Screenshot from video produced by the Taliban in Dec. 2016 that emphasized the ties between al Qaeda and the Taliban. Al Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden and Taliban founder Mulla Omar (center, top) are shown side by side in an image that promotes the martyrs of jihad
Long War Journal: Analysis: Pentagon continues to underestimate al Qaeda, downplay ties to Taliban
The US Department of Defense continues to ignore fundamental facts in spinning its latest narrative. Yet again, the Pentagon underestimates al Qaeda’s strength in Afghanistan while downplaying the group’s ties to the Taliban. The Pentagon claimed that al Qaeda’s “core members are focused on their own survival” and “there is no evidence of strategic ties” between al Qaeda and the Taliban.
Except, the Pentagon and the US intelligence community has consistently been wrong about al Qaeda’s strength in Afghanistan, and evidence of strategic ties between the two groups does indeed exist.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: The narrative from the Pentagon and relevant intelligence agencies for the past few years has been that the Taliban are isolated and being contained, and that al Qaeda is a shell of its former self. To do otherwise would be to admit that the war strategy for he past few years has been a failure. What's my take .... the war has not been decreasing but expanding in the past few years. This tells me that the military strategy has failed. The political strategy has failed. Time to look for an alternative path and to have a debate .... something that is sorely needed on what to do in Afghanistan.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteDecades ago I read a book on the Vietnam War. In it the author relates the North Vietnamese complaint that they were left with the jungle and no cities after the peace negotiations in 1972. They complained bitterly according to the author about this. Recall when we went into SVN the LA Times was reporting the country was in danger of being cut in half. I remember reading that headline and story.
In our current situation the enemy aren't invincible nor do I believe they are as liked as might be portrayed in some articles. Take away their weapons....where would they be? Note the article[s] this week wherein wives of the "fighters" are divorcing their unwanted and unloved husbands who joined ISIS. The squeeze is on.
Have you read and considered The Village, author Bing West? Apply the dynamics to Afghanistan. How much support does an area voluntarily give to thugs who mine their roads and pathways? Levy the fruits of their back breaking farming endeavors? Take their children away? These deludeds are not invincible. Note the toll on their young men admitted by the North Vietnamese government; 1.1 million dead. Not casualties...dead. Who knows how many injured. Note also that there was a small but growing number of offspring of N. Vietnamese higher ups who were seeking survival abroad. The squeeze was on.
I have a leaflet in my "Vietnam box" dropped on a village in South Vietnam in 1969. In it the commander of the unit says that we started out with 600 men. We were told to bring our can openers for when we captured the American supply dumps and other inducements. He says 350 of us survived the B-52's. We were told the SVN people would welcome us with open arms. They didn't. This was a commander who realized he and his unit had been had.
When they arrived to Bien Hoa they were lost and a day late. The South Vietnamese hadn't assisted them and few survived despite what those young men yanked from their families' rice paddies had been assured of experiencing. The reality was that they had been expended for headlines in the Western press.
That we did not prevail in that war can be attributed to many factors. Ignorance and hubris were large ones. Plain old stupidity springs to mind. Lyndon Johnson anyone? Fashions and calendars change; people don't.
In the last year I am noting that we are taking out Taliban and al Queda commanders of many levels with a frequency I never saw when the 8 year reign of obama was in all it's glory.
These people are not invincible. What is that book? Charley Wilson's War? Title may be incorrect but what struck me was the comment that the resistance to Russia in Afghanistan was flagging. The devotion was going down the drain. Until we introduced the Stinger. A game changer.
The Afghans and allies are getting their act together. Consider the recent cease fire and reported support for a longer truce by some lower level Taliban. War weariness? You betch'em Red Ryder.
I would hazard to guess the general Afghan population is strife weary. We have played our cards poorly and expensively but Afghans want what most people want. The Taliban are not overly successful at providing that. I don't believe Al Queda is either. And when we drop huge bombs and drive their roads in offensively huge vehicles we are doing our equivalent of the ied planted on their trails and fields; making "non-supporters of the populace. General Crystal tried a light footprint approach that was a poorly executed good concept.
I believe that much of the info our special forces units so successfully use is from the populace and voluntarily given. That says to me we could prevail here. So when I read of the spreading of Al Queda wherever there are muslim populations I am not impressed. How many of you were around when the SLA tried to start a revolution in the country. Patty Hearst. Remember her?
These groups appeal to dinosaurs. This is the age of mammals. The wives have spoken.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteThe Afghanis were not fighting The Queen's Own 27th Light Rifles this time. Or whatever units the British were using back when they invaded.