The 15'th is here

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: Kadarin
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Iraq only improved after the USA and other coalition partners quit trying to kill all armed groups and instead sought political accommodations. Yet we can't learn the same lessons in Afghanistan.

There are no "political accommodations" with the Taliban. These people are utter fanatics who once had (and want to reestablish) one of the worst, most repressive governments ever.

The Taliban are pure evil, and deserve nothing other than simple extermination. The very idea of the Taliban needs to be wiped out.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The thing that Kadarin got right is the fact that the Taliban is an idea, and as an idea, its subject to modification. And its also not accurate to call them pure evil, as one of things they stood for was eradication of the opium trade.

And as a proud American, there is zero danger Taliban ideas will find any acceptance in America or in the Modern Parts of Pakistan.

From what I can understand, there are only some 20,000 active Taliban fighters,
and they will have nothing to fight with unless they find support among the locals.
And that support they find when Nato indiscriminately bombs villages and does nothing to stop corruption.

The Nato problem is that their behavior has driven all to many of the Afghan people into tending to believe the Taliban has better ideas that the ideas that Nato has totally failed to implement.

Until we can implement our ideas and make it work over there, trying to kill our way out of the problem will be counter productive. Which is exactly the problem, in our Nato occupation on the cheeeeeeeeep, we have implemented none of our ideas other than trying to kill our way out of the problem, and as we can see on this thread, that seems to be the popular consensus. What part of continuously doing worse for seven years running is hard to understand.

Its pretty plain, in a battle of ideas, we are losing. Given the fact that I agree that almost all of Taliban ideas stink, it can't say good things about Nato and Nato behavior and strategy when we can't beat those stinking Taliban values.
 

Screech

Golden Member
Oct 20, 2004
1,203
7
81
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Actually screech's analysis is part of the answer and he comes half way to understanding the dilemma the Afghan people are in. But in coming half way to understanding, he refuses to to come all the way.

And what might that other half of understanding be? The following?:

Our basic mistake is to look at it through American eyes, if everyone in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the general region thought in terms of American values, we would have won years ago. And we would have won in Vietnam for that matter.

The point is, they do not think in terms of American values, its not that they per say reject those values they have never seen practiced, its a matter that they have to live in the hell hole we helped create. And not a matter that they can simply go on vacation to the French Rivera, and then come back after the good guys win, its a matter that they are stuck in place and have had to live in the middle of a shooting gallery, caught between corrupt Afghan officials, corrupt Afghan war lords financed by the opium trade, a Nato army that has done nothing to fight corruption for seven years, and a Taliban that is fighting the American army and also making the whole country into shooting gallery.

I'm not really sure where we disagree here, to be honest. Of course not everyone thinks like us, and of course Afghanistan is right now quite a bit of a hell hole. Simply throwing our values (democracy, etc) out on the table without the political and military force to back them will never be enough in a place like Afghanistan.

Basically exactly the same conditions the Afghans had shortly after the Soviets left, except there were no Americans and no Taliban in the equation, and the warring parties in the civil war were various warlords fighting to emerge victors in a civil war while corruption and anarchy ruled the day. And the Western powers could not give two hoots because all they wanted is to see is the Russians bears nose tweaked, and after that they abandoned Afghanistan to its fate. Maybe we in the West don't feel that is somewhat insincere, but you can damn well bet the Afghan people do remember how they were used and thus do not trust us.

Oh I absolutely agree here as well, albeit with one nuance, that being that I think you give Afghan anger about corruption waaaaayyy too much importance. I'd bet the average Afghan cares far more about stability and safety from inter-warlord wars than they do about some corruption. Hence. when the Taliban brought peace after the civil war (albeit at a very high cost) they were initially welcomed. But let us continue.

But it was the rise of the Taliban that finally helped end that Afghan civil war and started to end the corruption, anarchy, and civil war. With a basic Mussolini like fascist state offer to make the trains run on time, and general re-establish of order, an end to corruption and thievery, and all based on Sharia law. Please understand, I do not endorse those Taliban values, but I do understand why the Taliban prevailed, and that is because all other alternatives were worse. And indeed, life got better for the average Afghan, and for the first time since 1937, Afghanistan was on the way to having a stable government. Even though they were some what nutty, disenfranchised females, and on the plus side at least stopped opium production. If left alone, in 20 years or so, its excess sharia law may have moderated, as its population rebelled against such draconian restraints. Generally the way history treats such States.

What would have happened in 20 years is hard to say, but that is possible. Ironically, the Taliban of today probably skims funds from opium production to fund their guerilla war.

Sadly, Al-Quida changed that all with 911, and probably without the knowledge or consent of Taliban leadership, tarred them with the same brush. And in the first giant mistake of the Nato occupation we allied our self with the Taliban's main opponent in the civil war, the super corrupt Northern Alliance. While the main objective succeeded brilliant, the added Northern alliance muscle chased the Taliban out of Afghanistan,
the Northern alliance soon dispersed, could not wait to set back up corruption and anarchy at their same old stands. And at near the speed of light, corruption and anarchy ruled the day, while a too small Nato did basically nothing to rebuild an orderly society. In short, for the Afghan people, life got much worse as they were the victims of corruption. We still had a two year probationary period in which the Afghaan people were willing to try our values, but when we did nothing, the Taliban started to come back with two promises. (a) Life was better under our rule. (b) The root of all Afghan problems are Western devils.

I think you associate 'anarchy' with Nato and the Northern Alliance far too easily, and forget its main cause: the Taliban itself. Attacks by the Taliban and threats from the Taliban (such as the one that this thread was about originally) are the main means by which anarchy is spread. As such, giving the Afghan people protection from these threats and attacks must be a primary goal, which is the point I've been trying to make for quite some time now.

The Taliban's promises can better be stated as (a) Life was better for us under our rule. (b) If you side with the Western devils, we will kill you and rape and kill your family. Unfortunately, defeating this type of threat means that we must stop (b) from happening, rather than simply sitting back and letting the Afghan people choose not to die by being oppressed.

Regardless of what any of us think, the judge, jury, and executioner of that is the Afghan people, and not us.

Exactly! And that's why we need to make sure they have sufficient safety from the Taliban so that they can make that choice without the threat of death.


...

The rest of your post is mostly stuff that the above addresses, so I will jump to the end.

The final decision will be made by them, not us. And as long as we continue to define the problems by our standards, rather than doing the things it takes to win, we will keep losing.

And what might those be? If you take the time to sit down and think about this, you'll probably find that we actually see eye to eye on most things.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Screech is will to ask the right questions with " Exactly! And that's why we need to make sure they have sufficient safety from the Taliban so that they can make that choice without the threat of death.

( Some what ignoring the fact that corrupt War Lord Thugs and Corrupt public official, plus a court system that functions by bribes has to be added to the Taliban list, in what we have to protect the Afghan people from, Nato fails to do any of them. Given 72,000 troops is too small and double that is still way too small, some sort of a strategic Hamlet type idea where it can be demonstrated life with in is better than life outside, would provide something to expand outward. )

...

The rest of your post is mostly stuff that the above addresses, so I will jump to the end.

The final decision will be made by them, not us. And as long as we continue to define the problems by our standards, rather than doing the things it takes to win, we will keep losing.


And what might those be? If you take the time to sit down and think about this, you'll probably find that we actually see eye to eye on most things."

( That too is simple, economic development and bring in more modern institutions. Its simply incompatible with Taliban primitive ideas, and history shows, given the choice, people of all religions reject that lifestyle. And in a contest of just those ideals will result in a Taliban rejection. But when we try to make the battle simple military might, we bring our self down and not up by being equally brutal. And in trying to extend more control than we can police in too big of an area, means we control nothing at all. Leaving the Afghans caught in a shooting gallery. )

And now we will see of Obama and Petraeus will be smarter. I hope so.

 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
These are the kind of people LL thinks brings order to Afghanistan. As usual his moral equivalence is sickening and morally bankrupt.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...was-one-of-the-Taliban's-torturers-I-crucified-people.html


I was one of the Taliban's torturers: I crucified people
In an astonishing interview with Christina Lamb, the Afghan leader's former bodyguard reveals the full brutality of the fundamentalist regime sheltering Osama bin Laden


Last Updated: 11:50PM BST 29 Sep 2001

"YOU must become so notorious for bad things that when you come into an area people will tremble in their sandals. Anyone can do beatings and starve people. I want your unit to find new ways of torture so terrible that the screams will frighten even crows from their nests and if the person survives he will never again have a night's sleep."

These were the instructions of the commandant of the Afghan secret police to his new recruits. For more than three years one of those recruits, Hafiz Sadiqulla Hassani, ruthlessly carried out his orders. But sickened by the atrocities that he was forced to commit, last week he defected to Pakistan, joining a growing number of Taliban officials who are escaping across the border.

In an exclusive interview with The Telegraph, he reveals for the first time the full horror of what has been happening in the name of religion in Afghanistan. Mr Hassani has the pinched face and restless hands of a man whose night hours are as haunted as any of his victims. Now aged 30, he does not, however, fit the militant Islamic stereotype usually associated with the Taliban.

Married with a wife and one-year-old daughter, he holds a degree in business studies, having been educated in Pakistan, where he grew up as a refugee while his father and elder brothers fought in the jihad against the Russians. His family was well off, owning land and property in Kandahar to which they returned after the war.

"Like many people, I did not become a Talib by choice," he explained. "In early 1998 I was working as an accountant here in Quetta when I heard that my grandfather - who was 85 - had been arrested by the Taliban in Kandahar and was being badly beaten. They would only release him if he provided a member of his family as a conscript, so I had to go."

Mr Hassani at first was impressed by the Taliban. "It had been a crazy situation after the Russians left, the country was divided by warring groups all fighting each other. In Kandahar warlords were selling everything, kidnapping young girls and boys, robbing people, and the Taliban seemed like good people who brought law and order."

So he became a Taliban "volunteer", assigned to the secret police. Many of his friends also joined up as land owners in Kandahar were threatened that they must either ally themselves with the Taliban or lose their property. Others were bribed to join with money given to the Taliban by drug smugglers, as Afghanistan became the world's largest producer of heroin.

At first, Mr Hassani's job was to patrol the streets at night looking for thieves and signs of subversion. However, as the Taliban leadership began issuing more and more extreme edicts, his duties changed.

Instead of just searching for criminals, the night patrols were instructed to seek out people watching videos, playing cards or, bizarrely, keeping caged birds. Men without long enough beards were to be arrested, as was any woman who dared venture outside her house. Even owning a kite became a criminal offence.

The state of terror spread by the Taliban was so pervasive that it began to seem as if the whole country was spying on each other. "As we drove around at night with our guns, local people would come to us and say there's someone watching a video in this house or some men playing cards in that house," he said.

"Basically any form of pleasure was outlawed," Mr Hassani said, "and if we found people doing any of these things we would beat them with staves soaked in water - like a knife cutting through meat - until the room ran with their blood or their spines snapped. Then we would leave them with no food or water in rooms filled with insects until they died.

"We always tried to do different things: we would put some of them standing on their heads to sleep, hang others upside down with their legs tied together. We would stretch the arms out of others and nail them to posts like crucifixions.

"Sometimes we would throw bread to them to make them crawl. Then I would write the report to our commanding officer so he could see how innovative we had been."

Here, sitting in the stillness of an orchard in Quetta sipping tea as the sun goes down, he finds it hard to explain how he could have done such things. "We Afghans have grown too used to violence," is all he can offer. "We have lost 1.5 million people. All of us have brothers and fathers up there."

After Kandahar, he was put in charge of secret police cells in the towns of Ghazni and then Herat, a beautiful Persian city in western Afghanistan that had suffered greatly during the Soviet occupation and had been one of the last places to fall to the Taliban.

Herat had always been a relatively liberal place where women would dance at weddings and many girls went to school - but the Taliban were determined to put an end to all that. Mr Hassani and his men were told to be particularly cruel to Heratis.

It was his experience of that cruelty that made Mr Hassani determined to let the world know what was happening in Afghanistan. "Maybe the worst thing I saw," he said, "was a man beaten so much, such a pulp of skin and blood, that it was impossible to tell whether he had clothes on or not. Every time he fell unconscious, we rubbed salt into his wounds to make him scream.

"Nowhere else in the world has such barbarity and cruelty as in Afghanistan. At that time I swore an oath that I will devote myself to the Afghan people and telling the world what is happening."

Before he could escape, however, because he comes from the same tribe, he spent time as a bodyguard for Mullah Omar, the reclusive spiritual leader of the Taliban.

"He's medium height, slightly fat, with an artificial green eye which doesn't move, and he would sit on a bed issuing instructions and giving people dollars from a tin trunk," said Mr Hassani. "He doesn't say much, which is just as well as he's a very stupid man. He knows only how to write his name `Omar' and sign it.

"It is the first time in Afghanistan's history that the lower classes are governing and by force. There are no educated people in this administration - they are all totally backward and illiterate.

"They have no idea of the history of the country and although they call themselves mullahs they have no idea of Islam. Nowhere does it say men must have beards or women cannot be educated; in fact, the Koran says people must seek education."

He became convinced that the Taliban were not really in control. "We laughed when we heard the Americans asking Mullah Omar to hand over Osama bin Laden," he said. "The Americans are crazy. It is Osama bin Laden who can hand over Mullah Omar - not the other way round."

While stationed in Kandahar, he often saw bin Laden in a convoy of Toyota Land Cruisers all with darkened windows and festooned with radio antennae. "They would whizz through the town, seven or eight cars at a time. His guards were all Arabs and very tall people, or Sudanese with curly hair."

He was also on guard once when bin Laden joined Mullah Omar for a bird shoot on his estate. "They seemed to get on well," he said. "They would go fishing together, too - with hand grenades."

The Arabs, according to Mr Hassani, have taken de facto control of his country. "All the important places of Kandahar are now under Arab control - the airport, the military courts, the tank command."

Twice he attended Taliban training camps and on both occasions they were run by Arabs as well as Pakistanis. "The first one I went to lasted 10 days in the Yellow Desert in Helmand province, a place where the Saudi princes used to hunt, so it has its own airport.

It was incredibly well guarded and there were many Pakistanis there, both students from religious schools and military instructors. The Taliban is full of Pakistanis."

He was told that if he died while fighting under the white flag of the Taliban, he and his family would go to paradise. The soldiers were given blank marriage certificates signed by a mullah and were encouraged to "take wives" during battle, basically a licence to rape.

When Mr Hassani was sent to the front line in Bagram, north of Kabul, a few months ago, he saw a chance to escape. "Our line was attacked by the Northern Alliance and they almost defeated us. Many of my friends were killed and we didn't know who was fighting who; there was killing from behind and in front. Our commanders fled in cars leaving us behind.

"We left, running all night but then came to a line of Arabs who arrested us and took us back to the front line. One night last month I was on watch and saw a truck full of sheep and goats, so I jumped in and escaped.

"I got back to Kandahar but Taliban spies saw me and I was arrested and interrogated. Luckily I have relatives who are high ranking Taliban members so they helped me get out and eventually I escaped to Quetta to my wife and daughter.

"I think many in the Taliban would like to escape. The country is starving and joining is the only way to get food and keep your land. Otherwise there is a lot of hatred. I hate both what it does and what it turned me into."
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Zebo, I have never said that the Taliban were a preferable alternative even though I suspect the interview is about as valid as reports of invading Iraqis throwing babies out of Kuwaiti hospitals,

It still does not change the fact that the Taliban were the de facto government in Afghanistan and are regaining support today. And if US and Nato tactics are making the Taliban look better than us in comparison in Afghan eyes, I do not like it one bit. But you not I are in denial about that fact of it being of a wake up call for Nato to change its tactics so we can start winning for a change.

Petraeus has said we will not kill our way out of the problem, something I agree with, so why is nearly everyone on this forum fixated on the fantasy that we can?
 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
Why is it that 1 day intervention is bad, and the next day intervention is good?
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Why is it that 1 day intervention is bad, and the next day intervention is good?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe a good question Ozoned, and that short answer may be, that intervention may be wise, but the way the intervention is conducted is the truer test.

In short it may have been wise to intervene in Afghanistan, but when the intervention was conducted on the cheap with poor tactics, it self defeats the original intent.

And then the old adage of hell is paved with good intentions applies.