home

"Inciting Extremist Activity"

As someone who supported American action in Afghanistan, it has become time for me to render a mea culpa - I was wrong. The people in charge of the action are simply not competent. Consider the Koran burning incident in Bagram:

The holy books and texts came from the library in the detention center in Parwan, where Americans house people suspected of being insurgents, including many of those captured during night raids. A military official said detainees had been using the books to communicate with each other and potentially incite extremist activity.

(Emphasis supplied.) It seems that for incitement of extremist activity, Americans are the champions. How in Gawd's name could this have happened? And this is not an isolated incident. The NATO commander General James Allen said:

“We are thoroughly investigating the incident, and we are taking steps to ensure this does not ever happen again. I assure you ... I promise you ... this was NOT intentional in any way.”

How could it have happened even once? Incompetence is the only answer and frankly, I have no confidence that more "incitement of extemist activity" will not occur again.

First, do no harm. The American action in Afghanistan seem incapable of that. It should end.

Speaking for me only

< Obama Sings the Blues, With Mick and BB King | Wednesday Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    It's time Obama started (5.00 / 0) (#1)
    by Edger on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 10:52:33 AM EST
    withdrawing the troops from Afghanistan anyway...

    Withdraw & Redistribute (none / 0) (#63)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 03:56:54 PM EST
    Pretty sure the withdraws will be forced so we move on to bigger and better things like Syria & Iran.

    Parent
    We're a DECADE in!! (5.00 / 4) (#2)
    by Dadler on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 10:54:26 AM EST
    And STILL this sh*t is happening.  

    Hats off to you for the honesty and self-criticism, Tent.  I only wish our "leaders" had a bit of the same in them.

    I don't imagine that this is the (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Anne on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 11:40:25 AM EST
    kind of thing that will improve the chances that Afghanistan will agree to our continued presence in that country on US terms.

    David Dayen:

    This is the second major negotiation with a foreign government over a continuing military presence that the Obama Administration has undertaken. And it's running into the exact same problems as the first one. Gareth Porter, an indispensable resource on these matters, reports that the Karzai government wants assurances against night raids that the US is reluctant to give:

    Nearly a year after the Barack Obama administration began negotiations with the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai on a U.S. military presence in Afghanistan beyond 2014, both sides confirmed last week that the talks are still hung up over the Afghan demand that night raids by U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF) either be ended or put under Afghan control.

    Karzai has proposed the latter option, with Afghan forces carrying out most of the raids, but the U.S. military has rejected that possibility, according to sources at the U.S. Central Command in Tampa, Florida.

    Karzai's persistence in pressing that demand reflects the widespread popular anger at night raids, which means that Karzai cannot give in to the U.S. insistence on continuing them without handing the Taliban a big advantage in the political-military maneuvering that will continue during peace talks.

    The dilemma for both the United States and Karzai is that the United States has been planning to leave SOF units and U.S. airpower - the two intensely unpopular elements of U.S.-NATO presence in the country - as the only combat forces in Afghanistan beyond 2014.

    Last week, in an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Karzai reiterated that he wanted to end US-led night raids, as well as the US taking and holding Afghan prisoners.

    As for the Koran-burning incident, I'd say it was stupid and insensitive - which it certainly is - but I would also say that when your profile is that of the bully who can do whatever it wants, anywhere it wants, there are going to be people who can't draw the line on any grounds, much less ones that involve Islam.

    I'm still trying to wade through the 84-page Dereliction of Duty memo from Lt. Col. Daniel Davis, which is quite the eye-opener on the Afghanistan engagement.

    I'm not sure what (5.00 / 3) (#7)
    by CST on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 12:00:30 PM EST
    Afghanistan needs at this point.

    But what we don't need is more $hit like this.

    I don't pretend to have all the answers.  On the one hand, staying there seems to end up with cr@p like this, more people getting killed, and limited progress.  On the other hand, if we "abandon" them, again, what's to stop the exact same thing from happening all over again? What's to stop it from happening if we stay? Nation-building sounds well and good but you can't do it if it's not safe, or if they are just going to blow it up, or if they only build bases, or if the people don't seem to want it, or if you need the resources desperately at home.

    Then there are the neverending stories about what happens to the people (women) there, and the question of whether we owe them anything - or if we just want to help so bad we can't see straight to the fact that it's useless.

    This whole clusterf*ck is just depressing as hell.  And then there is Syria.  Some days I just hate reading the news.

    This whole thing brings me around to the broader question, is what role, if any, does the US have in playing world-cop?  And to be clear I'm talking about human rights issues here not the drug war.  That is the point of the UN is it not?  We're not supposed to stand idly by.  But maybe we're not the people to do it, or maybe we're not capable of it, and maybe it's no longer our job.  I just don't know.  It seems like there is too much cr@p to even bother, but then when/where is the time to draw the line?

    I guess the answer (for me) comes down to you do what you can do, and don't do what you can't.  It does seem like Afghanistan is slipping further into the category of can't.  No thanks to our own yahoos.

    I realize that for some the question of Afghanistan is more a security question than a moral one, but to me they are one and the same.  We made some promises that we couldn't keep, and that weight is heavy.

    Maybe if (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Edger on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 12:12:22 PM EST
    all the money - what is it, a trillion dollars or so? - that the US Government has spent "bombing 'em back into the stone age" had been spent instead building schools, hospitals, infrastructure, industry, etc., it would be a different story now?

    Of course, there's always  the chance they might have been filled with hate and turned into terrorists if that been done I suppose, and killing them and their country has been so successful at turning them pro-American, after all?

    Parent

    If only (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by CST on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 01:22:41 PM EST
    it were that simple.

    This is a pretty good run-down of what's happening on the re-construction front.  It's not pretty.

    Infrastructure can't happen in a vaccuum.

    Parent

    I really can't spell (none / 0) (#10)
    by CST on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 01:23:30 PM EST
    no idea why I put a hyphen in there.

    Parent
    Interesting couple of paragraphs in there (none / 0) (#11)
    by Edger on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 01:34:20 PM EST
    Who is to blame for the idea of building this ill-conceived and absurdly oversize diesel plant in the first place? Though the Bush administration first proposed the plant, Black & Veatch seized on the idea and kept it alive. "Black & Veatch were the ones that identified the need for the Tarakhil diesel plant," a provincial reconstruction officer wrote in a letter to Spectrum. "Their power flow studies clearly indicated that the imported power from the 'stans to the north would be insufficient and not available in a timely fashion. Turns out the imported power arrived prior to diesel plant operations such that the diesel plant was obsolete before it even started."

    In other words, Black & Veatch, a contractor that stood to make (as it turned out) roughly $25 million by building a huge diesel power plant, was the very same organization that also "proved" that the plant was necessary. USAID did not perform or commission any analysis to try to determine independently whether the mammoth plant was actually needed.

    Black & Veatch is a US company. A lot of that article seems to be (nicely) blaming Afghans for being such dummies. And Taliban of course.

    There is a lot of corruption in Karzai's government. How much corruption and opportunism is there is US defense contractors? Is Dyncorp committing fraud by not paying it's employees in Afghanistan?

    Parent

    I think it spreads the blame around (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by CST on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 01:38:14 PM EST
    Pretty well.  That paragraph you quoted doesn't pull any punches from the US companies.  And USAID comes off as the biggest loser, imo.

    Yes the Afghans not having their own engineers is also a problem, but that's not what I thought the bulk of the article was about.

    Parent

    It's a good article (none / 0) (#14)
    by Edger on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 01:41:21 PM EST
    Thanks for it...

    Parent
    I want security and I want to do it (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 10:03:46 AM EST
    morally.  We are so powerful and capable when we choose to be.  There is no excuse for what happened.  It is an irreparable stain.  Obviously we have lost the command environment again in Afghanistan, and you can't do that....you can't allow it at all.

    The Marines pissing on the dead, that is IMO the work of a ahem....a suspicious command environment.  And who said to burn these Korans?  Someone was in charge.  Some command lost its damned mind, there isn't enough fear out there for commands obviously.

    Parent

    We Are Anything But (none / 0) (#50)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 01:38:29 PM EST
    We are so powerful and capable when we choose to be.

    When exactly have we chosen to be powerful beyond bomb dropping by pure wealth ?

    Beyond Gulf I, we have mismanaged every major military adventure since WWII.  I would argue that we are incapable of showing real strength, we are bullies who think force will bend the wills of man.

    I am so tired of these misadventures, and Tracy, this stuff all boils down to people, you say this person or that person, I say who cares.  Quit trying to blame this or that person, this cr@p happens in every war, they will never control kids with guns in foreign lands, period.

    Ten thousand good men can't make up for one Koran burning, one dead soldier urinating, one prisoner posing, one village rapist, or one thrill killing idiot.  And unfortunately, there is far more then one and no matter who is running the show, there will always be an element of complete and utter stupidity that no command will ever be able to account for.

    So as much as you want to blame this or that person, stop, we get it, you didn't like a certain command.  But that doesn't explain the same stupid stuff happening in other wars, under entirely different commands.  It doesn't explain it happening, right here on American soil nearly everyday.  It's the blackest part of the human soul that happens in every single crevice of the planet.  It not a controllable element of the human psyche.

    The difference of course is this non-sense is inciting people to violence, the very people we are suppose to be working with to eliminate this kind of hostility.  Time for our military to get a well earned rest and bring them home and let someone else figure out that mess.

    ----------------------------

    And I am with BTD, Afghanistan seemed to be a good idea and was paying dividends.  Now it's just slipped into another great American misadventure.

    But fear not BTD, pretty sure we will be pulling out soon, Iran and Syria are the next big buildups and should the Hawks get their way, the next big messes.

    Parent

    Here's what keeps it from recurring (none / 0) (#35)
    by BobTinKY on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 09:33:17 AM EST
    we should have gone in, taken out AQ & Bin Laden at Tora Bora & left leaving the Taliban with the message that we will henceforth feel free to come in and police their murdering criminals if we need to, and if the Taliban or whatver obnoxious group who is running the place fails to police within their borders.

    We did not need to concern ourselves with who happened to be running the place & instead our focus should have been and should be on our interest only, which is what are the steps being taken by whoever runs the place to police against terrorism directed at us.  Our one demands should always have been that the Afghan Govt. have a  zero tolerance policy for AQ & their cohorts.  Would the Taliban have accepted that condition to remain or return to power?  Why not?  What has AQ ever done for them except invite their toppling and an invasion/occupation of their country?

    The course we took will result, once we leave if not before, in the Taliban's return to power over a country with millions more sympathetic to AQ than was the case before we allowed genius boy Bush to lead our "War on Terror."  

    Oh, and then there's the pointless deaths of tens of thousands and maimings of ten times that number.  

    Parent

    speaking of blame, let's start at the beginning. (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by cpinva on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 06:16:53 PM EST
    the US, in violation of both international and domestic law, illegally invaded the sovereign country of afghanistan, overthrowing its legitimate (though odious) government. the bush administration never made clear it's reason for doing so, since it was obvious from the start that the afghan government had no direct/indirect involvement in the events of 9/11.

    said government did lease arid mountain cave space to osama bin laden and his merry men in tights, but that was the extent of their association, strictly business. when presented with a demand, by the US government, for the capture and extradition of mr. bin laden and his group, suspected of involvement in the events of 9/11, the afghan gov't requested, per the terms of the existing extradition treaty between the two countries, some reasonable proof of the asserted involvement. a normal request, under the terms of pretty much any extradition treaty.

    the bush administration decided the niceties of observing treaty obligations weren't manly enough, or they had no actual proof to give the afghan gov't. it's never been real clear which reason took precedence, and it doesn't really matter. it was decided the most expeditious way of getting mr. bin laden et al, was to spend billions of dollars, and expend 1,000's of lives, by invading afghanistan, overthrowing the taliban government, and setting up one that would be more accomodating to bush's demands. and so they did.

    7 years, a half trillion dollars, and god knows how many lives later, bush left office. still no bin laden and his merry men, but some really cool pictures for bush's den wall, back home.

    afghanistan: the movie! a failed military operation, perpetrated by a failed president, with the collaberation of a willing congress, and millions of angry, duped citizens.

    a first run, major motion picture! share the exhilaration, the glory, the massive waste of resources and lives! a cast of (literally) thousands!

    so tell me BTD, what, specifically, caused a normally intelligent guy, such as yourself, to get sucked into the farce, become comedy, turned into tragedy, that is our experience in afghansitan? i truly want to know. i assume it must be really, really good. somehow, i missed it.

    exactly (none / 0) (#36)
    by BobTinKY on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 09:34:24 AM EST
    No amount of money, (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by NYShooter on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 06:30:55 PM EST
    And, certainly no amount of bombs, would produce the positive results that we claim to want for the world than by leading by example.

    We should simply go back to the image the world had of us after WW2 and manage our affairs in a way that does honor to the foresight and sacrifice of our founders.

    From Washington, through Lincoln and Roosevelt we had it right. One by one we were solving our problems, and we were well on our way to becoming that "Beacon on the Hilltop" that made us the envy of the world. It took a Democrat, Roosevelt, to show us that there were no problems we couldn't handle if we "put the people first," and a Republican, Eisenhower, to warn us what laid ahead if we didn't.

    We are where we are today because we took Roosevelt's accomplishments for granted, and we were too full of ourselves to take Eisenhower's warnings seriously.

    It really is that simple. Clean our own house first, and then watch the world beat a path to our door. Except this time it really would be with flowers, and not I.E.D's.


    I'm told that because the Korans (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 06:54:30 PM EST
    had writings in them from captured insurgents, they were writing things to each other in the margins and then swapping Korans.....that is the reason they were destroyed.

    Anybody should know though that you can't destroy a Koran at this point.  Box them up and send them to the U.S. and put them in National Archives?  Unless you don't want anyone to know what was written in them.

    One soldier did tell me today that because the Korans were written all over, they had already been desecrated.  I don't know if that is true, but do two wrongs make a right?

    It all gives me a headache.

    Sounds like an excuse to me (none / 0) (#25)
    by sj on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 08:30:14 PM EST
    My Mom's (not best) bible was written all over as well.  She really believed in margin notes.  I don't consider that desecrated.  Although maybe some soldier might.

    Parent
    I don't know what Islamic Law (none / 0) (#28)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 07:10:48 AM EST
    says about writing on Korans.  I suppose I will look it up if I can today.

    Parent
    I'd be interested to learn (none / 0) (#41)
    by sj on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 10:19:59 AM EST
    According to wiki (none / 0) (#45)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 10:56:00 AM EST
    The Koran is always supposed to be treated with reverence.  You must wash your hands before touching it too.  Doesn't say anything about writing messages to each other in one, but if you can't have dirty hands I'm going to assume writing 'Tracy was here' in one is forbidden :)

    A discarded Koran is supposed to be burned with respect, just like a discarded American flag is.  Burning Korans in the trash doesn't seem very respectful.

    Parent

    Culpa accepted. (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by desertswine on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 10:26:30 PM EST
    Now let's go home.

    The Only Thing We Could Have Done Worse (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by john horse on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 06:45:32 AM EST
    was to put out the fire by urinating on the Korans.  

    But lets give the Bush and Obama administrations the benefit of the doubt.  They said it would never happen again after Abu Ghraib.  They said it would never happen again after the Haditha massacre.  They said it would never happen again after waterboarding was exposed.  They said it would never happen again after discovery of a "kill squad" that murdered unarmed civilians and collected body parts as war trophies.  They said it would never happen again after the video of our soldiers urinating on dead Taliban soldiers.  But this time I believe them.  However, I'm not so sure about the Afghanis and Iraqi people. They have this unfortunate tendency to judge our military on their actions and not on what they say(sarcasm alert).

    I think there's a big difference between those (none / 0) (#31)
    by tigercourse on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 08:14:12 AM EST
    first things on your list, and burining a bunch of stupid books.

    They's shouldn't have done it, but it's hardly on the same level as those crimes.

    Parent

    Calling them (5.00 / 3) (#42)
    by sj on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 10:23:02 AM EST
    "a bunch of stupid books" kind of highlights the problem, I think.

    Parent
    Not at all (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Edger on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 10:46:37 AM EST
    They love being insulted, just like they love being bombed and killed. They especially like having their families massacred. The dumbf**ks  should know by now that it's being done for their own good though, but they're a little slow, not like Americans, and these things take time to be blasted into their brains. If they'd quit complaining they could have a starbucks and a walmart on every corner and good paying jobs just like in America. They could probably have subprime mortgages too, but do they get that? Nooooo....

    Sigh. Sometimes I think the whole eleven years was just a colossal gargantuan utter waste of time and money. These people will never get it.

    Parent

    Slash Heavy Snark (none / 0) (#56)
    by Edger on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 02:32:51 PM EST
    I apologize for not having enough reverence (none / 0) (#46)
    by tigercourse on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 12:28:00 PM EST
    for a bunch of bound up pages about ancient magic.

    Parent
    oy (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by sj on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 02:06:17 PM EST
    just.  oy.

    Parent
    Diplomacy tigercouse (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 02:27:44 PM EST
    I often feel the same way you do about such things.  I have my mom's Bible, and it has some sentimental meaning to me because it meant something to her.  But I consider it largely a book of silly magic too.  Koran's haven't had much of an impact on my life but yeah...

    They mean something to some people though, so diplomacy my science based friend.  There is a social science that has given credence to there being real value in diplomacy :)

    Parent

    Yeah I completely agree that it was a diplomatic (none / 0) (#58)
    by tigercourse on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 03:22:06 PM EST
    nightmare. I just see it as having nothing to do with one of those real and horrific war crimes.

    Parent
    Do you truly not understand (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by Zorba on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 02:30:54 PM EST
    that, while none of these writings have any meaning to you, they are meaningful and sacred to others?  And that these others might be offended about any desecration or perceived disrespect for the writings they hold dear?  I would expect Christians who were incarcerated in, say, a Muslim country, to be upset if their jailers burned or desecrated their Bibles.  Just as I would expect that incarcerated Jews would be upset at the burning of their Torahs (and Torah burnings by the way, have happened a number of times in their history).  It is a matter of respect for the beliefs of others.  

    Parent
    It's fine to be offended. But when you (none / 0) (#60)
    by tigercourse on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 03:24:41 PM EST
    go out and start murdering people over it... it more or less confirms most people's prejudices about you.

    Parent
    Go look up (5.00 / 3) (#64)
    by Zorba on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 04:22:58 PM EST
    the history of the Christian Crusades against the Muslims because the latter had "taken over" the land considered holy by Christians.  Among other things.  I'm not condoning violence, but nobody's escutcheon is exactly unblemished in this regard.  Plenty of people have been killed in the name of "religion," and it's not just Muslims that are doing the killing.  I leave you with this:
    "Imagine."

    Parent
    You could try (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by Edger on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 02:38:53 PM EST
    reverence and respect for people.

    Or is it that we're talking about only Afghanis here?

    Parent

    I have absolutely no respect for people who (none / 0) (#59)
    by tigercourse on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 03:23:11 PM EST
    would kill over the incineration of a book that has millions of other copies lying around.

    Parent
    The operative phrase being (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by Edger on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 03:25:44 PM EST
    "I have absolutely no respect for people"

    Parent
    but it is just one more offense (none / 0) (#34)
    by BobTinKY on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 09:20:25 AM EST
    in an ever growing list.  That is how the locals view it.

    Parent
    Although I Complertely Agree (none / 0) (#62)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 03:31:02 PM EST
    Those stupid books, with every stupid religious text contains the stuff that runs the world.  From starting wars to nearly every law on the planet can be traced back those 2000 year old.  Essentially the minds of 100 generations ago run the planet.  Which actually explains the madness IMO.

    Personally I think Muslims should be just as upset with the people using those texts to communicate, which presumably was for non-religious stuff.

    They desecrated the exact same books, had they not, there wouldn't have been any book burning.  I'm not excusing our behavior, but there's blame to go around here.

    And this business of 'It won't happen again' is so troublesome.  Maybe that act won't happen again, but I guarantee someone will willfully defame their religion in a way that is equal to or worse then this latest episode.

    By the way, what is the proper way of disposing of a Koran/Bible ?

    Parent

    The presumption should be (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by BobTinKY on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 07:51:14 AM EST
    US military action is always wrong.  It almost always is.

    The real questions is how one could expect (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by BobTinKY on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 09:06:04 AM EST
    anything but stuff like this happening?

    We're sending hundreds of thousands of troops who are largely ignorant of these cultures to invade and occupy these countries. That in itself goes a long way to inciting extremist activities.  These stories are just the details.

    Turn the situation around and imagine the US invaded & occupied by Afghani or Iraqi troops imposing what they think is a better system upon us. Imagine them plodding through our streets and towns with their ignorance of our various religious observances and customs or lack of etc. Think anything exetreme might be incited in response?

    This is and was foreseeable.  A quick googling will generate a slew of these concerns expressed way back in 2001 & 2002.  Mark Shields for one raised his concerns about a largley Christian military occupying Muslim lands on all the talk shows with which he was involved, which were and remain far too many.

    Maybe (none / 0) (#3)
    by Edger on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 10:59:55 AM EST
    more drones would help?

    I agree with you except for one thing (none / 0) (#4)
    by Slado on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 11:26:58 AM EST
    We had to invade Afghanistan and get rid of OBL and the Taliban.    

    What we didn't have to do was occupy the nation for a decade and try to rebuild it.   That was debatable and I agree with you now in hindsight misguided.

    Did we distract ourselves from the main goal because of Iraq? Yes.   But even so with those additional resources would it have made it any better?

    I don't think so anymore.  

    As my Navy pilot friend has told me..."When I flew over that country on missions I could only think, what the hell am I doing here".   In his frank words ..."The place is a sh*thole.  And no amount of money is going to fix it if the people don't want it to be fixed".

    We can't bring a country from the stone age into the 21st century all by ourselves with money .   Throw on top your example of what happens when you occupy a country with a foreign army and it's time to declare victory and leave.

    From the stone age into the 21st century? (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Edger on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 11:43:58 AM EST
    You have it backwards.

    A historical photo essay of Afghanistan, by Mohammad Qayoumi, President of California State University...

    I grew up in Kabul in the 1950s and '60s. When I was in middle school, I remember that on one visit to a city market, I bought a photobook about the country published by Afghanistan's planning ministry. Most of the images dated from the 1950s.
    [snip]
    A half-century ago, Afghan women pursued careers in medicine; men and women mingled casually at movie theaters and university campuses in Kabul; factories in the suburbs churned out textiles and other goods. There was a tradition of law and order, and a government capable of undertaking large national infrastructure projects, like building hydropower stations and roads, albeit with outside help. Ordinary people had a sense of hope, a belief that education could open opportunities for all, a conviction that a bright future lay ahead. All that has been destroyed by three decades of war, but it was real.

    Once Upon a Time in Afghanistan...
    May 27, 2010, foreignpolicy.com

    Parent

    We're not talking about Kabul (none / 0) (#12)
    by Slado on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 01:38:08 PM EST
    We're talking about the whole country and especially the region along the boarder with Pakistan.

    There are lots of reasons why that country was a mess before 9/11 but none of them where going to be solved by an invading army and money.

    We should have routed the Taliban and then gone after OBL and left the nation building to others.

    Hindsight is 20/20

    Parent

    Well, after all the years (none / 0) (#15)
    by Edger on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 01:58:31 PM EST
    the CIA and the US Government spent cultivating and grooming bin Ladin there are probably a lot of people who think that.

    I understand that negotiating with the Taliban was out of the question, for some reason...

    President George Bush rejected as "non-negotiable" an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden if the United States ended the bombing in Afghanistan.

    Returning to the White House after a weekend at Camp David, the president said the bombing would not stop, unless the ruling Taliban "turn [bin Laden] over, turn his cohorts over, turn any hostages they hold over." He added, "There's no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he's guilty". In Jalalabad, deputy prime minister Haji Abdul Kabir - the third most powerful figure in the ruling Taliban regime - told reporters that the Taliban would require evidence that Bin Laden was behind the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US, but added: "we would be ready to hand him over to a third country".



    Parent
    Even reading this article that was not a (none / 0) (#18)
    by Slado on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 05:03:46 PM EST
    real offer.  Especially since MO didn't agree.

    Look, there are lots of reasons why Afghanistan was a mess.   It was a truly international operation starting with the British, the Saudis, the Pakistanis, the Russians and then the US.  You're finger would fall off if you tried to point it at all the guilty parties.

    What BTD is saying is we shouldn't have invaded Afghanistan.   That was not a realistic option after 9/11.

    What I'm saying is we could have routed the Taliban and killed OBL without occupying the whole country for a decade in a failed attempt at nation building.

    Where I do agree with him is we have killed OBL and it's time to come home.   Too many on the right are trying to argue we need to win this war when it's already lost.   We will never obtain our objective because you can't make people do what you want without occupying them and we don't need to be in that business anymore.

    Parent

    Neither did Bush... (none / 0) (#20)
    by Edger on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 06:13:45 PM EST
    We did need to get AQ but not Taliban (none / 0) (#37)
    by BobTinKY on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 09:39:50 AM EST
    what we needed from the Taliban was recognition of the need and a serious sustained effort to police against terrorists within their borders.  

    Are the Taliban a horrid, mideival group of sexist, theocratic thugs?  Of course. So aren;t a lot of folks the US deals with day in & day out.  The problem to be solved was Afghanistan being used as a have, a luanching pad for OBL and Co.  The "solution" not only failed to address the problem but exacerbated it by creating millions of angry survivors of the US invasion/occupation who now hate the US with as much ferocity as OBL.

    Parent

    I recently read "The Operators" (none / 0) (#16)
    by KeysDan on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 04:03:07 PM EST
    by Michael Hastings and recommended it to TL.  Our colleague, MT, commented that she would not pay two cents for Hastings book, but I do believe it to be an informative read of America's war in Afghanistan.  It may be seen as being harsh on some politicians and military commanders, but no so in the case of the troops.  

    He just whines about the same old crap (none / 0) (#23)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 06:49:00 PM EST
    Read any of his other stuff about how much he hates McChrystal and Petreaus, that's all free, and save yourself the long version.  Does he go after McRaven at all?  Or does he leave him out because he knows nothing and the last time he was current on anything was when he busted McChrystal and he's going to milk that "fame" for all its worth?  The only thing you get out of the book is which officer by name he claims said, "Bite me/Biden" and which officer by name said shit about Eikenberry and Holbrooke.

    Oh yeah, and he doesn't like COIN because just indiscriminately bombing the hell out of Afghanistan and the Pakistan border like Biden and Holbrooke wanted to do, and which was the "other plan," was the superior plan I guess. Or maybe Hastings has no plan other than extending his 15 minutes of intense fame for his Runaway General who really was a Runaway General.  He needs to go back to work though and come up with something that shows he has gone back to work IMO.

    Parent

    Maybe better to read the memo (none / 0) (#32)
    by Anne on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 08:24:15 AM EST
    from Lt. Col. Daniel Davis - Dereliction of Duty II (the non-classified one; it's 84 pages long and I think it's somewhat "weedy," and I'm still trying to wade through it.

    Not having read the Hastings book, I don't know how much nexus there is, if any.

    And, for what it's worth, if we have problems with and among the top brass of this group that's in charge in Afghanistan, shooting the messenger wouldn't seem like the best way to address them.  Is he right about McChrystal and Petraeus?  Then we should be looking at that.  

    On the one hand, you want to rag on Hastings for whining about McChrystal and Petraeus, but you also seem to think he should have included McRaven; if he had, would that eliminate the "whiner" label?

    And if there's something rotten in Denmark, why must Hastings be the one and only one who has to investigate and report?  Seems to me there is no shortage of journalists who could jump into this and expand on what Hastings has done, or dig deeper, don't you think?

    Parent

    Anne...there is no nexus (none / 0) (#38)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 09:55:48 AM EST
    between Danny Davis and Hastings.  One is a military officer who believes that a military officer must always tell the truth.  Now where he is going to be tripped up is on the truthfulness that he must be with his civilian leadership.  He says you are his leadership. Others say that our civilian leadership is the President and the Secretary of Defense.  And that those are the only people you need to be honest with because they must fight this war on many levels and leaving Afghanistan and leaving it in a way that discourages a story telling culture from attacking us again requires that we leave somewhat victorious.

    That is our goal, that is winning, when we have discouraged support for extremist attacks.  We hammered Haqqani and we got Osama.  We are ready to leave now.  We are leaving now, Obama has put everything into place to leave and I'm not going to start kicking him when he is at his most vulnerable.  I'm just not going to do it.  He needs to leave.  He is leaving.  And I am in every way at this moment a hypocrite in how I want this to be handled by the left and how I want it to go down when compared to every other issue out there :)

    Parent

    The nexus I was referring to is that (none / 0) (#40)
    by Anne on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 10:06:59 AM EST
    which may exist between what Hastings may be reporting via his book, and what Davis disclosed via his memo.

    Parent
    Hastings isn't reporting on anything recent (none / 0) (#44)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 10:47:42 AM EST
    He doesn't even report on anything startling.  We all knew that it was going to be difficult standing up a police force that would protect its own country of Afghanistan.  It might even be culturally impossible, but we needed to attempt it.  Danny Davis is upset because Afghanistan commanders aren't being honest with Congress about how badly that is going.  Politics are involved though.  The United States military at large wants to win this, but if people are attacking our CIC right now we can't.  It is impossible to leave Afghanistan with an honest assessment of achievement of any kind if everyone is going to attack the effort as a whole now.  Whatever story gets play in Afghanistan is something culturally that will empower or disenchant further extremist attacks upon the United States and our allies.

    Hastings is just an egotistical sometimes brilliant mostly just hater writer though. He isn't a journalist, he has a bias....a deep bias.  And he's really mad that he lost access, but when you choose to break that on the record off the record deal, every journalist knows that's what happens.  And now he's just some kind of stomping fit throwing child.  And he will never be another Sy Hersh, never :)  He lacks character and work ethic :)  But he will always be sensational :)

    Parent

    Having read Hasting's book, "Operators" (none / 0) (#47)
    by KeysDan on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 12:37:39 PM EST
    and Colonel Davis'  memo, I found them to be complementary in insights and collective in value.  Observing and writing from different perspectives and diverse intentions was not an impediment to my assessment.

    The first sentence of Davis's "Dereliction" was also, in essence,  the upshot of Hasting's work:  "Senior ranking U.S. military leaders have so distorted the truth when communicating with the U.S. Congress and the American people in regards to conditions on the ground in Afghanistan that the truth has become unrecognizable."  

    Parent

    Equating Hastings work (none / 0) (#48)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 12:47:37 PM EST
    To the work of Danny Davis is such an insult to the military in general and the real work our soldiers do.  Even if you are angry that they phucked up.

    Parent
    Refresh my memory: (none / 0) (#49)
    by Anne on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 01:09:35 PM EST
    have you or haven't you read either of these works?

    If you haven't read either one, I'm trying to understand your categorical rejection of Hastings' book and your assumption that it has no relationship to anything that Davis could have written.

    I get that you don't respect Hastings - but I really don't have enough information to reach the same conclusion (it may be out there, but I haven't availed myself of it - sometimes these strategic/political military things make my eyes glaze over), so it's possible that my mind may be somewhat more open to the possibility that however florid his personality or gargantuan his ego, Hastings may have something quite credible to say.

    I guess I really should take some time to read The Operators.

    Parent

    Hastings blew all his credibility last year (none / 0) (#51)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 01:43:23 PM EST
    with everyone.  It was already questionable when he did it too. I read the highlights of what the new book reveals.  Nothing new, not one thing Anne that wasn't discussed when it went down originally years ago.  Nobody who is serious really knows what to do about Michael Hastings anymore.  He had many friends out there, but most who talk about it say that his ego and his axe grinding have overtaken his own butt or something these days.

    Last year he tried to say that when VIPs were visiting military officers that military officers were provided secret bios to enable them to spin the visitors, and that that was some sort of psy/ops the military was doing on visiting Congressmen and Senators and dignitaries.  

    It is something that is done by everyone everywhere, our President does it, Hillary Clinton does it, every General and Colonel in the war zone has staff and assistants that do it for them, it is how you quickly are up to speed when your life is nothing but speed.  

    He was heavily discredited over that "reporting" event.  And he has been nothing but an angry sidelined axe grinder since.  I don't mind that he's anti-war, but the military is not SATAN.  Now if you want to believe the military is SATAN all day every day, read Hastings.  Buy everything he ever puts out there, no matter how old and stale the events he is writing about are because he has nothing new.  If they shut down Afghanistan I don't know how he'll make a living after that.

    Parent

    Tracy, (none / 0) (#52)
    by KeysDan on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 02:05:44 PM EST
    it is not a matter of equating but, rather,  gathering insights from different perspectives.  Neither Hastings nor Davis's perspectives are the only ones that I have taken into account in formulating my opinions or for my overall assessment of our decade-long misadventure in Afghanistan.  Hastings provided an introduction, for me, to Davis's memo in his  Rolling Stone article about it along with a link to "Dereliction of Duty II".

    Hastings may not be an idyllic journalist in your view, but for me, it is interesting to have someone other than, say, a Michael O'Hanlon, give me his Brookings bias.  Hastings no doubt is no longer on the Pentagon's "A" party list after coverage that resulted in McChrystal's departure.   And, Davis' memo may have had other than golden intentions (there has been such gossip as well as pooh poohing his work as that of just a "reservist"), but it does not necessarily detract from the truth as he sees it.

     In any event, we can't leave Afghanistan too soon, in my view, and I am glad that President Obama is moving in that direction.

    Parent

    The trap (none / 0) (#17)
    by christinep on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 04:54:26 PM EST
    I'm trying to remember how many countries have been caught too long in Afghanistan? The most famous (or infamous) caught-in-the-no-win-land was Russia/Soviets when they hobbled out 30ish years ago after a misspent decade there. The British? The French? Seems that so many have had a turn at it.

    I do not agree that this has to do with military incompetence.  Rather, I suspect that it is the turn of events that recur as military efforts in far away countries, places that everyone wants to leave & doesn't have the drive of oh-so-long-ago, drag on & on.  The repeated historical lesson.  And, we'll never know what would have happened if our initial action had been pursued without the costly Iraq diversion (read: catastrophe)at Tora Bora & elsewhere.  

    I remember the feeling of an outlier when in the first months in Afghanistan because my initial instincet was to oppose it--not on whether it was appropriate, right (which it was under any International Law construct of which I'm aware--but because of the Soviet experience & the experience of other "powerful" countries who stayed too long there. Before its all over, we may well see more end-of-war type atrocities.

    'Thankful that we are on a course to get out.

    Well put (none / 0) (#19)
    by Slado on Wed Feb 22, 2012 at 05:06:37 PM EST
    IMHO we could not do nothing but we could have gone after the Taliban and not set up shop in Kabul trying to nation build.

    We didn't need NATO or UN support to attack the Taliban and Al Queda after 9/11.   We could have gone after them with full military might and not sent contractors, Blackwater, UN envoys and all the billions of dollars over there that we'll never get back.

    Parent

    Two soldiers shot dead point-blank (none / 0) (#29)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 23, 2012 at 07:13:03 AM EST
    over the Koran burning.  Husband leaving for work today really pissed. What a mess.

    BTD Still delusional (none / 0) (#65)
    by pluege2 on Sat Feb 25, 2012 at 09:58:10 PM EST
    The people in charge of the action are simply not competent.

    not so - they do what they're trained to do: kill, incite, destroy.

    The idea of a beneficial war and occupation is complete nonsense. Those creating these fantasies in their minds are delusional. Militarys are good for one thing, and one thing only: killing and destruction. The US military is no different no matter what the BTd's, Freidman's, Drum's and others want to fool themselves into thinking.

    And its just stupid to think anything good could ever come of death and destruction - can't happen.

    ...but at least BTD was big enough to admit he got the general concept wrong.

    What would Mohammed do? (none / 0) (#66)
    by diogenes on Sat Feb 25, 2012 at 11:21:46 PM EST
    Would Mohammed kill uninvolved soldiers and civilians because someone burned a Koran or drew a picture of him in an editorial cartoon?

    What would Jesus do ,,, (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by Yman on Sun Feb 26, 2012 at 06:39:02 AM EST
    ... about the atrocities committed by "Christians" in his name?

    Parent
    He's "bless" them of course. (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Edger on Sun Feb 26, 2012 at 09:23:26 AM EST
    No?

    Parent