tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681148865964431927.post8850386566832933144..comments2023-11-05T01:40:27.910-07:00Comments on FOGG OF WAR: The Afghanistan SurgeAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08399019375564825616noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681148865964431927.post-26693500898505594392008-12-26T14:02:00.000-08:002008-12-26T14:02:00.000-08:00So there are a few questions here. Politically, th...So there are a few questions here. Politically, the US wants an ally in Afghanistan, and a stable democracy that is sortof a safeguard against terror. But the political goals have shifted since the American showed up 7 years ago. They still want to take down al Qaeda to as much of an extent as possible. There will always be bad guys out there, and the fewer the better. And indeed, the Americans have found that they drove al Qaeda and the Taliban into Pakistan. The US can't go into Pakistan, not completely. But a stable, secure state in Afghanistan is going to be important to that. The state needs control over that area, there needs to be rule of law, or some form of terrorism can come right back. You can't win the War on Terror just by killing folks.<BR/><BR/>And obviously, the war can't be won without work in Pakistan. It's unclear to me to what extent the Pakistani intelligence services are supporting terror anymore--especially when bombs are going off every now and then in their own territory. The current government is ineffectual in any way--an international mandate to put FATA under NATO mandate and Kashmir under Indian mandate might be a good idea--but it's politically impossible.<BR/><BR/>In reality, the US isn't quite sure what it's doing. It doesn't have a good plan, there's no way around that. It's hoping it can get enough of a handle on Afghanistan proper with security (which is a complete mess) that political options become more possible, that the Taliban starts wanting to negotiate. The ultimate answer is that the Americans have a lot of trouble giving up, have a lot of trouble admitting defeat. And for better or worse, the Iraq war has shown the Americans that doubling down and gritting one's teeth can be a viable strategy, if done right. And with Gen. Petraeus in charge of the entire region, US politicians are willing to have faith.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08399019375564825616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681148865964431927.post-68029691739391845392008-12-23T01:54:00.000-08:002008-12-23T01:54:00.000-08:001.What is the use of this surge?2.what is the poli...1.What is the use of this surge?<BR/>2.what is the political aim of this surge?<BR/>3.What USA wants to achieve in Afghanistan militarily and politically?<BR/>4.Can the war in Afghanistan won without eliminating the rest and recreation sanctuaries in Pakistan provided by Pakistan army covertly?<BR/>5.What is the alternate for Khyber route for NATO supply line<BR/> Unless these questions are answered TRUTHFULLY BY american thinkers who always talk about Afghanistan/pakistan border instead of Wazirstan/FATA the surge is likely to be Obamas iraq.<BR/> Bruce reidel is talking about India placating Pakistani army rulers with kashmir valley as if this will satisfy the wolf of GLOBAL JEHADI TERRORISM FUNDED BY SAUDI ARABIA.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02774636105865916484noreply@blogger.com