Serbs just by bombing the hell out of them, so why can’t America do the same thing to Afghanistan and Pakistan if those in positions of authority decide that there really is a good reason for us to be there.

I’m not interested in any more country building a la Iraq. It hasn’t worked terribly well and they haven’t proven as a people or a society to be worth the price or effort. If we *have* to have a presence in that part of the world, why does it have to be a really expensive country-building weening-them-off-of-poppies-and-misogyny effort? It seems to me that the hand of Allah smashing down unseen from above would be just as effective as another 30,000 troops, and in the case of Pakistan, even more effective.

Any one who argues that we can’t pull out because America will be seen by the terrorists to have lost our war is merely saying that same trite, “if we don’t do thus and so, the terrorists will have won”. And frankly, I’m getting really tired of basing my life around what the terrorists do or don’t think of America.

Feb 10, 2009 - 7:19 pm 96. RAH:

Ever since the Russian -Georgian war of Sept, I have said that we need to give up on Afghanistan. Even if we eliminated Taliban in Afghanistan, they have havens in the tribal areas and the Taliban war against Pakistan military has been winning for about 2 years. Pakistan lost the valley of Swat and the Paki Taliban control the entire western section. We lost control over the Khyber Pass and the supply line is too long. Airdrops cannot even make up 1 days fuel use. We need to eliminate the Taliban in Pakistan to win in Afghanistan. The Taliban under the capable military leadership of Baitullah Mehsud will win Pakistan in a couple of years. I have been long watching this military genius for a couple of years and Pakistan has nothing to stop him. He has leadership and the Pakistan military does not. Mr. 10 % is incapable of getting the military to fight successfully and the ISI is 50 % Taliban anyway. After all the Taliban, with Baitullah Mehsud, was able to assassinate his wife easily enough. Musharaff was the only hope and when he lost the country’s support, we lost the chance.

Even if we won, upgrading the civilization in Afghanistan without a strong king warlord in power is hopeless. The only hope would be from the previous ruling family, which could wield myth and fable and a warlord tradition. If Afghanistan has a king and then nobles with military forces controlling provinces they would fight to maintain their power and eliminate the competing power of foreign Pakistani Taliban. The real problem is when Islamism wins in Pakistan with a nuclear arsenal. What then and war with India with Kashmir as the excuse?

Russian nuisance factor does not help. Putin wants us to win in Afghanistan but also wants us to be bogged down and bleed. Putin’s ego is involved in his contest with us. He does not see the demographic reality that China and the Muslim world will gobble up Russia. Russia does not have the population to man the army it has and it is going down hill. Russia needs the US, but ego gets in the way. I fully expect China to egg on Pakistan to take on India. That takes care of India and China is nibbling the edges of India. China wants the central Asian oil countries and Russian resources.

The oil revenue drop, has made Putin’s ability to bribe disappear. Russian military power is on the wane and without US help in 20 years they will lose territory.

Feb 10, 2009 - 7:27 pm 97. NahnCee:

Maybe we could hire the Russians to send their military back into Afghanistan as mercenaries. Promise not to object to anything, just tell them to go in and rout out the Taliban and we’ll pay for it and let them keep any goodies we give them to do it with.

Play it as being equals among soldiers, that it’s the only other military in the world that we’d trust with such a task, and we think it might be helpful to them as a country financially.

Then announce the agreement to the Afghans and watch how they react. And Pakistan which would then be caught between their internal terrorists, India, Russia and America. If there’s ever any further agreement with Pakistan, the very first thing I want that bunch of heathens to do is hand over Khan and then throw his skanky ass in Gitmo.

Feb 10, 2009 - 7:34 pm 98. NahnCee:

Gentlepersons – when discussing economic terrorism, I wish you’d give Saudi Arabia and China equal consideration with home-grown progressives and Mr. Soros.

Mr. Obama *was* elected with the help of overseas contributions. I’m betting those contributions didn’t come from Mr. Soros, since he has more than adequate ways of funding American elections directly. (Can anyone spell A C O R N ?)

Who-ever scuttled Wall Street and the American economy has also evidently been heavily involved in electing the current American President. Therefore, not only is America’s economy teetering on the brink of irreparable disaster, but the White House will now be doing the bidding of (choose as many as make sense): (1) Putin, GazProm and his tame billionaires, (2) China and the communists, (3) Saudi Arabia and the Wahhabi’s.

Ask yourself which of those entities plus Democrats and Soros would care if the whole rest of the world got pulled under at the same time America does.

Feb 10, 2009 - 7:48 pm 99. Cannoneer No. 4:

We didn’t come to Afghanistan to do counterinsurgency. We came to do counterterrorism. We stayed after Tora Bora because Bagram and Kandahar make passable lily pads from which to launch razzias against AQ and any claimants to nation-state sovereignty who allow their territory to be used in preparing attacks against us.

Everything America does for the Afghans ought to be in support of the counterterrorism mission. We will need to do some COIN along the Main Supply Routes, and some Reconstruction along the MSR’s and around our lily pads, and Foreign Internal Defense sufficient to provide us with competent local assistance in maintaining our lily pads, but those are all ancillary tasks enabling the counterterrorism mission.

We are not there to bring sweetness and light to the indigs. We bring what sweetness and light we do to support our agenda, not there’s. The place is a bottomless pit of needy supplicants, infidel-hating fanatics, murderous pederasts, and baksheesh-extorting “officials” beyond our capability to unfornicate.

We are not as rich or powerful or well led as we once were.

Feb 10, 2009 - 8:02 pm 100. E. Nigma:

“We are not there to bring sweetness and light to the indigs. We bring what sweetness and light we do to support our agenda, not there’s. The place is a bottomless pit of needy supplicants, infidel-hating fanatics, murderous pederasts, and baksheesh-extorting “officials” beyond our capability to unfornicate.”

Sounds like the South Side of Chicago, or South-Central LA.

So what DO you do with a failed nation-state? Or any failed polity similarly screwed up? And how do we sell that to the American people as essential to National Security?
Tough questions.

But I agree on one point; we are being played. After watching Barack Obama the last few weeks, I am now thoroughly convinced the man is not bright enough to have won this election on his own.

Feb 10, 2009 - 9:00 pm 101. Old Blue:

Cannoneer, what have you been finding in your cereal bowl this week? You are one cynical dude, man. You also know better than that.

NahnCee, you can quit anytime. I’ll still be here. Now, if the country quits and says it’s time to knock it off, then that will be that. I’ll do what I’m told. I can tell you that my honest appraisal is that counter-guerrilla or spotty COIN around lilly pads and MSR’s will lose this campaign and the implications for our national security are dire. It’s not just what they think of us, but in the world of insurgency, impressions mean a lot. Two of the tallest buildings in the world made quite an impression, didn’t they? I know it left a big smoking impression on the terrain of New York City.

No one really expected people-filled rent-a-cruise-missiles before 9/11. No one really expected fishing boat infantry and the terrorizing of an entire well-populated city in Mumbai. Now, when you can tell me exactly what these radicals… who will not give up, I assure you… will do next and how to contain them, I’d love to hear it. In the meantime, you can quit anytime you wish because you are tired. I can’t blame you for being tired of the war, really. That body armor, shitty food and the challenges of dealing with people who you are trying to help not speaking the same language must be very tiring for you.

We are so self-centered that we forget that the enemy has a vote, and we are so self-righteous because we have evolved so much since our own grandfathers were permitted by law to beat their own wives, we are so superior that these people don’t even deserve our efforts.

It’s not about THEM. It’s about US and the fact that the world is a very small place these days. I know; I’ve been on the other side of it. If 9/11, Mumbai and other events from Munich on haven’t taught us that hatred is easily exportable, then we really really really deserve another punch directly in the face. Once was clearly not enough.

This is about turning the light on in dark places and making sure that the light stays on so that the cockroaches can’t congregate there in large numbers. In the long run, it’s not about being kind or humane or exporting our evolution… although by doing some of those things we will find our own security.

We suffer from the delusion that this is not a war that deserves our best efforts, as if we can afford to get tired of it and walk away and say, “Boy, we sure showed them, didn’t we?”

You know what? Let’s try it. Let’s walk away. It’s time for a nice healthy punch in the head. It’ll take a few years, which will seem like a lifetime in our instant-gratification society. Next time we get all self-righteously angry because we’ve been sucker-punched, all of our friends are going to say, “What? Help you? Are you kidding? Till what? Till you quit AGAIN??” Because that’s who we are. We are quitters and we get tired of WATCHING WAR ON TV.

All of this is diversionary. The Army doesn’t want to do COIN. The Army wants to be ready for WW-III. Do you want to know what Obama can do that would make a difference? Start firing field grade officers and sending them to bed with no supper when they can’t get the job done. If a few senior officers lose their whole rice bowl for being poor counterinsurgents in a counterinsurgency, you will suddenly see them do things like train COIN to Soldiers and buck Sergeants. That’s when the Army will start to “get it.” Obama can start breaking rice bowls in the State Department that belong to those guys who are throwing OUR money over the wall to corrupt and inefficient people instead of getting out there and helping a broken society to form good habits. He can make people do their JOBS or find someone who can. If Obama really wants to do something different, that’s what he can do.

You think we’re so great? Hey, I was IN Louisiana after Katrina, and I’m here to tell you that Americans are animals when there is no one looking. I’ve seen American cops steal supplies that people need, freely given, and sell the stuff. We are no better than the rest of the cockroaches when the lights go out. We are not naturally superior, we just have better stuff and the luxury of having the structure to sit around figuring out how to make everyone act nice to each other. Strip off that veneer and there is a lot of ugly basic animal stuff that comes out. There are good and bad people everywhere. Being pompous about being an American is just a delusion.

Feb 10, 2009 - 9:14 pm 102. twobyfour:

@ 99. E. Nigma

He was bright enough to be coached how to manipulate the sheep. And he had the requirements to pull it off–only rudimentary conscience, narcissist personality (a fair bit over what would be ideal, but nobody’s perfect) and no problem to reconcile cognitive dissonances.

Else, his resume is lacking, so is an apparent set of skills. An ideal Manchurian candidate.

Yes, strings are being pulled, I have no doubt. The puppeteers are domestic, but there sure were some deals made around the globe. However, they can be reneged quite easily (that is where the narcissist personality comes handy, you can blame a lot on it). The point was to fund the election’s vote buying, but now with the hand firmly planted in treasury, the outside funding is no longer essential, nor is the adherence to original agreements. Tuff shite, as they say.

Feb 10, 2009 - 9:19 pm 103. programmer:

Old Blue says:

We are not naturally superior, we just have better stuff and the luxury of having the structure to sit around figuring out how to make everyone act nice to each other. Strip off that veneer and there is a lot of ugly basic animal stuff that comes out. There are good and bad people everywhere. Being pompous about being an American is just a delusion.

programmer responds:

Let’s take it a line at a time:

We are not naturally superior, we just have better stuff and the luxury of having the structure to sit around figuring out how to make everyone act nice to each other.

So, how did we get better stuff and the time to sit around figuring out how to make everyone act nice? Seems like we certainly have a better system, at the very least, eh? I’ve been around the world some, probably not as much as you, but quite frankly, I haven’t seen any other place that provides the opportunity and freedom that America does. The freedom to f**k up, fall down, get back up, dust yourself off and start all over again. I love this country.

Strip off that veneer and there is a lot of ugly basic animal stuff that comes out.

You are starting to sound like some of the leftists I know, and from reading some of your previous posts, that surprises me. You say man is just a brutish animal. Sorry Blue. I think there is a little bit of angel mixed into everyone. There is simply some demon mixed in also. It is all in the examples they are given. People generally tend to rise to the level of the expectations they are challenged with. Which brings me to your next statement.

There are good and bad people everywhere.

We agree on that, although I believe that actually everyone has bad and good intermixed. Some just never, ever are able to overcome their demons. Perhaps, they never have a good example or maybe faulty programming, I guess. They need rebooted.

Being pompous about being an American is just a delusion.

Being justly proud to be an American is no delusion. We need to provide a good example for the rest of the world. It ain’t easy, I agree. And sometimes, it is downright thankless. But, by golly, we try. In fact, from reading your essays, I know you are setting a good example and trying to improve the lifes of the less fortunate at the same time. I’d bet that a little bit of the angel in you pops out every once in a while, but we’ll try to keep that quiet.

Feb 10, 2009 - 9:49 pm 104. twobyfour:

Hmm. Well, the funders may opt for other ways to get back their investment… And it ain’t a pretty picture.

The Capital Markets Subcommittee Chair, Rep. Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania, tells C-Span how the world economy almost collapsed in a matter of hours.

At 2 minutes, 20 seconds into this C-Span video clip, Kanjorski reports on a “tremendous draw-down of money market accounts in the United States, to the tune of $550 billion dollars.” According to Kanjorski, this electronic transfer occured over the period of an hour or two.

Kanjorski: “The Treasury opened its window to help. They pumped a hundred and five billion dollars into the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide. We were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts, and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn’t be further panic and there. And that’s what actually happened. If they had not done that their estimation was that by two o’clock that afternoon, five-and-a-half trillion dollars would have been drawn out of the money market system of the United States, would have collapsed the entire economy of the United States, and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed.”

“It would have been the end of our political system and our economic systems as we know it.”

Feb 10, 2009 - 9:56 pm 105. trish:

Hard is not hopeless. ~ GEN David Petraeus

: )

That’s an excellent blog ya got, Old Blue.

Keep up the good fight.

Feb 10, 2009 - 9:58 pm 106. buddy larsen:

twoby, where link?

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:27 pm 107. Old Blue:

Thank you, Trish.

Programmer, my point is that looking down on others for being born into the system that they were born into is a basic error that a lot of Americans make. There is a lot of talk about Afghanistan (and Iraq, too) that is predicated on whether or not they deserve our efforts. None of us is responsible for the circumstances of our birth. My point about Katrina and the ugly animal side is that when all structure is gone, humans revert to the physical ability to survive and compete (even if it doesn’t really require such regression.) The behavior of many Louisianians in the aftermath of Katrina was an example of this.

None of us built this system that we benefit from and that frees our minds from so many basic tasks that we have time to ponder such luxuries. This was left to us by generations before. It was someone else’s work that we now stake as our right to claim superiority. We’re not better than, just luckier than.

The Afghans didn’t ask us to invade. Even if some of the warlords did, it was in our interests that we did so. Many of the people are glad that we are there. It just so happens that it is in our best interests to help them to succeed as a nation with a government that is responsible, representative, and open. If that can be achieved, we as a nation will be much safer. Slipping into the arrogance of pondering if the Afghans actually deserve such efforts is diversionary and ignores the fact that by securing Afghanistan, we make ourselves safer.

When we start from truly grasping that fact, then all the other good motivations can flow. I like Afghans; not all of them, obviously, but I like their character on the whole. The children there break my heart with their possibility, which is like any child endless, stunted by circumstances. Yes, there are the bad ones, the cruel ones, the misogynists and the greedy. There is all of that. There are also good and kind and intelligent people who just need to be shown a better way and assisted in adopting it and developing their own coping mechanisms for adapting them to Afghan norms.

But all of that flows from one central truth; by helping them, I am making my own country more secure. The more effective my work, the better the chances that when my sons go to Afghanistan, it will be as tourists; there to enjoy the white water rafting on the Kabul River down through the passes to Jalalabad.

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:33 pm 108. Lifeofthemind:

@Old Blue,
Expand that to 35,000 words, wrapping it around a story to personalize it and you have a book that will sell. Better you might have a screenplay. Wars are hard, you do not “choose” war. You accept it or surrender. We have been over the logistics involved in our fragile Afghan position ad nauseum. Right now the Northern route exits at Putin’s sufferance. The loss of the Kyrghiz airbase s a warning that a worst case retreat through the North could end up like a retreat from Moscow. The Khyber route is cut. Our choices are:

1) Do nothing and keep a small footprint in Afghanistan, one warlord among many as the forces gather around us. We could hopefully do that for some time. Possibly events will happen to the West or East that will improve our position in the future or things may get worse.

2) Run away and accept another 20 years of violence and contempt in a world that knows the US is a paper tiger. This would be the Vietnam fantasies of the aging Left come true with a vengeance. Only now instead of facing the last hopeful thrashings of a dying Soviet dinosaur we would face the rising ambitions of a resurgent China and a triumphant Islam.

3) Add 30,000 or more troops to Afghanistan in the hope that they will so overawe the Taiban that, despite the fact that the social and political soil is much less fertile for making a surge work than they were in Iraq, everyone promises to be nice and devote themselves to community organizing and sustainable development while we quickly declare victory and go home. This is the strategy I most expect to lead to an American Dien bien phu.

4) Pour in all the resources needed to transform the Afghan society into something capable of supporting a civil society and accompany it with the long term deployment of COIN forces sufficient to do the job. This would be the 50 years at least of the American Raj approach. It has two problems, the geographic that makes the massive surge problematic and the American political which makes any long term commitment impossible.

5) Focus our efforts on Pakistan while conducting a holding action in the Taliban rear with raids into Pakistan’s tribal areas from the West. This could entail an effective dismemberment of Pakistan in conjunction with India to ensure a safe supply route to Kabul. To do this would require the cooperation of China, which could prove expensive. It is doubtful that the present American administration has the stomach for such a policy.

So we have 5 options that range from the risky to the disastrous with the least likely to fail over the long term being those that Obama is least likely to pursue. My expectation is that he will attempt some kind of short term surge designed so that he can “Declare Victory” and pull out with the country collapsing behind him. Al-Qada may give him the fig leaf given that he has been negotiating with them for months. They may just spring the trap and eat 50,000 Americans.

Feb 10, 2009 - 10:40 pm 109. Josh:

killing bad guys will not defeat well-organized and determined terrorist networks

Is this news? That is the difference between the “police action”, which we’re supposed to know does not work, and a WAR.

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:05 pm 110. 13times:

>>Do you want to know what Obama can do that would make a difference? Start firing field grade officers and sending them to bed with no supper when they can’t get the job done. If a few senior officers lose their whole rice bowl.<<

13times:

IF Obama is being honest about his commitment to victory in Afghanistan.

FDR had Marshall and McNair, both of those men were lifelong military, they understood the threat posed by the axis powers and both men had generated lists of capable men over a very long period of time. They axed the entrenched old guard and promoted the young, willing and able officers.

Who will serve in that role now? I seriously doubt Obama has the political and internal will to do such things. We need an absolute commitment from our politicians to prosecute the war to its final conclusion. If congress is unwilling to stake their political capitol on winning this war, how can we ask our troops to fight, bleed and die in a country halfway around the world?

I’m torn on this, how can we send our young to die while our politicians dither? It just ain’t right man.

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:11 pm 111. krontekag:

Nahncee at 94: Why do we care what “the world” or “the terrorists” think?

If they think you are weak, they will eat you.

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:47 pm 112. twobyfour:

Buddy,

Lost the link. Happened on September 18 last year, just FYI. It can, no doubt, be invoked any time. Just… the run would have to be within 2 hours as that seems to be the time frame to get a bearing that something is up–in other words, if the run was within 1-2 hours on 5.5 trillion (or even 3 trillion), it wouldn’t been realized only after the fact what has been done. Who knows, it may have been a dry run.
I don’t have any info about who were the people/countries involved, which would be very interesting to know.

Feb 10, 2009 - 11:54 pm 113. buddy larsen:

twoby, thanks for the info. Yes, it had to be a normal transaction –except for the size of course –many draws from member banks hitting at the same time. So, gov’t knows at least something about where it went. i’m sure they know by now where the Madoff money went too. buckle your seatbelt!

13 times @ 109, me too, that’s pretty much how i see it. All the things exhelo and old blue & others mention is true as a bell but, jeez, what is NATO doing, 5%, 10%? If the admin isdetermined to hold that strategic position and isn’t just dicking around with polls and poses, that’s a horse3of a different color. I’ve just seen Dem rationizing flip flops too many times –it’s so easy for them, they can’t really be expected to hold fast beyond expediency.

Feb 11, 2009 - 12:53 am 114. wildernesscalling:

BL (#112)”I’ve just seen Dem rationalizing flip flops too many times –it’s so easy for them” What do you expect from the party with no morals! they can and do have it both ways, that’s why at every opportunity they rub the rest of us noses in the $hit every chance they get, that’s why Lying, stealing, coveting and arrogance is a nonissue to their party members why normal folk sit there scratching their heads trying to understand how slim balls like willy get re-elected and narcissi like “0″ can be elected.

Feb 11, 2009 - 1:36 am 115. Cannoneer No. 4:

Concur with your assessment, Life.

Course of Action #2 is a no go.

COA #3 is logistically insupportable, and puts too many heads in Russia’s noose, or Iran’s, or Jihadi Central’s, or China’s or Pakistan’s. It’s a hostage situation waiting to happen, and even though the hostages are armed, Xenophon has nowhere to march to. The groveling and sodomizing America would be forced to endure to extract the survivors would be the humbling billions around the world, including millions of our own fellow citizens, think we so desperately need. We would have lost more face than we did over the Fall of the Philippines, and would have to kill even more people than we did back then to get it back. We don’t have the stones to do that anymore, so there goes our time as a global hegemon.

COA #4 has all the disadvantages of #3, plus some. America makes even more promises that are so unlikely to be kept that the white beards in the remotest village call BS. We have neither the wealth, nor the employable elements of national power, nor the will, nor the competent leadership to carry out COA #4 for as long as it would need to continue to succeed.

That leaves us with a combination of modified COA’s #1 & #5. Do something rather than nothing, but don’t put much in that we can’t unilaterally evacuate in a hurry. Keep the lily pads for as long as possible, knowing full well how exposed and vulnerable they are. Take out a high value target over in Pakistan often enough to spoil their complacency. Hold the fort in an economy of force role, refusing defeat while waiting for circumstances to change for the better, doing what we can to expedite that change.

Feb 11, 2009 - 3:06 am 116. Peter Boston:

It just so happens that it is in our best interests to help them to succeed as a nation with a government that is responsible, representative, and open.

Worthy goals no doubt but the likely success of achieving them are repudiated by history. Afghanistan is not a nation. Never has been, not within the standard meaning anyway. The tribal area of Pakistan is more Afghanistan than is Kabul.

Any clan leader has more influence with more people than the central government. It’s been like that for thousands of years and nothing that we or anybody else can do over the next several generations is going to change that.

Urbanization and genuine economic opportunity are the only things that have successfully trumped tribal loyalty everywhere else in the world. Other than possibly Kabul there are no urban areas in Afghanistan or the Tribal Areas. A young Afghan man has no possibility of a future outside his tribal sphere of influence. If the tribe says go here and fight, he goes and fights.

Clan and tribal leaders fight among each other for dominance and unite against the external enemy. That’s been the play book of human history endlessly repeated until one tribe, one leader, is the last man standing.

I think that a restoration of the monarchy with tribal councils would have had a better chance of making Afghanistan at least look like a nation. A tribal warlord who is master of his own domain is not going to concede power and influence to some pipsqueak legislator in Kabul.

Feb 11, 2009 - 3:32 am 117. buddy larsen:

wilderness @ 113, funny to see your post, just as i was coming over to add a dab of Clinton-era info to what i’ve been stringing out over some of these threads over the last weeks. Briefly, the Clinton administration’s last year in office featured some people and activities that have resurfaced in the present crisis. SEC’s inexplicable behavior is a story in itself, re rules that have been like artillary shells in the current mess, and the guy responsible for them was just named to the president’s new economic board.

Ok, here’s another one (snip, bolding mine):

So what is the catalyzing event that will precipitate outright capitulation?

I think the spin-controlled version of events will make the collapse of the derivatives market the red herring that facilitates the aw-shucks-we-have-no-choice shoe-gazing moment possible, and that’s exactly the parachute the government needs to retain a veneer of credibility – at least in its own delusional mirror.

The announcement that the CFTC was about to become the target of a regulatory overhaul supports this theory. Consistent with his unfortunate proclivity to hiring foxes to guard chickens, Barack Obama’s choice for CFTC commissioner Gary Gensler was the undersecretary of the U.S. Treasury when the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 was passed, and is one of its architects. This was the piece of legislation that was put forth to appease the opposition to “dark market” trading in certain OTC derivatives first noisily derided by CFTC commissioner Brooksley Born in 1998.

Ignoring Born’s admonishments with this act, it exempted credit default swaps (CDO’s) from regulation, resulting in the somewhere between 58 and 300 trillion dollars in value presently under threat if the positions were to be unwound. Because of their unregulated status, counterparties in the largest transactions can simply “roll forward” contracts, instead of the losing party in the transaction covering their loss with a transfer of money. It is this massive “nominal” value that could be the Achilles heel of what’s left of the U.S. banking system, and by extension, the U.S. dollar.

(back to me, it’s these things inside Bank of America and Citibank and JP Morgan that are behind, i am deducing, the admin’s refusal to discuss let alone discontinue mark-to-market (the rule 157 that does so much damage to bank capital, thus housing, thus consumer confidence, thus spending, thus employment, thus (back to front in a vicious circle). If as so many have been howling about, that mark-to-market is the key to fixing this mess, then it looks like these CDOs are the lock the key is stuck in. And Obama’s new commodity futures trading commission [CFTC] chief is the launcher, on the world in yr 2000, of these monsters. Why are they monsters? Read the second link, they are bets that the other guy goes belly up. they are also assets.

mark-to-market, remember, is desirable to kill so that a cash flow (using rent equivalents) model can revalue upward the banks’ real estate portfolios higher than the current marked-to-market unrealistic distressed-priced portfolios.

But, these three banks’ CDO assets, in the 6 to 9 trillion range (depending on who defaults first), are bets that each other will default.

Mark to market means they don’t have to acknowledge that those trillions of assets on the books are well and truly worthless. If the system went back to the old cash estimated value model, trillions (less than the sum, due to netting out against each other, can that be right?) would be written off, per accounting rules.

well, i’m probably wrong somewhere –because still, mark-to-market has arguablyb already cost about the same as dropping the mark to mark would cost. but in sequence that’s twice as much as better vision of the future would have cost, done honestly from the beginning. Right? Wrong?

Anyway, Gary Gensler designed (or had designed) these unregulated lottery bombs in yr 2000, and now he’s Obama’s pick to run the CFTC.

Yep, it’s nine years later and Mr. Gensler’s work is worth a negative 5 or 10 or 15 trillion dollars –but no worries he’s found work.

Yep, the tool that may well default the Dollar was brewed up by the Secretary of State’s husband and Obama’s transparancy and accountability and –hmm, what was that third purty word? –pick to run commodity futures trading.

Yep, remember that next time you hear that “right-wing deregulators” crashed the global financial system.

Feb 11, 2009 - 3:48 am 118. buddy larsen:

Note that CDOs were created by “…legislation that was put forth to appease the opposition to “dark market” trading….”

Bill Clinton, or someone with access to him, wanted to perpetuate “dark market” trading. that is, anonymous trading by unregistered funds of custody-unchained money. Bill Clinton’’s wife is your secretary of state.

also there’s this: the person directly responsible for either not noticing Bernie Madoff’s activities, or deliberately covering it (which any reading of Harry Marcopolos’ testimony would suggest to anyone but Dr. Pangloss), was so effusively praised by her incoming replacement, Obama’s pick to run (and clean up) the center-of-all-hell SEC, which in conjunction with the Democrat’s (Barney Frank’s and Chris Dodd’s) political protection of the heart-of-the-center-of-all-hell Fannie & Freddie, that the praise effusion was enough to cause a reporter to report it as “strange”. So, watch her, too, i guess (*sigh*).

if people are overly-suspicious of this crowd, whose fault is that anyway? I know i’d rather be doing damn near ANYTHING besides sitting here in the wee hours thinking about this invasion of the body snatchers.

Feb 11, 2009 - 4:14 am 119. Cannoneer No. 4:

Krygyz leader says money behind US base closing

Feb 11, 2009 - 5:12 am 120. Cannoneer No. 4:

US still has its Kyrgyzstan base covered

In formal terms, the Americans would have a grace period of six months to vacate the base from the moment they received an official request from the Kyrgyz government.

Feb 11, 2009 - 5:22 am 121. Cannoneer No. 4:

Everyone wants a piece of the Afghan war

The Persians would be glad to rescue Xenophon, for a price, which the Israelis will pay.

Feb 11, 2009 - 5:52 am 122. Wadeusaf:

In Afghanistan, roads.
But roads to where? Pakistan?
Whatever road you are on, NG, asphalt, Cable, Aqueduct or even a friggin logging road, the trouble with Afghanistan is that it is 100% surrounded by places that look just like it, act just like it, and smell just like it acting as a buffer for places that don’t. The most reliable, most economical and most direct, route for supply is Pakistan. The most unreliable ally we have had in this GWOT is KSA, er Pakistan. The NWFT is in Pakistan.

It stands to reason that if we wish to have an impact in Afghanistan we need to take care of business in Pakistan.

I figure the best thing we can do will be done while fighting our way out…through Pakistan. It is not a stretch to realize that where this adventure is leading…is…, Say it with me now…,
PAKISTAN. Afghanistan resistance to USSR is the only reason the Taliban and Al Qaeda exist and the only reason they existed in Afghanistan is because of …Say it again…Pakistan.
I don’t know how much chai one has to drink to realize that nothing is going to work long term in Afghanistan, no one (not even Bin Laden) can be captured in Afghanistan, until some real progress is made in Pakistan.

Did I mention I think Pakistan might have some influence in Afghanistan? If we were a medical team we could be charged with malpractice. The Bear sees it, as does the Dragon, and although no one wants to say it, so too do the Europeans. Even and especially so, does India.

I have run out of patience with the Pakistani’s, and the formerly disbanded court’s decision to release AQ Kahn, along with a lack of follow up on the Butto assasination and the luke warm response to Mumbai, and the et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

A proper hammer and a well placed anvil, is what is required. Our forces may have to play one part to survive. Whose up for the other?

Feb 11, 2009 - 6:05 am 123. barry 0351:

There is nothing to win in afganistan. All the place will be is a cesspool as it has been through out time. Let the Russians have the place.

Feb 11, 2009 - 6:33 am 124. Doug:

Taliban targets the heart of Kabul
Synchronized suicide attacks claim at least 19 on the eve of the scheduled arrival of Obama’s new envoy to the region.

Feb 11, 2009 - 6:33 am 125. Doug:

19 Killed in Suicide Attacks on Government Sites in Kabul
The attacks displayed the apparent ease with which Taliban insurgents can breach the defenses of the heavily-fortified capital.

Feb 11, 2009 - 6:37 am 126. NahnCee:

Is there any such thing as Stockholm Syndrome in reverse? I’m seeing military based in both Iraq and Afghanistan with an inordinate fondness for the indigs (nice new word) they are working with, who refuse to look at them rationally. Possibly they’ve been in a firefight and the American soldier felt like his life had been saved. Some times, like Old Blue, the reasoning is “they didn’t ask to be invaded so we owe them”.

But I’m wondering if part of the reluctance to pull out — not because we lost but because they are simply not worth it — is a feeling that that would negate all the blood, sweat and tears we have poured into the war on terror since 2003. That if we left Afghanistan, all the dead in both Iraq and AFghanistan would have been for naught, and all we would be switching back to spitting “baby killer” hissing in our airports.

Or maybe it’s just a father thing, and men naturally want to protect what they see as being weak around them.

Feb 11, 2009 - 7:27 am 127. dan:

buddy – thank you for the interpretation; I agree with you, and I have read that Nyquist piece, and that kind of synchronicity, buttressed by supports such as the detail about recalling diplomats worldwide (which sounds like a verifiable fact), is what keeps my normal instincts from rebelling against the Golistyn strategic thesis. These are not normal times; something intentional is afoot, and the absence of reasonable treatment of malevolents like Russia and China (who, by the way, is behind Darfur?!), certifies the sensibility.

Regarding that CSPAN exchange twobyfour provided: you say in your response that that was undoubtedly a normal transaction. $550 billion in a couple of hours is a normal transaction, at a rate that, if somehow undetected, would have destroyed the global order – that is normal? A reasonable response, maybe, to economic indicators suddenly dawning on a vast number of individuals at once? I’m not being sarcastic, I’m just asking.

And now we see Kabul this morning: forgive me, this is all too well-orchestrated, and the tactical manuevors are being conducted over too wide a territory to simply be a result of the Great Jihad surging like a Hegelian wave over the suddenly dupe-led USA and its best intentions. On another forum a person who seems to have thought about these things to a perhaps unhealthy extent is convinced that the ultimate crisis which causes the next world war will result from a nuclear exchange in the South Asia, presumably the subcontinent. The USA will remain on the sidelines, as in the Phony War, until a combination of manufactured pretexts can string across the media like a stock ticket of doom. Then, as on London, the bombs will begin to fall on the USA. The bombs will be hydrogen bombs.

If Leninists’ preoccupation with historical patterns weren’t so obvious, I wouldn’t usually credit this kind of synchronicity (revolution (in USSR), depression, warfare launched by fanatics, etc.). But, with the Golitsyn thesis in mind, look at the thesis of Victor Suvorov: that Lenin/Stalin granted Germany space and time and technology to build an armed force capable of crushing Western Europe because they knew that such a weapon would be used to revenge Versailles and cause another world war. As the first revolution had succeeded in the bowels of Great War, so – the thesis went – would the second and final revolution. Stalin supported Hitler in his way, even granting him a free hand in the East and the bulk of the raw materials without which Germany would not have been able to sustain its war – and the withdrawal of which in Ploesti was Hitler’s first unmistakable clue that Stalin was fixin’ to betray him and his extended forces.

Now, if there is truth to that thesis, and frankly I am persuaded, why couldn’t the Kremlin have decided to arm and direct all these lunatic Muslims to try the same thing, only this time as a delivery system for nuclear weapons rather than a massive conventional army? Stalin allegedly supported Hitler because Stalin recognized a useful fanatic when he asw one; could not Andropov, or some wily successor, have come to the same conclusion about Islamist groups, especially in light of the international treatment of the PLO, for example, or any of the myriad other USSR-sponsored “national liberation” groups in the Muslim world? Counting on the stupefaction and myopia of the Westerners, particularly the co-opted and neutered Europeans, is not such a leaping insight for totalitarians possessed of a KGB and a Death-Star like nuclear umbrella. Who needs an economy, or hi-tech conventional forces? All you need is a delivery device, a compliant political figure, an economic crisis and – as the Wehrmacht in 1941 – a stretched military force? Particularly when you control – Russia, Venezuela, Iran – the spigot of the world’s energy supply?

I’m just sayin. It may be a little too pretty and slightly paranoid, but it is not, unfortunately, a wholly implausible thesis.

Feb 11, 2009 - 7:51 am 128. dan:

For further comparison I direct your attention to the diversionary rhetoric used to such effect by Germany and its sympathizers in London and Paris: oh the poor Germans, they were too roughly handled at Versailles, and anyway wasn’t it all our faults really and the bad bad imperialism of the previous governments? Oughtn’t they be allowed to resolve their German questions among themselves (Anschluss, Sudetenland)? All that talk about the Jews and Communists – well, it’s unpleasant but there seems to be order in Germany and we can do business with them, and anyway we don’t much like the Jews and Communists either… And why shouldn’t they be allowed back into the Rhineland? After all, that Versailles treaty was really quite horrible… And what if they are arming? Surely Germany ought to have its rightful place in the concert of nations…

Is that not much like the sympathy extended the lunatic Islamists from Gaza to Tehran? I could go on.

Although I agree with Old Blue and have argued them for years, there is a wider strategic picture. It is possible, notwithstanding all the good honorable and right reasons to stay, that a great noose is tightening. It should be considered seriously, in my opinion.

Feb 11, 2009 - 7:59 am 129. steveaz:

Eggplant at #92,
“It’s hilarious how the language thing has gone back-to-front.”

Another linguistic switch: the progressives no longer use the word “conservation” when addressing resources-use or environmental issues. Conservation, and conservatism, used to figure prominently in the environmental debate. The early green movement relied on conservation to shame profligate users of coal, water, gasoline and food. In fact, CAFE standards and gas-taxes were enacted in order to force conservation onto us pleebs.

But now, perhaps because the word reminds the user of the Conservative movement (a.k.a. “Republicanism”), “conservation” has been wiped from the environmentalists’ lexicon. I doubt this excision from the popular media and political lexicon is accidental.

Feb 11, 2009 - 8:00 am 130. dan:

twobyfour and buddy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NMu1mFao3w

Feb 11, 2009 - 8:04 am 131. Old Blue:

Lifeofthemind, those are not our only options. That’s what I’ve been trying to say and what Cannoneer knows, or should know, is the way to go, which doesn’t necessarily require overwhelming American conventional force on the ground… although a few more wouldn’t hurt. But in this plan I don’t see the plan to up the advisor capability; only combat troops.

Here’s option #6. Add to the Afghan forces capability in the threatened areas with the “surge,” pushing the troops out to provide local security to threatened populations. Double our advisor effort and ensure that each and every Afghan district has a police mentor team and accompanying security force element. Ask the Germans to take their paper tiger troops home and replace them with governmental advisors/mentors to help the fledgling government root out corruption and begin to take responsibility for the provision of basic governmental services to the population. This would satisfy German sensibilities while still making a critical contribution. Engage Iran to assist in revamping the Ministry of Justice, an Islamic judiciary which we have no expertise in. This will engage Iran in positive work while staying militarily out of the fight. Encourage the police to support local justice as in Koh Band District, Kapisa Province, using this as a model to provide accessible justice to citizens and prevent their need for Taliban courts. Have the ANP and ANA be the lead agencies, with NATO support, in securing each local area. Force State and any other agencies engaged in reconstruction/development to “get off the FOB” and oversee the projects to which our money is directed. Encourage mining industries, through tax breaks and whatever incentives you can think of, to assist in developing basic industrial capacity beginning with helping Afghanistan exploit its significant mineral wealth.

Not one of the other proposed solutions said anything about ANSF. Not one, and each would be doomed to failure. The Afghans themselves are the key to their own security, and they can do it with some help and guidance. Many will tell you that this has been tried, but it really hasn’t. The ANP, the key to local security in every district, are largely ignored. Only a small percentage have American advisors, but where they do a difference is being made.

Scholarly references to history and Xenophon only apply if you are acting like Xenophon or any of the other actors of history. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it if they do the same things. No one has ever done what we are capable of doing. Every US-centric solution on here is one that the Soviets would have considered if they were in the same position. That’s not a good sign; they are the world’s worst counterinsurgents. The object is not to bring them up to 21st century western standards, folks. It’s to bring them to a functional capability for growth. You would be amazed what that will do not only for the Afghans and that region, but for our security and the security of Pakistan as well.

NahnCee, if you read what I said, it had nothing to do with owing them. It had to do with owing ourselves. Likening my viewpoint to a form of Traumatic Stress experienced by captives is condescending and rude. Instead of seeking reasons why my viewpoint is driven by mental illness or injury, why don’t you readjust yourself to see that while you are seeing the situation through what little scraps of media you can gather from over 6,000 miles away, I have been on the ground in Afghan villages and spoken with Afghan people. I have worked alongside the “indigs” and I have seen their humanity. I saw a lot of people there who handle their hardships with much more grace than did our own people in the aftermath of Katrina.

Our reluctance to pull out is driven by the realization on the part of many that such an action would only exacerbate our problems with international terrorists by an exponential factor in the long run, all for the ease of ridding ourselves of a problem that many do not have the imagination to understand the solution to. Would it leave as waste the American lives given? Yes. Would it bring international realization that we are the big dumb fat kid on the block; heavy-handed but easily winded? Yes. Would that harm us in other areas? Yes, no doubt. But the most serious implication would be in demonstrating that all you have to do is punch us and then hide and wait out the tantrum that follows; because there is no resolution in our actions, just a tantrum to be waited out like a two year old flinging himself on the floor at the grocery store.

Now is when we decide who we are going to be. We can choose to be the big, dumb fat kid who throws tantrums and skulks away after breaking a few things, or we can be the opponent that they never thought that we could be; a powerful thinker who can apply might, mentoring and benevolence in the proper proportions to bring the dark safe havens of terrorism back into the light and control of reasonable people.

First, you have to understand and believe that there are reasonable people who just want to lives free of terroristic domination. It is not transplanting a tree. It is planting a seed and nurturing it until the wind will not rip it from the ground. Reducing them to “indigs” who are incapable of rational thought is not helpful in the least. It only makes them alien.

NahnCee, here is an exercise: Why don’t you tell me what you expect from your government and the society you live in? Basic stuff. Do you expect to be able to walk outside without intimidation? Do you expect to drive down the road without being stopped by armed bandits who take what money you may carry? Do you expect someone to adjudicate your complaint if your neighbor puts up a fence on your property, so that you don’t have to risk violence when you go to remove it after your neighbor contends that it is in fact on his land? Do you expect schooling for the children? What do you expect? Let’s start with some things like that, and I will show you a couple of things about counterinsurgency.

Of course, you could always read the 100-page primer on it, “Counterinsurgency; Theory and Practice” by David Galula. Then you would be able to see that the blueprint that is laid out in our doctrine will work in precisely this situation and that we are NOT doing it. We are fighting a counter-guerrilla war only, with hints of COIN here and there.

This thread is about insurgency vs counterinsurgency. If more people actually understood what COIN is, then many of the straw men raised on this thread would not have been raised. $30-$40 and a couple of evenings and you would have a reasonable understanding of the failures and be in a position to demand that our military actually put down their rice bowls and do the deal. It’ll be like a light came on in your head. Lacking that, you attempt to reduce me to a victim of mental illness. In the meantime, there is no cry against the generals who don’t “get it.” All of this is diversionary.

Feb 11, 2009 - 9:26 am 132. dan:

fair enough. but 2 comments:

it seems as though we put a great deal of effort into karzai and he and his government have proven to be ineffective. is that not the case? i think the sense of frustration rises when it begins to appear to even the most ardent supporters that we will have to re-invent or prop up a succession of governments until the combination of strategies can bear fruit. is this a reasonable inference in your opinion or do you think we can work with what we’ve got now and build from there if we only change our strategy?

second, i think your emphasis on commenters’ frustration with the afghan people is well-taken but a little too shrill; there is ample reason, with all the good faith in the world, to take the Afghans in general for savages. it doesn’t require xenophobia, social darwinist tendencies, or worse. your point about katrina ripping off the veneer of civilization is also well-taken, but if the entire country was constantly in a post-Katrina Hobbesian state, the project you describe would look pretty daunting here too. iraq post-petraeus is still just iraq; it seems as though afghanistan post-petraeus would have to be something much more than afghanistan.

Feb 11, 2009 - 9:58 am 133. Cannoneer No. 4:

Engage Iran to assist in revamping the Ministry of Justice, an Islamic judiciary which we have no expertise in. This will engage Iran in positive work while staying militarily out of the fight.

The Iranian justice system is not a role model I would see one dime of my taxpayer money spent on exporting to Afghanistan.

Feb 11, 2009 - 10:14 am 134. exhelodrvr:

Programmer,
Leaving Afghanistan now WOULD be a devastating defeat of the U.S., in the eyes of 90% of the world. Don’t you see that?

Feb 11, 2009 - 10:25 am 135. Dave:

#131 Old Blue: Let me back up Old Blue on this one before I go to work.

I’ll eschew specific measures to be taken for the moment and concentrate instead on general principle.

Afghanistan was at one time a privileged sanctuary for terrorists, etc. If we go away and leave it alone, it will revert to that status. And I shall bode no talk about trying to wipe out the Afghan population with nukes. On top of the ethical consideration, it would not work. Soon as radiation subsided, it would be an Area 51 for our mortal enemies.

Old Blue is right when he says that the Army in “General” does not get it. That is true of both military and civilian life whenever
unusual situations arise. Wrong steps are taken unless and until some bright guy comes along and applies his own out-of-the-box paradigm shift. Take the crew that is currently running Afghanistan and transplant them to our southern border and all we would get would be a completely open border. Bringing order out of chaos is not something that is done routinely. Period.

My ruminations on the subject of Afghanistan are based on the principle that there can be no such thing as an area defense unless it is built on one or more point defenses.

That is why I think that the solution is to apply various and sundry productive enterprises to the area. By securing them we of necessity apply the rule of law to all
and effect a socio-cultural transformation which in turn gives us a socio-political environment where Afghanistan, left to its own devices, will be an asset to maintaining and perpetuating our own country as a free and independent republic.

As is, Afghanistan is a liability, although not as large a one as it was before. Since making it an asset is within the realm of possibility and since we cannot afford a return to its previous condition, we’ve no rational choice but to be as resolute as need be for as long as need be.

Any questions?

Feb 11, 2009 - 10:31 am 136. NahnCee:

exhelodrvr – “If we don’t stay the terrorists will have won.”

90% of the eyes of the world already hate us and despise us, so what’s another “devastating defeat” or two in the eyes of a bunch of backwards losers who are all going under their very own selves? WHY do we need to base our political and social decisions predicated upon what the “eyes of the world” do or do not think?

(I just read at Instapundit that 70+% of the Spanish think that the Jews are behind the current world-wide financial melt-down. Are these the “eyes” that you’re so concerned about?)

Feb 11, 2009 - 10:40 am 137. dan:

I wonder what’s happening in Pakistan these days, exactly. Seems sort of quiet there, newswise.

Feb 11, 2009 - 10:51 am 138. Lifeofthemind:

@Old Blue,
I do not question your analysis of what is needed to improve the situation within Afghanistan, with the exception that I also would need a lot more explanation before accepting a role for the Iranians as a “Good Idea.” My position here was that of the Logistics Bore. If we can not get in our out safely then how to we conduct the mission as you desire? From my perspective you want option #4, time lines and such are details I’d leave to people like you who know what they are talking about but I’d err on the side of expecting it to take longer and cost more when warning the public, and without doubt that is the best long term plan. My point behind option #5 is that given the geographical and logistical trap that Afghanistan is how can we fix it before we deal with Pakistan?

Am I simply wrong? Is the risk of having our Army cut off in the middle of nowhere overblown?

Feb 11, 2009 - 11:01 am 139. Mongoose:

HahnCee: I think that the discussions is about the opinions of governments that would work with us in collisions, not a popularity contest in the general populations of nations (though obvious electorates’ opinions do play a part in what room other government may have for political maneuver).

Contrary to the MSM propaganda, Bush put together a broad coalition for of course the WOT required it. This was not just about troops on the ground. It is about seizing assets, logistical support, intel, interdiction of WMD, war material, people, systemic security arrangements (as in freight transport and air travel),etc. That sort of thing. These requirements do not go away if we were to suffer the perception of defeat in Central Asia. Couple to that would be fears of retaliation should the overall efforts not reach a winning conclusion. If we are not a seen as dependable, if we are not seen as providing leadership, we will be hamstrung, and it could lead to devastating results.

Yes, we should worry very much about what the perception of our weakness, long term commitment or willingness to win in places like Afghanistan would mean to our long term position.

The situation in Pakistan show this. One is reminded of how difficult it was to recover from viet nam, and has someone has pointed out, we are not in the commanding position that we where way back then.

I will add that things are not made an better for the American position by this financial crisis. The world is pretty much pinning this on us too.

Like it or not, we have to deal with “world opinion” on some level. We cannot just go our own way in the world as it is today.

Feb 11, 2009 - 11:11 am 140. blert:

A better strategy for Afghanistan is to bring in the Indian Army and rotate out NATO.

The Pakistani elites have meddled in Afghanistan forever on the principle that doing so will provide them strategic depth during conflicts with India. Having a couple of Indian mountain divisions on the other side of the Khyber Pass implodes the dream.

This is the best way for the Indians to spank Pakistan for the Mumbai outrage. India has staying power: she’s got skin in this game.

Tactically, India can stay on-mission until success, and would be seen by all parties as having that tenacity.

Logistically, the Indian Army is going to have a lighter footprint, as she is not going to employ hit and run helicopter warfare. Instead, she’ll grind down the terrorists on foot.

The Indian and Afghan governments are already great buddies. They have a common foe. It is so much more practical for India to destroy the ISI toy army in Afghanistan than it is to punch through the Punjab against a nuclear enemy.

This Anaconda Plan will vex Pakistan until she goes bankrupt, and that can’t be far off.

The Russians have had a long-term relationship with India and would be most unlikely to cut off supplies to their non-aligned ally.

What few troops that America sustains can be supplied by air, in a pinch. If Pakistan formally cuts us off, that would be a cause for war, period. It’s a bridge she’ll never cross.

Feb 11, 2009 - 11:23 am 141. Old Blue:

Dave, thank you. Nicely said.

Cannoneer, that’s why it should be their money spent on it. Sorry you don’t like the Iranian justice system, but is the closest thing to Afghan law as it exists that can be found, as both are based on Sharia law. This is what the Afghans are used to, this is what they have decided upon, it will work for them, but they are having huge problems with their courts and the Taliban are providing the courts through shadow governance. As Galula pointed out, successful shadow governance is more dangerous than any shadow army. If you have a better idea of how to fix Sharia-based courts (which are non-negotiable) then I’d love to hear it. This is a way for the Iranians to have influence in their own backyard, do something positive, and be engaged in a non-military way. If we are to engage the Iranians, what better way to do it? It’s the same principle as asking for a cup of chai in the middle of a heated exchange. I think you’d be amazed at the temperature change in our relations if we were to even raise the idea that the Iranians may have something of value to offer… something we can’t do ourselves.

Lifeofthemind, the Chinese expressed interest in opening a highway along the old Silk Road route. The best way to move goods and open the economy in such a mountainous area is rail. Doing some good by opening rail routes into and around Afghanistan would do a ton for the regional economy and do a lot to open supply lines. In the meantime, playing silly reindeer games with the Russians and Pakistanis will just have to continue.

I’m sure that we can outbid the Russians for Manas, too.

Blert, that is a recipe for an Indo-Pakistani war that will unravel the whole region and likely draw in China. There’s the big war that our officer corps would be more comfortable with. Then they wouldn’t have to bother with all of this touchy-feely COIN stuff. A bankrupt nuclear Pakistan with Indian presence on both sides is just what the world needs.

It’s not about grinding terrorists down on foot or hit and run helicopter strikes. If you are doing good COIN, you are inside the insurgent’s decision loop and making them grind themselves down on you while cutting off their logistical tail (their tail is the local support, forced or not… the water in which the fish swims.) Secure the people and you will have insurgents beating down your door to get shot. Secure the people and the insurgents can’t get food, shelter or a group to melt into. It makes them desperate, so they will come to you to fight.

Chasing insurgents, “chasing ghosts” is strictly counter-guerilla stuff. The limited successes will lull you into thinking that you are actually getting something done all while you LOSE GROUND. It doesn’t work, it never has, and it never will… but because it is the obvious thing to do it will lure both military and civilian into thinking it is something productive to do. Some counter-guerrilla activities are part of an overall COIN strategy, but as Galula pointed out, only on a very limited basis. Chasing ghosts is a distraction from doing the real work of COIN. Traditionally trained Soldiers don’t get that at all. If you can’t shoot it or blow it up, it just doesn’t compute, and that’s part of our problem. I could go on and on with examples I have seen with my own eyes.

Afghanistan and its insurgency are absolutely freaking brilliant examples of textbook insurgency in the finest traditions of Mao himself. The doctrine that was developed from successful counterinsurgencies was written for just such an occasion.

Oh… here’s something about the way we view Afghans… click on my name for the link.

Feb 11, 2009 - 11:54 am 142. blert:

It could well be that India could supply her troops via Iran, something that we can not do.

Feb 11, 2009 - 12:00 pm 143. Old Blue:

Indians on the western side of Pakistan would be a blunder of historic proportions. Alienating that troubled country and making them feel even less secure is a recipe for disaster. The Indians are already scaring the crap out of the Pakistanis by doing economic and reconstruction activities. All we really need is to further radicalize the Pakistanis.

Perhaps the Indians could help engage the Iranians to assist in the reconstruction of the Afghan legal system.

Feb 11, 2009 - 12:08 pm 144. dan:

Ah yes… I’m sure Iran would be happy to send a few Hezbollah operatives and HAMAS representatives into Afghanistan to “reconstruct” an Afghan judiciary. You know, for the children. And of course the Chinese would be happy to help – maybe they can get some of their Darfur platform engineers to teach the Pashtuns how they can shelter their militia from the media eye. I’m sure the Pakistanis would be much less furious about life if they had the Chinese and Iranians next door “building Afghanistan” than the USA. We’re just so frustratingly stupid and all.

Blue your analysis is more f-cking nonsensical than my stealth Soviet conspiracy theories. I hope Gates and Petraeus find a way to stay and that the Afghans will put up with us a while longer, but I sure hope they aren’t asking “everyone’s a bigot” Blue for advice.

Feb 11, 2009 - 12:40 pm 145. Old Blue:

Wow, Dan. That’s strong. Gotcha all sputterin’, eh? (You’ve got a fleck of foam on your lip.) Apoplectic much?

The Afghan judicial system is broken; no two ways about it. We have no idea what to do with it, so that’s what we’re doing; nothing. In the meantime, one of the first services that the Taliban shadow governments in each area where they are strong enough offer is a legal system, and the people are resorting to it. It’s one of the most dismal signs to come out of Afghanistan, as a matter of fact. All you seem to be concerned about is with massive global conspiracy threats and discussing the financial crisis on a thread titled “Insurgency vs Counterinsurgency.” You never take note of the fact that shadow governance is seizing upon the broken Afghan courts to delegitimize the GIRoA. All politics is local, my sputtering friend. If you’ve got a better idea on how to fix the Sharia-based courts in Afghanistan, I’d love to hear it… but you’d rather rise above the real problems to just the geopolitical and global stuff like, “Is Hamas going to have influence in Afghanistan from sending lawyers?”

You don’t have a better solution to this critical problem. All you see is “Iran” and your brain shuts down.

Cannoneer likes to bring up pitting opposing radicals against each other to assist our cause. Take that a bit larger than militias. Iran doesn’t want a hotbed of Sunni global Jihad on their doorstep. They don’t like bin Laden. He’s Sunni and he’s an Arab. They are very suspicious of the Taliban and their links to the Sunni global insurgency. They have an interest. Fixing the Afghan courts will go a long way towards defeating the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan, thereby weakening AQ. Hamas and the others are focused on Israel… leave them be. They can be dealt with later, and they aren’t the problem in Afghanistan. Perhaps engaging Iran peacefully will help tone Hamas down. I don’t know. In the meantime, like I said, if you’ve got a better idea on how to fix this critical issue other than staying and squatting then let’s hear it.

Oh, by the way… the Chinese ARE next door helping to build Afghanistan. The Chinese won the rights to develop the huge copper deposit in Logar Province a year and a half ago. They are also going to build a railway to transport the copper to China. Hey… you’re doing great spotting those geopolitical threats there, Sputter. I wonder if the Pakistanis are as quick as you. Do you think they’ve noticed yet?

Feb 11, 2009 - 1:10 pm 146. Old Blue:

Iran isn’t the only solution to the Afghan legal crisis, but it could possibly work. I’m sure there are other solutions, but while some have jumped up to scream, “NOOOoooo!” no one has offered an alternative to this very important issue. I’m telling you; if there is no acceptable governmental court system, government in Afghanistan will fail.

Will; not might, or could… WILL FAIL.

If government in Afghanistan fails, then the place descends back into the depths and all of the blood and treasure we’ve put into it is wasted, but the war isn’t over. Throw me a bone here. Critical issue; need ideas. Anyone got a better one?

Feb 11, 2009 - 1:18 pm 147. buddy larsen:

Blert, the Indians are Hindu, the Pakis and Afghans are Muz. India would have to establish and train some Muz indians (there’s some but not many relative to popu).

Dan, i don’t think your soviet theories are wacko at all. They spent 65 billion on civil defense in the 90s (i read someplace) and can put the whole mil/civvie command structure underground, in comfort. even easier when the first striker. think Dec 06, 1941, or September 10, 2001. i guess it’s pointless to fret –but –i do it anyway. can’t hurt, might help. Eyes, you know.

Feb 11, 2009 - 1:33 pm 148. exhelodrvr:

Nahncee,
“90% of the eyes of the world already hate us and despise us,”

That doesn’t cause problems; what causes problems is when they don’t respect us. That is what happened after weak U.S. responses following Beirut/Somalia/USS Cole/Embassy in Iran.

And it will happen much more so if we leave Afghanistan at this point.

Feb 11, 2009 - 1:35 pm 149. Old Blue:

Good point, exhelodrvr.

Feb 11, 2009 - 1:38 pm 150. dan:

Blue, you’re right, that was uncivil and i regret it.

nevertheless, i see iran and i think subversion. i think revolutionary junta spreading itself through proxy armies into lebanon and among the palestinian arabs since the 1980s at the latest. i see direct confrontation with the USA, and i see an insufficient explanation as to how exactly that revolution came about, and doubt the authenticity of the “Islamic” part of the equation. i see Leninism where it sticks out like a sore thumb. i presume they will act in Afghanistan as they have acted in Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Latin America. I presume their alliance with Russia and China will strengthen, and Afghanistan will not improve and their tutelage, since self-evidently none of these governments could give a shit about anyone at all, and that therefore any apparent improvement in the Afghan judiciary will be cosmetic, a cover for Control, which we – having ceded that crucial institution – will have no legitimate way to re-enter should my presumptions manifest themselves.

i think the chinese are horrendous; not, of course, the chinese themselves; they’re just as wonderful or abysmal as anyone else. but they’re besides the point; the point is the CCP. the CCP will not let Afganistan fulfill your laudable goals: they will use their inroads as bases from which to harass us – as Russia has used its co-opted Kyrgystan, with the laughable $2 billion “aid payment” which isn’t a payment or even a bribe since you can’t pay or bribe yourself. you don’t think the KGB owns every single ’stan? Why not – did you ask them?

i think that under the conditions in which we grant our avowed, obnoxious enemies a piece of the pie, or however you want to characterize it, is a recipe for even deeper disaster than a possibly stranded but still lethal military force. you seem wise in ways i am not with respect to certain aspects of these operations, but you altogether underestimate the sino-russian interest in crippling the US politically and militarily. you also underestimate, by implication, the extent to which the Chinese and Russians – their governments – will tolerate a squalor that makes a complete mockery of the “oh they won’t endanger the US economy they benefit too much from it” argument. That is utter nonsense, since the only reason they opened themselves to the US/global economy is to benefit the elite and their instruments of power. They have not surrendered to the wisdom of Anglophilia. It does not require a conspiracy theory to see this.

What i don’t understand about your argument, presuming i am wrong about everything else, which i very well could be, is how the Afghans – however noble and familial and whatever they are supposed to be – are going to be persuaded in some way to accomodate themselves to an order in which the ancient corruption and violence which is supposed to repel them now is sure to persist for a long time, no matter how much progress is being made, and frustrate the thing utterly. every single generation for the next 60 years is likely to have the “They’re so corrupt! You screwed us Amrika!” excuse, no matter how much blood and treasure we give them and give them and give them.

i repeat, the absence of general violence in iraq has not resulted in Indiana. i hope you know something about them i don’t, and i hope we stay if only to deny a steady base to our enemies, but the picture is grander than i once thought, and ironically Obama could be the shield of glowing idiocy that would blunt the blow to our prestige, should that be required. i just think it has to be considered. and the ancient Afghan culture has a great deal to do with why that is.

Feb 11, 2009 - 2:17 pm 151. Cannoneer No. 4:

What Pashtun mullah is going to accept instruction in Sharia from Persian Shiites?

If all our expediture of blood and treasure to date has been to perfect the imposition of Sharia law upon the females, young boys and live stock, we were wrong to overthrow the Taliban. They were great at mass executions in soccer stadiums. They had Sharia down pat. Still do. If we are trying to wire the “friendlies” for success in out Shariaing the Taliban, then bring in Wahabis from Saudi Arabia, and instead of infidel Police Mentoring Teams for the ANP, let the Commission for Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice mentor them. Maybe al Qaeda would quit hating us if we did that.

Are you trying to strategically communicate to Belmont Clubbers that America should invite Iran into Afghanistan and surprised that your message is not well received?

Feb 11, 2009 - 2:30 pm 152. blert:

There are a staggering number of Muslims in India. She has about as many as the entire population of Pakistan.

Pakistan started the toy soldier war with India.

Some counter punching is in order.

A frontal assault would go nuclear PDQ.

The reality is that NATO in Afghanistan is neutered.

No way Pakistan starts an atomic war straight off.

And there is no way Pakistan stays solvent in any event.

With your prescription our political position within Afghanistan will continue to slide and slide and slide.

Let the Indians introduce a Western legal framework for Afghanistan.

Back in the 80s the CIA was quite against arming the Muj with Stingers. It would ‘upset’ the Soviets. That stale advice was ignored by Wilson and Co… And a truly terrible thing happened… the Soviets put up with it and pulled out.

Only effective counter force is ever going to stop the brigands in the tribal belt. If the ISI discovers that they must abandon the shadow army so that India will withdraw…

Guess, what… they will.

Without the internal protection of the ISI the boy soldiers are done.

Without the shadow army the Pakistani internal political situation has a chance to calm down. As it stands, the shadow army is right on track to assassinate its way to effective control of Pakistan.

Already the elites are made to look as foolish as Baghdad Bob.

Feb 11, 2009 - 2:38 pm 153. Steynian 323 « Free Canuckistan!:

[...] THE CANCER MOVED: Bill Roggio describe’s al-Qaeda’s shadow army in Pakistan. They are mobilizing locals to fight [...]

Feb 11, 2009 - 3:24 pm 154. Lifeofthemind:

@Old Blue,
You are losing me here. You still haven’t addressed the concerns that have been expressed about sustaining any sizable presence in Afghanistan given the vulnerable lines of supply and Russian/Chinese/Iranian/AQ etc. interest in precipitating an American humiliation. You have not explained why we need to a priori accept the primacy of sharia rule. If the war is only about who is cutting off hands and stoning rape victims then this is a lost cause. Why isn’t it physically possible to flood Panjashir with Guidance Counselors and Buddhist Missionaries until they all learn to play nice? Or at least kill some and threaten to do the other so they modify in a more Iraqi direction? Why in fact can’t we get Iraqis to go to Afghanistan and do some of this for us?

Feb 11, 2009 - 3:48 pm 155. blert:

Since the brigands make a huge profit off of drug running…

Buy more food rations from the locals…

By contracting for the entire output of opium cultivation — converted to potatoes, corn and such.

Fat farm profits would get the cash out into the countryside.

Off season farm labor needs to be soaked up in road construction in the most labor intensive manner — with the locals getting direct payment.

Use high power equipment for the rough-in…

Use many, many hands for the trim-out.

Feb 11, 2009 - 4:39 pm 156. trish:

Old Blue,

It was mentioned to me a few months ago that we would be focusing less on the ANA, while more on the police, judicial system and local courts, and – interestingly – medical providers. When conveying the question, “Why dither out in the hinterlands?” came the response, “Because if you don’t, you’ll never turn them.”

I’ve been in Bogota, Colombia, for a year now. This country only very recently was on the verge of losing everything – and for many reasons was never an ideal candidate for the type of turnaround it has, in fact, undergone. Our contributions have been indispensable in that turnaround. For cursory reference, see “Colombia: Back From The Brink” at CSIS.org. I urge you to read it, especially because it outlines the early mistakes and beginning groundwork – and echoes much of your own thinking and experience.

As against the challenges in Afghanistan, which are steeper yet, there are principles and lessons to be applied. But let it not be said that it can’t be done. Or that it never has.

After forty years of insurgency, misery, terror – whether at the hands of the FARC or the drug cartels or both – Colombians are genuinely optimistic and look forward to the future.

I remain hopeful that Afghans, too, will arrive at that day.

Feb 11, 2009 - 4:43 pm 157. Cannoneer No. 4:

Saudi judge sentences pregnant gang-rape victim to 100 lashes for committing adultery

Feb 11, 2009 - 5:25 pm 158. Old Blue:

Trish, thanks for that hopeful message and the affirmation.

Cannoneer, it is their justice. It is the current Constitution of Afghanistan. I never heard of any amputations, stonings, or mass executions the entire time I was in country or since. You know that, too. That is a straw man of concentration camp survivor proportions, it’s so thin. It’s just plain silly.

Now, I’m no Islamic scholar, but Sharia doesn’t seem to vary between the two sects. Pretty immutable stuff, as opposed to who is the rightful heir to the legacy of Mohammad. What the Afghans need is help with the organizational, administrative and corruption aspects. Heavy on the anti-corruption.

Again, doesn’t necessarily have to be Iranian… just has to work and fit with THEIR concept of law NOT YOURS. They don’t give a crap what you think of their laws. Just like I told the stupid MP’s who were letting female Soldiers search male elders, it’s not about YOU. THEY are not here to win YOUR heart and mind, old pal. It’s your job to win THEIRS. You’re an IO guy, right? You at least understand that.

Personally, I don’t care if that idea is well-received or not. I will still argue relentlessly that the judicial system has got to be figured out. Until you come up with a real alternative, then I will stick with mine.

If that stuff isn’t figured out it doesn’t matter if we can supply our troops or not because it’s all a waste of time. Now, you can either open your mind or you can figure out a serious proposal, but closing your mind and glibly tossing out straw men isn’t serious conversations.

Lifeofthemind, a lot of people have been pointing out the fragile supply lines for some time. We are starting to see some serious attempts to both close the Pakistani access and to interfere with the northern efforts. The Russians are very primitive thinkers, and while clever they see only the threat that NATO presents to their ability to manage their neighbors through belligerent posturing. I’d say outbid them on Manas, assure the Kyrgzstanis of our commitment to their sovereignty, and keep working the northern route issue. Smoothing some Russian feathers about the NATO thing would be good, too. Obama could back out on the missile defense shield and claim it was a Bush thing.

At the same time, the Pakistanis must be continually encouraged to keep that southern line open. Perhaps subtracting the cost of lost material from their other aid packages would suffice.

Someone clearly shut off the flow of baksheesh to whoever has been refraining from attacking our supplies for the past few years. Why have the attacks ratcheted up now?

That was quick and dirty, but I’ve got a son to get to basketball practice.

Feb 11, 2009 - 6:06 pm 159. trish:

I’ll also add: To those who say that you can’t get any real movement in Afghanistan without “taking care of” Pakistan, the same thing was being said about Iraq (it’s hopeless without “taking care of” Iran) a few years ago – and one might’ve said the same in re Colombia (futile with that outsized nutjob and his merry clique of murderous henchmen) next door in Venezuela). Wrong.

It never ceases to amaze me, however, that those who are weary of Afghanistan, and who were tiring of Iraq, are/were often the same ones who want/wanted to fully open a bigger can of worms yet. (Full disclosure: I’ve been – brother, have I ever – among those wanting little more than to call it a day, just looking for a good, long nap.)

Our strikes in Pakistan have a real effect downstream – but the bulk of the effort has to be in and among the targeted populations. That’s Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Feb 11, 2009 - 6:23 pm 160. Lifeofthemind:

@Old Blue,
So far you want to turn the Afghans over to the Iranians and the Poles over to the Russians. Way to go, I can’t wait to hear your third idea.

Feb 11, 2009 - 6:40 pm 161. exhelodrvr:

Trish,
“taking care” of Pakistan doesn’t mean (at least in my view) fixing it, it means ensuring that it is not a safe zone for the terrorists, and that the U.S. has a reasonably safe supply route through it.

Feb 11, 2009 - 7:00 pm 162. trish:

Okay, exhelo. How do you want to go about “ensuring” that? No sarcasm intended. It’s an honest question.

I can only say, at the moment, that the proper goal is ensuring that *Afghanistan* is not a safe zone for terrorists – and that’s a tall order in and of itself.

As for the supply routes, what are the going rates for various tribal leaders in control of every segment along the way? Gonna have to be more forthcoming/generous or give it up. Old Blue’s right: You can be outbid. Usually, however, you’re outbid by local rather than foreign actors.

Feb 11, 2009 - 7:34 pm 163. Armeggedon Rex:

Ladies and Gentlemen:
I’ve done a lot of homework on the Afghan / Pakistan situation and been involved in OPS there off and on for several years. I urge you all to read the history of the British involvement in the region last century, and the century before. In order to “win” the war in Afghanistan, we must be DEEPLY involved in Pakistan as it currently exists, and we must have a fully cooperative government there. At the moment, the government is partially cooperative but largely non-functional. Make no mistake about it; the Pakistani government is loosing their civil war against the Taliban. If Pakistan falls, as nearly a third of that nation effectively already has, our forces will be cut off for all but evacuation purposes. We will never defeat the Afghani Taliban so long as Pakistan serves as a safe haven they may use at will.
We must also have the will to do the dirty deeds necessary, or the entire effort will be a boondoggle that wastes money and American lives. Every day we continue the charade of warfare without being willing to do what is necessary to win we will loose more lives and treasure. Our Islamist enemy will continue to disparage us with the enthusiastic support of our left wing media. The current administration does not have the will, nor even the spine necessary to develop the will to order the harsh measures necessary to enable victory. The situation in the Afghan / Pakistan region has deteriorated to the point that I do not believe we can win there short of committing limited genocide. We don’t have the stomach for it, but I do believe the Indians will end up doing exactly that before many years have passed.
It is best to get out now rather than with an even more disheartened army after seeing the situation turn into another Vietnam. People can snicker at me and say I’m getting old for making the comparison, but the mountains of that region are nearly as difficult to operate in today as the jungles of Southeast Asia were for our military forty years ago. Likewise, the Vietnamese communists had tactical support in nearby Laos and Cambodia, and strategic support from China and the Soviet Union. Today’s Taliban Jihadists have tactical support in Pakistan and strategic support from Saudi Arabia and throughout the Islamic world. In Vietnam we were unwilling to make more than an occasional raid into the communists tactical support areas. We were completely unwilling to attack their strategic support. The parallels for our current situation are obvious.
We need to preserve the gains we’ve made in Iraq and continue to hunt Al Qa’ida world wide without asking permission from any government whose jurisdiction they may be hiding in. Let’s leave Afghanistan now. It pains me to say it, but we’re unwilling to win, and the longer we stay the more painful and humiliating will be our eventual exit.

OEF/OIF Intel FOBbit

Feb 11, 2009 - 7:37 pm 164. trish:

“It is best to get out…”

Sorry to disappoint. Not gonna happen.

Feb 11, 2009 - 7:58 pm 165. exhelodrvr:

Trish,
For starters, I think that they should continue what they are doing with the Predator strikes in Pakistan, and step it up if the intel allows. COntinue pressuring Pakistan, privately, to increase their ops against the terrorists. Use India/the threat of India as the anvil there.

Getting the supply routes to be more secure will require some combination of defeating that Taliban/Al Queda combined with improving relations with the locals. Bribes will likely be at least part of that; assisting with security against the Islamist elements at least as big a part.

In Afghanistan, get out of the big cities; take away the terrorists source of money (drugs), work on infrastructure to improve the local economy, provide medical assistance, don’t interfere with their culture, and continue hitting the Taliban.

And don’t give the impression that we are wavering about staying there.

Feb 11, 2009 - 8:18 pm 166. trish:

“In Afghanistan, get out of the big cities; take away the terrorists source of money (drugs), work on infrastructure to improve the local economy, provide medical assistance, don’t interfere with their culture, and continue hitting the Taliban.”

Have been out of the big cities since we got there. Had Talib and/or AQ known what little of nothing we had a few years ago protecting us smack-ass against the border, they would’ve ginned up their efforts even faster.

Infrastructure: Absolutely. But the security has to accompany it. Hand-in-hand.

Part of the problem, not an insignificant one, is Karzai (rather friends of Karzai) himself. I know Old Blue disagrees. There’s an election coming. There is hope there, too. And we may thank him, as is sometimes the case elsewhere, for the progress he *did* make under the circumstances.

The strikes will continue, as will other efforts there. They ARE effective.

It’s taken a little more than 10 years to turn Colombia around – through a painful, but instructive, series of mistakes.

When patience wears thin, hang in. Not blindly, but nevertheless.

Feb 11, 2009 - 8:41 pm 167. trish:

(We can also pick off some ISI. Because the Pakistanis can’t.)

Feb 11, 2009 - 8:47 pm 168. Cannoneer No. 4:

blue, I’m not a real IO guy, and have never claimed to be, but I understand enough about it to know that when you come to The Belmont Club, one of the most Counter Insurgent Supportive blogs on the web, and overplay your Ultimate Moral Authority as a BTDT, mistake objectivity for cynicism, insult people who disagree with you, and don’t care if your ideas are well received or not, then you have effectively persuaded, changed and influenced much of the readership here away from what you advocate.

You ain’t gonna get jack in Afghanistan if you can’t win some hearts and minds in the American domestic target audience. If the audience on this blog isn’t buying what you’re selling, you need to reevaluate your product and your sales techniques.

Feb 11, 2009 - 9:16 pm 169. Did ANSO Strategically Leak a Classified Email to HuffPo? « Civilian Irregular Information Defense Group:

[...] Insurgency vs counterinsurgency [...]

Feb 11, 2009 - 9:21 pm 170. exhelodrvr:

Trish,
Poor wording on my part. By “big cities” I meant “bag bases/big cities.” And that applies to both the military and the whatever-the-civilians-are-called types.

Feb 11, 2009 - 9:49 pm 171. exhelodrvr:

Big bases.

Feb 11, 2009 - 9:50 pm 172. trish:

Not everyone hangs out at Bagram (AKA ToonTown).

: )

Feb 11, 2009 - 9:51 pm 173. Dave:

Interesting what Old Blue said about that copper mining. Now my question is, why did Uncle Stupid let Joe Chink grab that plum
without their rendering (a) some assistance
to us and (b) making some gestures/employment towards the locals?

BTW: Anyplace with Afghan terrain is subject to have lots of exploitable mineral resources
that can be mined. Considering the circumstances, the taxpayer may well have to pay the cost of capital, but with that in place the operations should show black ink.
As I said before, securing productive enterprise(s) is what will move things our way.

Now just to sound off on a pet thought/peeve of mine: In those tribal areas and even in
the cities, people do not have electricity.
Yet, everybody likes to listen to the radio.
And there is a distinct preference for electric light rather than what they now use.

Ever hear of the Free Play Radio that also has that neat light-emitting diode (LED)?
Also other Free Play products that provide
illumination. They are all operated by that
wind-up generator.

Don’t you think these would make nice and appreciated presents? How about setting some people up in business peddling these things?
Yep, quality control etc needs to be improved,
but with an assured buyer waiting, the manufacturers ought to be able to do that.

I mention this as a good example of both civilian bureaucracy and military command being oblivious to useful and inexpensive tools. Reminds me of how the USAID types in VN tried to sabotage a useful irrigation pump
on concocted grounds of thermal effiency. USMC CAP teams and Seabees got the darned things into circulation anyway. Point is that war is a science but revolution is an art. Americans are darned good at revolution once they manage to figure out the requirements.

Feb 11, 2009 - 11:12 pm 174. Dave:

@Lifeofthemind: I am not “too” worried about our troops being cut off and isolated. We have ample road-opening capabilities and do not sell our airlift capabilites short.

At Dien Bien Phu, the strip was closed and C47s max out at three tons which had to be shoved out a single cargo door. And French requirements included far more weighty stuff like 105 rounds that what we need in Afghanistan. And there was no (for practical purposes) road to the Phu to be opened.

The “stan that no longer wants our our base looks like John L Lewis and his UMW in WWII.
Shakedown, not shutdown.

Feb 11, 2009 - 11:19 pm 175. Dave:

Last but not least for the evening: I now part with Blue when it comes to Iran, sharia,
the Yurps and other furriners as well.

The Viet Cong shadow government was utterly destroyed by employing Anglo Common Law, to include that expression of same known as vigilante justice. The NPA in the Philippines was largely dismantled by the same techniques, an effort put together by a Colonel who was himself a Moro.

The style of operation has to be adapted to fit local mores, but the substance remains constant. I think we can beat sharia any day of the week and twice on Sunday this way.

Now when it comes to winning friends and influencing people, I am a firm believer in American Exceptionalism. Nobody has the kind of effect on people that GI Joe has. Even the
Dinkum Diggers are a distant second in this regard.

So in establishing the Army of Afghanistan, I guess we might be able to utilize some others.
NATO members come to mind but not exclusively so. However, we should simply hire these individuals and mainstream them with the US units. (Their governments can be sent the bill for their maintenance and upkeep.) That way American culture will not be polluted and diluted and will still manifest itself.

And whatever you do in Afghanistan, also do in Pakistan. Except that it will be overt in the former and covert (CIA) in the latter.
Secret to success in Pakistan is to break their failed socialist economy and get them away from current state of dependency and self-supporting whether they like it or not.
Once they have the ensuing self-respect the marketplace brings, the Pakis will become an asset.

Now that I have dazzled you with my unerring brillance and humble modesty, ’tis bedtime.
Will check in tomorrow.

Feb 11, 2009 - 11:45 pm 176. Old Blue:

Cannoneer, which of these two statements are objective and not cynical? Explain that to me, and then tell me how I am mistaking objectivity for cynicism.

If all our expediture of blood and treasure to date has been to perfect the imposition of Sharia law upon the females, young boys and live stock, we were wrong to overthrow the Taliban. They were great at mass executions in soccer stadiums. They had Sharia down pat. Still do. If we are trying to wire the “friendlies” for success in out Shariaing the Taliban, then bring in Wahabis from Saudi Arabia, and instead of infidel Police Mentoring Teams for the ANP, let the Commission for Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice mentor them. Maybe al Qaeda would quit hating us if we did that.

The place is a bottomless pit of needy supplicants, infidel-hating fanatics, murderous pederasts, and baksheesh-extorting “officials” beyond our capability to unfornicate.

I’m not claiming any ultimate moral authority. If what you said in the two above quotes is an effective sales technique for encourage Americans or anyone else of the value of counterinsurgency in Afghanistan, then I guess you’re the moral authority on presentation.

I insulted only after being insulted, and if you don’t like being called out for tossing straw men around, then stop doing it. If you believe in the mission, then don’t wax all cynical about what assholes Afghans are and feed that whole, “What are we doing? They’re not worthy anyway!” thing. If you really do think that way, you are no longer a help. Maybe you’re reaching the point where you need to quit and join up with IVAW. If you don’t feel that way, quit screwing around playing the devil’s advocate and just be what you are. Like I said, that’s just silliness.

If you’re still pissed about the Iranian-court thing, then again I say; it’s a mui critical issue and while I’m not stuck on the Iranian idea, no one else on this thread is offering a viable alternative that doesn’t include cramming western values down Afghan throats. Instead of pissing about Sharia and little boys, come up with a fix. Think. Then you can throw shit at me.

I leverage my experience, my t-shirt and matching coffee cup to bring something to the conversation here; but I will not tolerate being abused without passing some out in return, and I won’t be baited with straw men without calling it. Cynicism in place of honest disagreement will get a similar response from me, and if you can point out where I jabbed first, then I will claim it.

I still say you need to check your cereal bowl. Objectivity.

Rex, Afghanistan is a lot more like Viet Nam than Iraq ever was… but that doesn’t mean that the end result has to be the same. Unfortunately, our Army’s senior leadership is behaving much the same way they did in Viet Nam except instead of just, “hearts and minds,” they’ve learned to mouth the word, “COIN” while they chase guerrillas. That doesn’t mean that we are actually doing COIN, just that we can spell it. Somebody’s got to say it out loud, “The Emperor has no pants on.”

He is wearing a shirt, however. We are doing spotty COIN, but we are missing key parts.

exhelodrvr, you’re right, too many on the FOB’s.

Trish, you’re right, not everyone stays at Disneystan.

Dave, there was an American company in on the bidding. They were out bid by the Chinese. Simple.

We have handed out tens of thousands of combination hand crank/solar radios. It would be cool to have them build them. Cheap labor, no way to get it out of the country. Again, that rail looks good. The Chinese railroad could open Chinese markets to cool “green” hand-crank Afghan radios.

Feb 12, 2009 - 12:06 am 177. trish:

“I leverage my experience, my t-shirt and matching coffee cup…”

That deserves a huge smile.

Feb 12, 2009 - 12:20 am 178. Old Blue:

Oh… almost forgot. I don’t disagree at all. I’d like to see Mr. Karzai’s anti-Coalition posturing fail him and for him to lose the election. Americans thought we made history electing Obama. You want to see history? How about the first peaceful transfer of power in Afghanistan’s history?

Now that would be cool.

Feb 12, 2009 - 12:49 am 179. Wadeusaf:

Pakistan has been involved in a civil war for nearly as long as it has been in existence. The governments forces there have time and again been routed in the tribal areas. These are not slackers in the governments ranks either.but they do not operate according to a coin, nor are they especially adept at counter-insurgency.

The Government of Pakistan still has yet to figure out whose version of legal writ to implement, from among the many versions of Sharia, and other doctrines of law. And much of the population has ties to India and the large Muslum population still there. The British did no one any favors in designing Afghanistan, and the Pakistani borders are not drawn much better.

For what it is worth, I would guess that very few of the population in the NWFT or in Afghanistan, especially likes the Taliban, or the strict and harsh punishments handed out under their sharia. It is my understanding that tribal elders and tribal jurga are more fairer and more agreeable form of justice and civil discourse than the often external and arbitrary meting out of Taliban sharia.

Therefore it has been the Taliban’s MO to kill or alienate the elders in villages, or place a mole among them to help keep order to watch and to listen to what is said and done especially when folks from Kabul or troops on patrol come to call. Without a continuous presence and without the knowledge that presence will be supported and long term, neither the Government nor the coalition can maintain any connection much less disrupt the influence of the Taliban. The same situ exists (only more intense) in the more heavily populated NWFP of Pakistan.

We know exactly how to fight and win the battles in Afghanistan and even how to win the battles in NWFP of Pakistan, but without a regional partner, without a sure line of communication that allows us steady supply and reasonable support there is no way to capitalize on that knowledge.

China could benefit by allowing a line of supply to flow through its soverign land, but why would they want to accept US material and US troops and US influence. Beyond the controlled and contrived economic sector the Chinese if invited I am sure would be happy to liberate certain parts of Afghanistan, and perhaps even parts of Pakistan. Same for Russia and the CA satellites, and same same for Iran.

The way to fix Pakistan is to allow the example of Iraq to fire the imagination of Islamic peoples. But Iraq is not yet ready to lead except by marking the trail. Theirs is not a proven state. Afghanistan has not a proven constitution, nor culture that ties them to Afghanistan above their tribe. It is a tough place to start. Same in Pakistan only more intense and while the Afghani’s do not have much in the way of nationalist feelings, Pakistan does. Worse yet, Pakistan does not know that it is a failed state. Pakistan is like Lehman Brothers, when it falls it will take everything with it.
What is the real shame is that but for their own expectations and their own pride, they have the all potential to really be a successful state and an example of reliable functioning and reasonable governance. Pakistan certainly has the talent, and the resources.

Feb 12, 2009 - 2:15 am 180. dan:

The main significance of this article, in my opinion, is that the Taliban are better armed and have better communications than the Pakistani military. They have sophisticated combat defenses capable of repelling armor/air assualts. They have dug in networks of bunkers and tunnels. These people are not simply indigenous tribals.

Feb 12, 2009 - 8:08 am 181. buddy larsen:

“The way to fix Pakistan is to allow the example of Iraq to fire the imagination of Islamic peoples” was the core of the meaning of OIF, as we know —

“Pakistan certainly has the talent, and the resources” –Large, educated middle class of western-oriented capitalists. the core of Mushareff’s support. until Mushareff began wilting under the attack of the jihad and the western left, much international investment was flowing in, to that capitalist system inside, forming the key to a future Pakistan as a normal nation. our own left was enormously helpful to the jihad and the totalists in getting rid of “Mushareff, the dictator, who took over in a coup”. (*sigh*)

Feb 12, 2009 - 8:30 am 182. shropshirelad:

To amplify a bit on the shadows forseen by Walt, @135…

Catharsis

Still mired in their muddy teens
With half a dozen magazines
They constantly must pass around
(And megatons of meat to pound)
Hearts and minds of one accord
Declare, “We are becoming bored.”
They say, “I have a fantasy:
Love isn’t what it used to be.”
Explaining, “I detest the way
You look so naked in a negligee.
I can believe you’re even human
Without identification.”

One might think that were in trouble:
The present speculative bubble
Will burst upon us, like a cloud
Of anthrax, plague, or something loud
Enough to rattle the bones of the dead,
And toss the living out of bed
In Bliss into the arms of Hate,
Crying, “Katie, bar the door! O, Kate—”
O, let us slip downstairs together,
Prepare ourselves for evil weather:
And, in the cellar, with the rats,
The broken glass, the baseball bats,
Pray granny’s throbbing corns are wrong.
The storm will pass, or not last long.

Pray, Gravity suspends its rules,
Pray, Politicians are the fools
That we selected them to be
To put a stop to History.
Pray Clio, Lady of the Whips
Will wait forever, hands on hips,
For the arrival of her date—
A day too terrible to contemplate.

Feb 12, 2009 - 9:39 am 183. shropshirelad:

Sorry wrong thread…

Feb 12, 2009 - 9:41 am 184. Dave:

Buddy, I estimate that our domestic leftists
have done more to undermine us in Pakistan
than have the jihadists.

If you listen carefully, you will notice that
(according to the left, we were not suppose to abandon Mushareff in spite of his being on our side but BECAUSE, he was on our side.

Now those Pakis who have to face the jihadists daily hear this kind of noise, their morale goes in the toilet ASAP.

Then, Paki Armed Forces and civilians alike take casualties for being on our side and that dumb son of a bitch Obama wants to invade them whilst leaving the Saddams of the world unmolested.

Not surprising that the situation there has deteriorated a bit.

And just to prove that this is no accident,
Jubilation T. Obama calls in General Petraeus
and wants him to change things in Iraq, where things are going well while doing more of the dysfunctional same in Pakistan/Afghanistan
and be sure to send in more troops to escalate instead of correct.

This is the scary part.

Feb 12, 2009 - 9:42 am 185. Dave:

Shropshire lad: Maybe the wrong thread, but thanks for welcoming us to your “House,man”.

Feb 12, 2009 - 10:25 am 186. Mongoose:

Pakistan is a flanking manuever for China against India. They want it to remain a failed state.

A successful state would be doing commerce with India. The grievances would melt away.

Those were not Pakistani capitalists sending in those gunmen to India.

Feb 12, 2009 - 10:50 am 187. buddy larsen:

General Petraeus was once actually almost killed, accidentally shot by an inexperienced recruit. So, i’m sure he recognizes the situation he’s in again. Metaphorically i mean.

given that O will screw up over there, and cost the world a certain future (while paying it a new one, of course), the question –as always with these people –is whether he’s that inexperienced recruit, or the farthest thing from it.

Feb 12, 2009 - 10:53 am 188. buddy larsen:

Pakistan has a whole suite of mutual defense agreements with China. Some are pretty hairy looking. India not likely to be able to war on ‘just’ Pakistan.

Feb 12, 2009 - 11:00 am 189. blert:

And China wouldn’t be able to make war on just India….

Russia and America would have a fit.

The key point is to keep the hot war contained to Afghanistan.

Then economic forces will pre-occupy China and Pakistan.

Feb 12, 2009 - 11:08 am 190. buddy larsen:

righjt –the ’small war’ to bleed off the trying-to-pressurize ‘big war’. it’s just that USA now has a “?” CiC –that’s why –well –our military may get into one of those “your job is to bleed for my politics” deals –which is not unstatecraft-like, unless one side’s Big Chief is also the other side’s Deputy Big Chief –then it goes SNAFU to FUBAR fast

Feb 12, 2009 - 11:28 am 191. Mongoose:

Blert: Well i meant it as a long term flanking strategy, not ot war tomorrow.

But do you really thing the Democrats would defend India? I doubt that they would even defend Kentucky.

If we are taken out as a superpower, which might well happen now, China a Russia could cut a deal. Europe for India.

Might have to wait a few years.

Feb 12, 2009 - 12:09 pm 192. blert:

Mongoose…

Russia is about to suffer a staggering fall off of military age males. The impact will kick in big time by 2016.

China is also having a demographic headache: her booming work force is destined to have a Japanese style bust. It’s the natural consequence of a one-child policy.

Iran is in the exact same mode as Russia…

Pakistan is hurtling straight towards a water crisis. She hasn’t built any major dams since the late 70’s…

If we can keep a lid on things, the relative drop in military age populations will give us an edge within one generation.

As is evident, the collapse in European military age males has already neutered NATO.

Feb 12, 2009 - 1:23 pm 193. dan:

“Russia is about to suffer a staggering fall off of military age males. The impact will kick in big time by 2016.”

And the babyboomers are also about enter into retirement.

Its these factors actually that make me more, not less, nervous about imminent aggression. if you spend all that time educating a generation of buffoons – 30s Stalinists educated 50s/60s generation – but then your deathstar goes up in flames… if you have the firepower left you better use it while the world’s still populated with useful idiots. after that it’s game over. if golitsyn’s right, then even more’s the worry.

Feb 12, 2009 - 1:51 pm 194. dan:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D96A8SL08&show_article=1&catnum=0

china may retake taiwan – surprise, surprise, surprise…

when we fail to respond – ha! the spasm of violence is coming folks.

Feb 12, 2009 - 2:29 pm 195. Mongoose:

Yea dan, not to mention that we live in the age of nuclear war, as you say.

It is not as though the Russians have to send a horde of Calvary across the EU to take it. The way the EU colleagues are going, they might welcome it–the “citizens” might not even notice the change much. It would not even have to look like the old Warsaw Pact.

I will also point out that the a short fall of men in a nation as large as China really does not matter much as they can still field enough.

There were smaller populations altogether for the Napoleonic wars and WW1, that did not stop them from ding a lot of damage.

Of couse, I am talking about a break down of the global system and an age of some darkness. The USA would be out of the pciture. I am not talking about next year (I hope).

We have to face the fact that what the Democrats are up to puts a very high probability that we are headed out of superpower status, probably permanently.
This appears to be one of the goals.

Feb 12, 2009 - 2:33 pm 196. dan:

i think the goal – as you imply – is to “isolate” the USA. Leninists love to isolate everything – the crown, the bourgoisie, the church, what have you. Wasn’t USA supposed to be last, then drop like a ripe fruit? Perhaps it won’t work out exactly that way; as someone pointed out, there’s always the incompetence of the enemy. perhaps a final sub-cataclysmic nudge delivered by vaporous islamic aliens, irrevocably crushing the dollar, fire sale on our military positions.

maybe not. i think the entertainment value of talking about this stuff has overtaken the analysis but hey – we’re entitled!

seriously, if china decides to launch against taiwan, that could mean serious, serious havoc. i just wonder what the efficient pretext, as in efficient cause would be…. who knows. probably a long shot anyway.

Feb 12, 2009 - 2:50 pm 197. blert:

The assault on Taiwan is a geo-political ruse….

It is a pretext for building a blue water navy able to defeat the USN.

The Chinese need to read Dreadnought, the book.

That gambit was tried by the Kaiser and it blew up into WWI.

Either Korea or Pakistan have the distinct possibility of recreating the nexus of the Balkans: geo-political powder kegs.

I’d put my bets on China having an incredibly difficult period starting right now due to the mega-layoffs in their export industries.

China made a horrific mistake by over building her military. The resources were vitally needed elsewhere. She’ll never get a positive return on her war expenditures. Big as they are, they don’t even confer enough clout to affect international geo-politics.

It’s a long, long, long way to being top dog. With the global disruption now underway, the goal is slipping completely away.

Our own Pentagon has been scratching their collective head wondering about Chinese judgement. When did it occur to the PLA that they ever had a shot at replacing the USN? Not only would the USA resist it, the remainder of the planet would be totally opposed. China would have to take on everyone at the same time. And we know how that story always ends.

Feb 12, 2009 - 3:23 pm 198. buddy larsen:

PRC’s January exports were down almost 18% –circumstances are weaning them off USA. slow process, but they are reported to be working hard to develop internal and regional markets. taiwan has been moving closer nyway –the anti-mainland party has been losing elections, and commerce between the two countries continues to grow. the glorious people’s revolutionary rhetoric –gone, or just not reported? i wonder.

Feb 12, 2009 - 3:27 pm 199. buddy larsen:

CNC right now –high prod. value show on the real estate mess –prob will replay –will be good window on the NBC mindset –

Feb 12, 2009 - 6:05 pm 200. buddy larsen:

oops –CNBC

Feb 12, 2009 - 6:07 pm 201. blert:

No wonder GE is tanking….

Feb 12, 2009 - 8:01 pm 202. blert:

China has terrible cards to play: too many compelled bachelors…

A ton of environmental pollution…

An endless list of Iron-Rice-Bowl state funded losers…

Which will completely suck the guts out of China’s exchange reserves.

Feb 12, 2009 - 8:08 pm 203. Fletcher Christian:

How long is it going to be before someone decides that enough is enough – and turns the Al Qaeda “shadow army” into real shadows?

The West has done it before. Perhaps a good propaganda tool would be a few million photographs dropped from aircraft. The date on the photos? August 6, 1945.

Feb 13, 2009 - 1:20 am 204. Mongoose:

Blert: those seem more like compelling effects to me, not cards to pley.

The key is to see it in terms of a break down of the current order altogether. Then these sorts of things matter less. They would just put those rice bowl losers in the front lines, whipped on by the young bachelors in search of their dreams.

Quite a wave.

Feb 13, 2009 - 9:52 am 205. Mongoose:

biddy: i stil do not see how they develop that internal market. It is not as though they can create homesteaders or more industrial workers by fiat. The value add has been in the middle of the supply chain in global markets. With that gone, well…

I am not saying it cannot be done, I just do not see how they do it.

Contractions in exports does not signal the creation of an internal market, and remember this has to be for the most part created. Typically export lead economies swing out from internal markets, China is odd in this case of being the other way around.

The “weaning” may just be a singal if a collapse of demand. note that imports are down 25% too.

If it what you say is true than maybe we should launch our stimulus package after all, for this is the only thing driving and internal market in a China that is seeing massive layoffs. That bailout if ppp adjusted is pretty large, but not large enough to great some sort of long term internal market, and again, it is mostly aimed at “infrastructure”. The point here is to just placate enough of the newly unemployed industrial workers to avoid massive riots in the street. So this whole business seems to me more like analysts painting pictures for themselves to me that any real understanding of the markets over there. Again, this did not seem to wrk for japan. A real contraction in China will expose a large asset bubble there too, that are way over invested in capacity.

Besides, must of the big profitable firms are the multinationals anyway.

Feb 13, 2009 - 10:07 am 206. njcommuter:

Our objective in Afghanistan is to deny Taliban/AQ a victory. That is something far short of nation building but good enough for now.

The word “victory” is slippery. Let’s keep our eye on the primary, driving objective: to deny the use of Afghanistan to the Taliban and similar organizations.

Feb 14, 2009 - 10:36 am 207. Cannoneer No. 4:

Not Even the Afghans Know How to Fix It

The breadth of disagreement is startling: Some say that nation-building is a mistake; others believe that it is the only way to defeat the Taliban-led insurgency. One U.S. official told me that we should stop trying to push democratic institutions on a country with such a strong tribal culture, while an equally savvy Afghan American insisted just the opposite. Women’s rights activists begged for our support, saying that they feared for their lives, but tribal leaders demanded that they be left alone to deal with their women as they see fit. “We are tribal people, and we don’t need your women’s programs,” one declared. Unlike Iraqis and Bosnians, Afghans can’t even agree on whether ethnic divisions still exist in their country or whether they are the invention of ferangi — meddlesome foreigners.

All this confusion over such fundamental questions vastly complicates Washington’s efforts at developing an effective policy toward Afghanistan.

From high government officials to villagers in the countryside, Afghans are learning how to play the game and how to game the system. We met one provincial minister of economy who resorted to development jargon to evade allegations about his corruption. In halting English, he told us how important it was to “involve stakeholders” and “build capacity” so that the provincial government could “take ownership” of its development. He definitely seemed to have the desire to take ownership, but whether it extended beyond ownership of the aid funds was not so clear.

Beyond that, many government officials lack even the most basic skills. An Afghan aid worker told me that 90 percent of local leaders in Kandahar province can’t read, and a U.S. official said that she often saw thumbprints instead of signatures on important documents. Many of these officials don’t venture out into their own districts because they’re afraid of being attacked; others just can’t be bothered to ever leave their offices.

We in America and the West have neither the will nor the moral rectitude to do what really needs to be done, nor any assurance that if we did our efforts will have been worth it in the end.

The more we do for them, the more they play us for suckers.

30,000 more hostages won’t fix this mess.

Remember what we came for. Everything else is mission creep.

Feb 15, 2009 - 12:07 am 208. buddy larsen:

34,000, cannonmeer, with 12,000 more as of today’s announcement.

Feb 17, 2009 - 4:15 pm 209. buddy larsen:

Sure hope everything works out and we get them back home.

Feb 17, 2009 - 4:26 pm

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.