As the withdrawl date is already know it will allow the Taliban two years to regroup and well plan their dominance strategy after the withdrawl...good going NATO give it all away.

Let the fox guard the hen-house! This is just another sign that even the military have capitulated to the inevitable: Pull out! The sooner, the better. This Mission is over, whatever it was after Bin Laden was eliminated. The Taliban will be back, and Al Quaida has dispersed and is no longer a significant player in Afghanistan. Those are the basic facts, which we should only ignore at our own peril! Say goodnight, Karzai!

Well, unless one wants our forces to remain in the country indefinitely, we have to turn it over to them at some point or another. There will likely never be a time that we will think that it is completely safe to turn everything over; yet we have to do it anyway. I don't see this as "giving up" our most effective tool; it is merely transferring it over to the Afghans themselves - as it should be. We will be continuing to advise and instruct them in order to make their own troops more effective.

I think that requiring a warrant is a good idea, and a necessary move towards a more accountable domestic policy. While I have reservations that it may be a bit to soon, it is ultimately up to the Afghans themselves to decide what to do and when.

Rick-525236

I do agree that we have to give control of Afghanistan back to the Afghanis.

The problem I have is A+B=C

A The US military is part of NATO

B Afghanistan will now have control over NATO

C Now Afghanistan has control over the US military.

Do we really want the Afghanistan authorities being able to use our military as mercenaries to eliminate threats to their current administration? Do we really want to allow unlimited nighttime movement that puts Americans at risk? I don't believe it is a good idea to ever allow foreign powers to have tactical authority over our Military. It just seems inherently dangerous, and brings into serious question the chain of command when we hand control of our military over to NATO, and thereby Afghanistan.

I think we should simply leave and let what will be, be, because I doubt a government appointed by a foreign power will ever be able to hold control in Afghanistan anyway.

"From now on all night raids will be conducted by the Afghan national army, police and intelligence in close coordination with Afghan judicial bodies,"

I don't see where this is giving Afghans control over our military. Our troops will be providing "advice and support" only. If we don't like the mission, I see nothing suggesting that we have to even take part in it.

The world court should take up the issues of oppression and intervention. Front and center is Syrian actions against the (peaceful) resurrection. Libyian intervention in denying the use of mechanization in the slaughter is one approach...

Rick-525236

Sorry, it just seems a little scary to me. What is to keep them from promoting attacks on one group while protecting another. That is internal politics, not war.

Why doesn't Obama just let the Afgan commanders have authority over the U.S. troops. That should solve things, eh?

I have a better idea. How about we GTFO?!

What is to keep them from promoting attacks on one group while protecting another.

Again, what is there to suggest that we have to take part at all? If they choose to protect one group, I'm sure that that is being done regardless of who is making the actual raids.

Politics is always a part of war - We even have to get permission from "friendly" countries to do fly overs for operations support.

Rick-525236

I think there is a definite distinction that can be drawn between going into war with those parts of Afghanistan that we took issue with, and getting involved in what should be Afghanistan's self-determination. One is war, the other is us trying to create US 3.0. IT has never, ever worked in Afghanistan, and regardless of our ego, never will.

In fact, I believe that the group we attack over the ones that are protected, will turn terrorist, and there will be blowback against the US in the future.

And I would agree with you on this issue. But we need to provide them with some measure of stability and a means to establish a stable government (training of police and military) and then allow them to do with it as they see fit. The problem with decimating a country's ability to govern it's population - then failing to build that back up is that it leaves the country in turmoil and much more prone to fanaticism. There is no guarantee that the country will not descend in to turmoil anyway; but that is no excuse to not even try.

I would agree, but it has been ten years. What is sufficient? 15? 20? History has shown us that picking sides makes enemies. Unless I am mistaken, picking sides caused this mess when we backed one side against Russia in Afghanistan once before. And led to the rise of Al queda in the first place.

I hate when the edit box times out. Unless we insist on making a country a "US 3.0," then we are going to have to deal with the fact that they are going to make decisions that we are not happy with; yet we will just be shooting ourselves in the foot by pulling our troops out to soon- in a tantrum - before we have achieved our goal (stable govt).

When ever we let the politicians "Run our Wars" like they have since Korea, we always seem to end up with the short end of the stick. The "Will" has left the battle field for our politicians (all of them really), and the only acceptable thing to do at this point is to get the hell out of there. It appears that prosecuting wars from Washington (Congress and the White House) will always be with us because we have lost the gumption to prosecute wars to WIN. Politics shouldn't determine the prosecution of Wars. Military professionals should determine the outcomes of Wars we decide to wage. When the "Dogs of War" are released, they should be allowed to finish the job unhindered by political 'niceties' or fears of stepping on some third world despots toes. In Afghanistan, as in other places we have fought wars, the insurgents, Taliban. or whom ever will always hide among the local populace for protection, vengeance, or Intimidation. Consequently our 'smart bombs' have had to become smarter so as to kill less civilians (collateral damage.) Certainly our intent has never been to DIRECTLY harm civilians but the politicians want a 'clean' war waged with little or no civilian casualties. It's a lot like NOT involving the indigenous population in your war so just kind of move them out of your way while you are trying to kill the enemy and for GOD's sake don't interrupt their lives! Kind of work around them while you are trying to kill people. We'd still be waging WW2 with this policy.

Our Civil War killed over 600 thousand on both sides. Nearing the final outcome, General Sherman was tasked with driving the final will to fight right out of the South. Sherman's idea to wage a "Total War" against his adversaries with his "Scorched Earth" policy is still taught in military schools today. The idea is to BREAK THE WILL COMPLETELY of your enemy. To deny them food, resources, supply lines, housing, clothing and anything he can use to wage war. To completely and utterly BREAK HIS WILL to fight and to break the will of ANYONE who supports him INCLUDING any supporting population. Our Bombing of Dresden, Germany was a classic use of this idea. If you are to remove a Cancer, you can't worry about the possibility that you might have to excise normal tissue. We have waged our wars in a BOX every time, while disregarding obvious actors outside of the Box, who supply and enable our enemies. It's no way to wage a war.

Rick-525236

That is exactly the point. "Our" goals, not theirs. And what we consider a stable government to "our" liking, not theirs. Lately I have concerns that we can't even run a functional government ourselves, let alone tell others how to.

I believe that al-Qaeda would have risen anyway. I think that it was the inevitable consequence of the growth of radical Muslim factions. Yes I agree that 10 years should have been long enough - if we had had a legitimate, well thought out plan to begin with. Jumping into a war and just winging it for so long doesn't tend to accomplish to much. Regardless of what point you choose to get serious about actually building a govt., it will take time to achieve - after that point. I don't think that we have quite finished yet; but, I believe that we are approaching the finish line - and actions such as this are a necessary checkpoint along the road to complete withdrawal.

I agree with both of you above. But, politics is a part of war - like it or not. And fomenting discontent among the local population does not help achieve our goals - at least not without even more involvement. Thoroughly demoralizing a population may indeed prove effective; but, it can also be much more costly. We are basically trying to conduct "lite" wars now - and that requires less devastation and more goodwill on the part of the local populations. Personally, I think we would be better off, simply staying out of it all - except for the most grievous instances.

That place was a waste of our soldiers, time,effort and money..since it started..GET OUT NOW..forget what others say...who cares what they think.

Well I have to ask. Do you think we are making friends in the region, or enemies? Osama bin Laden grew his distain for the West and created Al queda to fight our politics and foreign policy. I believe he may have never done that if our politics and foreign policy were different. I just wonder how many more Osama think-a-likes we are creating. We sure as hell haven't made many friends in Pakistan or many other countries in the region.

for those that are not in the military and do not understand any of this here is a simple breakdown...

- afghanistan is NOT apart of NATO; they will have no direct command over any NATO forces as in field orders.

- NATO forces will do up the plans and see to it that the afghan forces carry the attacks out properly.

- NATO forces will most likely still be the main personal that secures the area. once secured is when the afghan forces will move into the building.

Afghanistan now can just say no to a night raid; which then would just be carried out during the day... really thats the only thing to get out of this. afghanistan is NOT going to be put incharge of our forces by any means; the field commanding officer will still be a NATO member. so people dont get all worked up thinking something crazy is happening. this is to show respect for the locals instead of a foreign power that comes busting into your house... those from american, who would you rather have storm your house if you had to choose; an american swat team or a russian or chinese one? personally i would take the american one any day since i will be able to understand them and all.

So now afghans have a veto when nato can kick afghan ass. genius.

john-73278,

to your question about if we are making friends of enemies in the region...

as in region i will assume you mean the middle east in general. the answer is both to be honest; but more friends then enemies. most of the middle eastern countries have pretty strong ties to the US now and most of their people respect us greatly. i have been in bahrain for 2 years now and my wife has been in afghanistan. both of us have seen the locals respect us greatly. they are glad we are in the middle east bc it has given them a lot of freedoms they didnt have. we have helped them improve their overall lives, such as the construction projects... helping provide drinkable water and such.

i was in a cab a few weeks ago and for the 25 minute ride the driver was saying over and over how glad he is we are here and how much he loves americans. one of the main issues in afghanistan is how remote the country was/is. they are born and taught the west are just killers and pretty much brain washed to hate us from day one. then we show up and try to respect them the best we can; the military adapts to local ways greatly in the middle east... for example we will follow all of the standard rules for ramadan, some are even more so then the locals themselves. some locals do get mad we change our ways for them haha.

but at the same time, of course we do some bad as we are only human and like to drink... there are members that make poor decisions. if its knocking up a local and bouncing or just being a drunken fool or what not. things do happen... so some do hate us for our dumb actions. also accidents do happen and innocent people do end up getting killed. it happens in all wars. now adays its common for the enemy to use woman and children as shields too; meaning traveling with their families bc they know the US normally wont strike due to it (unless cleared by the president).

so long story short, the answer is both. we for sure have made allies and have respect of many but at the same time we surely have pissed some locals off due to multiple reasons.

mike277,

last i checked you are talking about the AMERICAN MILITARY! what makes you think we will off of a sudden bounce? we have way to much pride for that coward crap! we will never just bail on a country again like we did with nam once we step into it. all of us are way to proud to be able to serve our country and protect our homeland; even if you all back in america dont realize the facts that since we stepped into the war terrorist attacks by foreign powers have been pretty much zip. to bad you dont know about all the plots that have been soiled due to our outstanding military and government members... hope one day they can be released to the public and then you can look back and say "damn, our countries service men and women did an outstanding job and i didnt even know it".

me281048

So, do you think there will come a time when the good we have done will have the effect of making them do the right thing of eliminating those that are bad in there society, instead of turning a blind eye? Or after we leave will all the work we have done end up being futile?

I guess those are the eight trillion dollar questions.

me281048

I think most Americans at home give great respect for the work those that signed up do. They simply question whether the costs outweigh the gains. And don't like seeing politics having a greater role than security of those serving. That is my perspective of what I have seen. If that is not the case, then the media here at home is doing the cause a great disservice.

Get out now.

Sorry folks...time to get out! We turned control of night raids over to Afganis, just like the Vietnamese AND CONGRESS HAD CONTROL OVER OUR BOMBING MISSIONS/TARGETS...GTFO NOW!

It is Blatantly Clear, the Government, people of Afghanistan do not want the US Military there.

Tell them thanks, for all the 4,000 or more Soldiers who have not died in vain to try to salvage the people's lives, getting rid of the ruling Taliban (Karzai). Thanks for all the killings over the Quran--which was another doctored up story.

Thanks Afghanistan. Go back to your caves, get high on the opiates, and kill each other.

President Obama, "What does the US have to gain by staying there anymore"; what is it that you must keep this War going? Bush started it. Longest War in the History of the United States.

Thanks Karzai. You are a Corrupt, ungrateful Jerk! Why should this Soldier now be penalized for killing their 16 or more people. It's over--"An Eye for an Eye"--Apologies, they do not work either.

Now NATO---get some courage and react!

Correction:

#1.29 "4,000 Soldiers who "did die in Vain"

Yes. This is a great idea and about time. Letting a corrupt government dictate tactical operations. I say lets do it the whole way and give each village elder a facebook account, and when we are going to do operations in their dstricts, we'll "poke" them. It will be our little secret, and in no way would they tip off the Taliban.

ME- I get the gist of what you are saying, but the fact remains that they can kill, enslave, rape, sodomize, and create all the mayhem they want because the Koran tells them they can. They don't like us because we drink? Too bad. Get over it. If that is the biggest problem they have with us, itd's just to baxcd. We are hauling their butts out of the 7th century, like your buddy the cab driver said.

We are also dumping billions into the local and national enonomy, so when we leave, his income tanks, and he's back to starving.

Actually, EVERYBODY in NATO has bars on their bases, except for the U.S., because we always try to get along with the locals, which is like trying to commune with a fire ant nest, in this case. All they are gonna do is bite.

Waldo has it just right- you have to kill them and keep on killing them, until who is left gives up. Wipe out the government, install one that has at least a 6th grade education, and handle the locals with an iron fist. I'm not talking like the screwup Soviets - I'm talking North Korea.

THEN you can start relaxing things, after the locals get the idea and start cooperating.

To do that, you would have to get rid of the PC bleeding hearts in Congress, who feel so much of the Talibans pain, nothing for our troops, and who have to just agonize over whether to have the terrine or the filet tonight. Not going to happen.

And so our kids continue to die.

Osama and al-Qaeda would have formed even without our first intervention in Afghanistan. Osama felt that we had cheated Muslims out of tons of money by paying the going rate for oil - instead of what he felt we should have paid them. Osama wanted the US to pay over a trillion dollars to make up the difference for the oil we had bought from the ME throughout the years - this was way back before his attacks. Since we weren't about to do that - he would have gone the same course anyway.

All the people filled with hate for anything that they don't approve of don't seem to understand that the only way those soldiers died in vain is if we leave the country with the job undone. This isn't like Viet Nam and before where kids were drafted and had no choice but to fight. The people fighting now have volunteered - they volunteered to get a job done; let's honor them by doing just that. Once the Afghans have control of the country, they can screw it up again if they wish; but, we at least gave them a chance - and got rid of ObL and al-Qaeda to boot. If we don't want to pay the price of fixing something - we shouldn't break it by getting involved to begin with.

This will never be effective. As corrupt as the regime is there the cockroaches will be long gone before the missile hits. (Unless the target is political opponents. )

Rick-525236

I don't think your view of why OBL hated the West is entirely accurate. During the Soviet/Afghan war we, as in the CIA, funded the building of his network and training camps in the mid 1980's that he turned around and used against us. In some ways, what has happened was our own damned fault because we didn't see it coming. We also had chances to arrest him and the beaurocracy in the US refused.

What pissed him off the most was when Iraq invaded kuwait, he offered his followers to defend Saudi Arabia, and the king chose to have the US help push Iraq back instead. It inflamed him that US troops were in Saudi Arabia. And then he got more pissed because the king deported him and disowned him for the sake of US/Saudi interests. Then when ties went to Israel, he went over the edge.

The psychosis is that he should have blamed his father, not the US.

Maybe they want their sovereignty back? I would love to know how you would feel if a Chinese military base was down the road from your house?

How would you feel if the FBI was busting in doors in your neighborhood suspecting there might be a drug dealer nearby and it was done all the time? I promise you you'll get tired of it real quick.

If you wear two lefty shoes, your going to walk around in circles. Stop believing everything you hear on television and go do your own research. War is Terrorism

All the people filled with hate for anything that they don't approve of don't seem to understand that the only way those soldiers died in vain is if we leave the country with the job undone. This isn't like Viet Nam and before where kids were drafted and had no choice but to fight. The people fighting now have volunteered - they volunteered to get a job done; let's honor them by doing just that.

"Get the job done???? Yeah, okay - in a month of Sundays we'll get the job done over there. The only thing we CAN control in this asinine war is how many more names we want on our memorials, NOT A DAMN THING ELSE. Get real.

It's the attitude of "let's buy our enemies a Coke and hold hands and sing KUMBYA" that's the reason why we have lost every war we've been in since World War 2. Either you fight the god dammed war to win it, or you stay the hell out of it - one or the other.

We'll leave Afghanistan just as we all predicted - with our tail between our legs. Then these savages will go back to doing what they do best, fighting and killing each other. Stabilizing that country? What a laugh. Winning the hearts and minds? ?? Sorry bud, there's no such thing in war. We won nothing.

John - I never said that the oil money was the only thing that pissed ObL off - and yes, our presence in Saudi Arabia during the gulf war was seen by him and others as an affront to Islam. But, ObL had it in for us since his mujaheddin days in the 1980's.

1995 Interview (on his thinking during the fight against the Soviets in Afghanistan) - "For us, the idea was not to get involved more than necessary in the fight against the Russians, which was the business of the Americans, but rather to show our solidarity with our Islamist brothers. I discovered that it was not enough to fight in Afghanistan, but that we had to fight on all fronts against communist or Western oppression. The urgent thing was communism, but the next target was America... This is an open war up to the end, until victory."

1997 Interview - Muslims are starving to death and the United States is stealing their oil. Since 1973, the price of petrol has increased only $8/barrel while the prices of other items have gone up three times. The oil prices should also have gone up three times but this did not happen.

Time Magazine Interview (1999) - The U.S. knows that I have attacked it, by the grace of God, for more than ten years now (prior to Gulf War).

HOTTICKET - killing Obl - Job Done; castrating al-Qaeda - Job Done. What's left is to fill the void in Afghan govt. caused by our having removed the Taliban controlled govt. We don't have to hold their hands forever - just install the basic institutions, provide training to military and police to allow them the ability to adequately protect themselves, and give them the minimum amount of time to get it together. I think that we are not far from completing that now. After that - it's up to them. We've attained our mission objectives - now we're doing the clean-up. How is that leaving with our tail between our legs?

If all the peaceniks who wanted us out of there years ago had their way - the country would have descended relatively quickly back into chaos, and the Taliban and al-Qaeda would have simply moved back in and set up shop like nothing had happened. After the next 9/11 we would have had to go right back again.

My problem is not with Afghans making the decisions or taking the point, that's fine, it's their country after all. But we're talking about a people who, even when they are working side by side with our soldiers, can literally shoot them in the back at any given moment. So now, NATO is going to have to get approval from these same people who we can't even trust when they're supposed to be our allies and partners. One cell phone call/warning will get to the Taliban hideout long before any troops can, in fact, maybe fast enough to allow them to stage an ambush. Sorry if I don't trust any of them, but they've given me ample reasons not to, from the top (Karzai) on down to the supposed 'friendly' Afghan aide/translator/soldier working side by side with our boys who they suddenly turn and gun down/blow up. We have to trust these people with our intelligence? I certainly wouldn't.

Rick-525236

I still contend that it was our politics and foreign policy that caused the rise of Al queda and not money. Especially since he saw a pretty good share of it coming form the CIA. But I guess that is neither here, nor there any longer. I think what is a more overriding factor in the region is the lies that he told that were believed.

Yes, we may gotten our oil from the middle east, but he should have laid the blame for their people starving at the feet of those actually responsible. And that would be the leaders of the countries that didn't share the wealth. We could have risen above that lie in Iraq, but we didn't. We could have forced profit-sharing over all of Iraq for their oil wealth, just as all members of a reservation profit from a casino. We would have made every Iraqi a millionaire. How often do we see millionaires pull out guns to shoot each other or start wars.

As far as Afghanistan, I think we have spent enough time and money, and anything that is not done by now should no longer be our responsibility. And we should leave them with two things. "Good luck", and "If you make us come back you will regret it". Now that is motivation to get their @!$%# together.

Hello folks, the edacity of the U.S. even thinking that we have a right to dictate to another sovereign country is the epitome of arrogance and insanity. The hypocrisy to think that we have an ethical or moral platform from which we can dictate to anyone illustrates the depths to which we have fallen. Anyone who thinks that they are better than anyone else is ignorant pure and simple.

John - The key is the lies. The money, politics, etc. were nothing but excuses - a means to an end. In one interview Osama put blame on us going back to WWII when we became "even more unfair" to the world and the Muslims in particular. Yes, our politics and greed have hurt us; but, if it weren't for one excuse, things would have happened for another.

As for Afghanistan - I simply feel that if we are responsible for the removal of their means of governing, we are obligated to provide an adequate replacement. We should have been out of there long ago; but, we have noone but ourselves to blame for our ineptitude in handling the situation for so long. We should have had viable plans and alternatives, a timetable, and a ready means to provide adequate support for the purpose of providing a stable govt. before we ever set foot in the country.

What I would like to know is who is in charge? The united nations or karsai? If it's the united nations, karzai's input can be ignored. If it's karzai then the best thing we can do is get out immediately, like tonight, before they run us out.

Look back at history and do what has worked in the past. If it didn't work, don't do it again.

Wow, I am truely amazed, most are civil discussions and not the usual sh!t slinging.

Anyway, were to start. I was counting down, to less than one more month then most of us get to go back on Retirement again. Before someone hit the stop button and now we are still stuck here (again, at least the last time they lined thru our departure dates and wrote abovethe lined thru original date a new date.).

Pertaining to this article, who is/are the Author(s). So that I know to avoid them in the future.

where support for the ethnic Pashtun-dominated Taliban is strongest.

When are you News Reporters going to go look in your own archieves to find out that the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban were those Pro USSR Afghans that fled into the USSR Backed Fundamentalist Islamic Republic of Iran during the USSR 40th Army Occupation that was killing ANY Afghan, Pro US or Pro USSR did not matter. After USSR lost, the US Abandoned the Pro US Afghan Muhajeen. The Pro USSR Afghans returned and with the full support of the Fundamentalist Islamic Republic of Iran massacred almost half of the Afghan population (Millions) and the Pro US Afghan Muhajeen(20,000 to 50,000) as "Collaborators to the Christians, Jews, Unbelievers Die a Horrible Murdering". Then the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban went massacred the Taoists, Buddhists, etc. as Unbelievers, and dynamited the Centuries Old Great Buddhas.

It is NOT unusualfor the Fundamentalist Islamic (Shia) Taliban to NOT speak Pashtun, and do speak Farsi. The same with the majority of the Fundamentalist Islamic (Shia) JihadistForeign Fighters, most speaking Arabic and or Farsi. From their very long association with the Fundamentalist Islamic (Shia as to where the term Sharia comes from, as in Sharia Law of Fundamentalist Islam) Republic of Iran. This close association includes the Main Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadist Training Camp at the Autonomous KurdistanisRegion (Southern Turkey, Northern Iraq, Border of Syria, and Northwestern Iran) as fully supported by the Fundamentalist Islamic Republic of Iran with their Special Forces trainers and advisers, weapons, military equipment, funds, munitions, etc..

So now to the discussion:

txmom32 - As the withdrawl date is already know it will allow the Taliban two years to regroup and well plan their dominance strategy after the withdrawl...good going NATO give it all away.

This was not done by NATO; but by President Obama as Commander In Chief, previous Secretary of Defense Gates and finally SOS Clinton as General McKiernan, General McChrystal, General Petraeus had no input. That also committed the US Military Asymmetric Warfare Forces (aka Special) to remain for decades after 2014.

Referee - Let the fox guard the hen-house! This is just another sign that even the military have capitulated to the inevitable: Pull out! The sooner, the better. This Mission is over, whatever it was after Bin Laden was eliminated.

The Mission ever since the 9/11 2001 Attacks was to Overthrow, Eliminate or Negate the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban Government that provided Islamic Sanctuary to Osama Bin Laden and Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadist Organization Al Quada. Weeks after the 9/11 2001 Attacks US Military Asymmetric Warfare Teams attached to the CIA's SAD/SOGwent into Afghanistan, some linked up with the Northern Alliance that hated the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban; the other US Military Asymmetric Warfare Teams (mostly survivors from Operation Cyclone, Languages, Culture, previous experience) went into the Afghan Cities to fight the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban Government Militias (Army) withhuge losses, with the Teams and the Northern Alliance literally Cavalry to the Rescue (of us).

http://dougstanton.net/

The survivors of this later on participated in 2002-2003 Operation Hotel California at Iraq to prepare for the US Military Liberation of Iraq in accordance with US Laws, H.R.4655 and 2002 Iraqis War Resolution as the First Declared War since WWII.

The Wars at Afghanistan and Iraq were already won, then the US Politicians got involved (again, just like Vietnam). UN Missions: Nation Building of Afghanistan and Iraq.

The Mission to locate, capture or terminate Osama Bin Laden was added after President Bush in 2006 Amended the US No Assassination Policy that allowed for the termination of Osama Bin Laden.

Referee - The Taliban will be back, and Al Quaida has dispersed and is no longer a significant player in Afghanistan. Those are the basic facts, which we should only ignore at our own peril! Say goodnight, Karzai!

That perception of the Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadist Al Quada International Franchise is not correct. As for Fundamentalist Islamic Believers to be accepted into Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadist Al Quada is to become a Worldwide Fundamentalist Islamic Super Star.

Inside Al Quada

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/09/04/inside-al-qaeda.html

US Ally President Karzai will end up dead as a "Collaborators to the Christians, Jews, Unbelievers Die A Horrible Murdering". President Karzai was never the problem (corrupt) that was President Obama PoliticalAppointees that spent hundreds of Billions with nothing being built or done at Afghanistan. President Karzai'sdemanding General McChrystal Investigate is one of the Real Reasons that President Obama's PoliticalAppointees were demanding General McChrystal be Relieved of Command (days after just getting Nominated by President Obama, Confirmed by US Congress, and finally getting here). I wanted all of the "This Administration Does Not Know What It Is Doing" to come out in the Required Public US Congressional Hearing(s) to Relieve General McChrystal as President Obama had no Legal Leg to Stand On per UCMJ; but, General McChrystal as a ardent publicly announced registered Democrat, and the deals President Obama gave him to get him to tender his Letter of Resignation overrided that. The calcualtedResults of a Public US Congressional Hearing would have been the President Obama Political Appointees would have to account for the hundreds of Billion USDs as demanded by President Karzai, their Public appologies for Undermining a US Ally's Established Government, and they tendering their Letters of Resignation; much better Relations between the US and US Ally Afghan Government, maybe even renegotiating the Rules of Engagement that were negotiated by President Obama's Political Appointees that tendered their Letters of Resignation.

Rick-525236 - Well, unless one wants our forces to remain in the country indefinitely

To remain here indefinitely has already been negotiated with President Karzai by President Obama, SOS Clinton and President Obama's Political Appointees. The US Military Conventional Warfare Forces leave by 2014, previously, 2012, previously 2011. The US Military Asymmetric Warfare Forces leave decades later (maybe).

As implied before, after the US Abandoned the US Ally Pro US Afghan Muhajeen to be massacred by the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban as fully supported by the Fundamentalist Islamic Republic of Iran. The Afghans are worried that the US will forget or abandon them again to be massacred again.

The question arises how do you fight against the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban as Fully Supported by the Entire Nations of Fundamentalist Islamic Republic of Iran and the Fundamentalist Islamic People of Pakistan (Not the US Ally Pakistanis Government). The Fundamentalist Islamic Republic of Iran Fully Supported by the Chinese and Russian Federation.

Just an FYI, by removing the US Military Conventional Warfare Forces (97%) the US Military Asymmetric Warfare Forces (3%) will not have a "security blanket" or theDirect Support of the US Military Conventional Warfare Forces. examples: Redacted FOBs, COBS, etc.., Redacted., Redacted at Bagram AFB., The option is like us living withthe locals for years of consecutive tours; but we Redacted from FOBs, COBs, Bagram AFB, etc..

So yes, basically, when the US Military Conventional Warfare Forces leave Afghanistan that shows a US lack of Political Commitment to US Ally Afghanistan. The results already known from previous examples: US Abandoned them after Operation Cyclone. US abandoned US Ally President of Egypt. US Abandoned Iraq to the Fundamentalist Islamic (Shia) Government of Iraq as demanded by the Fundamentalist Islamic (Shia) Republic or Iran. US Abandoned the US Ally President of Yemen. US Abandoned the US Ally Somails Government. US ignored the US Ally Saudi Government. US ignored then backstabbed previous US Ally Libya.

Bottomline the US Politicians trashed all the decades of work of us.

john-737278 - Do we really want the Afghanistan authorities being able to use our military as mercenaries to eliminate threats to their current administration?

Ever since the US Military has been used as the United Nation's B!tcheswhat do you expect. After WWII Japanese surrender and leave Indochina (aka Vietnam), US holds French Indochina Colonies until the French can reocuppy. Korean Conflict (aka War). US at Vietnam. And all the stuff in between during "Peacetime" (NOT peaceful at all) till now.

Rick-525236 - I hate when the edit box times out. Unless we insist on making a country a "US 3.0,"

US Ally Afghanistan from the 1950s till the USSR 40th Army Occupation stating in 1979 was a 20th Century "Little America". What was not destroyed by the USSR 40th Army Occupation (they tried not to destroy all the comforts that they were enjoying) was later destroyed by the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban as "Non Islamic", "Western", "Modern", etc..

Where's Waldo,

True about the US Politicians having a very short attention span. However, prior to the Defeat of the USSR it was already being taught at the Command and General Staff Colleges and War Colleges that the next Wars would be Asymmetric Warfare and NOT Conventional Wars.

In Asymmetric Warfare there are no recognizable Forces, and no static locations, or even the recognitions of National Boundaries. Historically, Asymmetric Warfare wins against Conventional Warfare. One of the Strategic Goals of Asymmetric Warfare is to get a Nation's Population to fight for your Cause(s) for either real or perceived injustices, without you even firing a shot or killing anyone yourself. example: During Operation Cyclone, the USSR 40th Army was using Total Conventional Warfare, attempting to destroy the Afghan National Will to Fight and support the Pro USSR Afghan Government. After being at US Ally Iraq during the Iran Iraq Wars we were redeployed to the Afghan Refugee Camps at Pakistan and Northeastern Afghanistan (mountains) to Identify (with Vetting), Organize, Train, the Afghan Refugees that had witnessedwhole Afghan Villages being massacred by the USSR's Total Conventional Warfare, these Afghans became the US Ally Pro US Afghan Muhajeen. In most cases we accompanied them into Afghanistan and made on the spot corrections to our training of them, sometimes we actually lead them into critical missions or when we saw that they were losing. And no we did NOT Train the Taliban, nor OsamaBin Laden that was living with his Rich Saudi Arabian Relatives forming the Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadist Organization of Al Quadaas an Anti US, Anti US Ally, Anti US Ally Saudi Government. At that time the USSR had over 101 Full Strength Fully Equipped Frontline Divisions to draw from, so entire USSR Tank Companies would be destroying small Afghan Villages and massacring all the Afghan Villagers.

It was too late that the USSR Bureacrats and very Political Military Leadership realized what was happening, and sent in their Spetsnaz to counter us and our Asymmetric Warfare. This then became US Military Asymmetric Warfare (Insurgency) versus USSR Military Asymmetric Warfare (Counter Insurgency), very deadly skill versus skill, with us not having the full support of an entire Army to rely on.

Rick-525236 - But, politics is a part of war

Only if you want to lose that War, Conflict, Police Action, Humanitarian Assistance Mission, UN Mission, etc.. By Training and lots of experience with Asymmetric Warfare that is what we do, exploit the Political Involvements (interference) to cause defeats. One of the Primary Strategic Goals of Asymmetric Warfare is to Defeat the Enemy's Will to Fight (they lost the War before it even started, and maybe we get the other Strategic Goal of Asymmetric Warfare the Overthrow of an Enemy Nation's Established Government).

Rick-525236 - I believe that al-Qaeda would have risen anyway.

That could have been nipped at the bud, before they even became well known. However, President Clinton refused to give the US Ally Saudi Arabian Government Evidence of Osama Bin Laden'sinvolvement withthe 1993 First World Trade Center Bombing, or the US Ally Saudi Arabian Government's offered extradition. So with insufficient evidence they had to let Osama Bin Laden go, as the US Ally Saudi Government is NOT Fundamentalist Islamic Shia, and is the Moderate Modern Western Liberal interpretation of Islam as Sunnis. The US Military Asymmetric Warfare Teams (USN SEAL Team 6, aka USNSWDGand US Army Special Forces Det 1, aka Delta) that were shadowing OsamaBin Laden continued to request Presidential (Commander In Chief) Authorization to terminate OBL, with President Clinton refusing and citing the US No Assassination Policy. Osama Bin Laden and his Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadist Organization Al Quada accept the Islamic Sanctuary of the Fundamentalist islamic Taliban Government of Afghanistan after many other Islamic Nations denied Osama Bin Laden Islamic Sanctuary and many even offered the capture and extradition of Osama Bin Ladenlike the President Gaddaffi of Libya (President Clinton's response was the Bombing and Cruise Missile Attacks of Libya).

Rick-525236 - I think that it was the inevitable consequence of the growth of radical Muslim factions.

Do NOT underestimate the size, scope, funding of Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadists as Fully Supported by the Mandatory Islamic Tithes and their Trillions USDs per year fromthe 1.5 Billion Islamic Believers Worldwide. These Mandatory (by current Islamic Laws) Islamic Tithes (Taxes) are not limited to only monetary, and include and are not limited to Political Endorsements, Legalization of Islamic Jihadists, Taqiya (Lies to Advance Islam) and now a days posting on the internet these Taqiya, Islamic Sanctuary for Islamic Jihadists (Sura 2.190 to Sura 2.217 of the Holy Koran (Quran) includes Mosques), etc.. The Mandatory Islamic Tithes (Taxes, for any living at an Islamic Nation regardless of Belief) was 2% of EVERYTHING you own, and perverted to the more you give the more Muslim, subjugated to Islam you are (bragging rights and peer pressure as announced by the Imams at the Mosques). When you have already given your children to become Conscripts as Islamic Jihadists, and you have nothing else to give then you join the Islamic Jihad. Entire Nations are involved, and even those areas that are not Nations like the Hamas Warlords of Palestine and Gaza, their main Export being Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadistsas Worldwide Hamas Foreign Fighters, for serving for 9 months or more (the more valuable you are to the Islamic Jihadists) to prove their loyalty to the Hamas Warlords, Fundamentalist Islamic Republic of Iran provides the HamasWarlords withmore support of bomb making materials, weapons, ammunition, rockets, etc..

The Minority 1.8 Million Islamic Believers living at the US do NOT determine what Islam is or is not for the Majority 1.5 Billion Islamic Believers Worldwide. With the Majority being Shia Fundamentalist Islamic Believers that use methods like armed force, violence, massacres, terrorist activities, starvation, etc. to further decimatethe Sunnis'sModerate Liberal Western Modern Islamic Believers as unarmed pacifistichuman rights beliefs. example: The Fundamentalist Islamic Arabic Omani Muslims massacring the Peaceful Moderate African Islamic Believers of the Sudan by the hundreds a day, millions to date, since these Peaceful Moderate African Islamic Believers refused to attack the Christians at the Southern Sudan (Darfur).

So instead of the minority being what you called "Radical Muslms" sorry by attritions they are the Majority. It would be like Lieutenant Colonel Custer saying "Hurrah boys, we've got them! We'll finish them up and then go home to our station." just before the Little Big Horn.

As the Majority being Fundamentalist Islamic Believers, there Mandatory or Death 109 Suras of the 114 Suras of the Holy Koran (Quran) Call To All Islamic Believers to War Against the Christians, Jews, Unbelieves as also required by the Current Islamic Laws.

me281048 - Afghanistan now can just say no to a night raid; which then would just be carried out during the day... really thats the only thing to get out of this.

Good you do that during the day and lose the element of surprise and the advantage of Night Vision Devices. As either the Islamic Jihadists will leave before you get their as "Hello Muhammad, hate to wake you, this is Judge Amin, they are coming to get you", or they will leave quite a few IEDs for you and a few Islamic Jihadists to take a few shots at you then disappear.

Once again the concept of a Convention (1907 Hague Convention and 1949 Geneva Convention, as the attempts to make War "Civilized" (Civilianized) by paper Laws) War, aka Conventional War.

me281048,

US Ally Bahrain, Home of the 5th USN Fleet, is NOT even remotely like US Ally Afghanistan especially now the 6 degree F and us conducting US Military Asymmetric Arctic/Winter Mountain Warfare.

I have a very serious question for you about Ramadan, that I almost laugh about as many including the Islamic Believers that celebrate Ramadan do not know.

What does the Ramadan Celebration Celebrate. What do each day of Ramadan signify as well as EID. I would be laughing my arse off at you like the locals if you were Celebrating Ramadan.

And yes, after years of consecutive tours of living with the Afghans to get them to trust us with their lives, we, NOT the US Contractors, have helped them build schools, water wells, medical clinics at their villages. We buy the materials locally, transport the materials, roll up our sleeves and help the villagers build while the other Teams provide security. At those Afghan Villages that we have been to before, I Redacted while Redacted provide security.

me281048 - mike277, last i checked you are talking about the AMERICAN MILITARY! what makes you think we will off of a sudden bounce? we have way to much pridefor that coward crap! we will never just bail on a country again like we did with nam once we step into it.

We were ordered to do that before after the Defeat of the USSR 40th Army Occupation. You really do not believe that the Afghans do not rememeber the massacres by the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban of the Afghans that were Collaborators to the Christians, Jews, Unbelievers. The trees at the Afghan cities looked like Christmas Trees with all the Afghan bodies left rotting hanging by the neck. That was about the time that we started to exfiltrate ourselves into US Ally Pakistan after Operation Cyclone.

john-737278 - So, do you think there will come a time when the good we have done will have the effect of making them do the right thing of eliminating those that are bad in there society, instead of turning a blind eye?

It is against Fundamentalist Islam and Fundamentalist Islamic Laws to say, do, etc. anything against Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadists and Islam; as a Death Penalty or to be placed on Death Sentence Fatawa Lists to be carried out by anyone.

Marchant - President Obama, "What does the US have to gain by staying there anymore"; what is it that you must keep this War going?

Nice try, President Obama, "Iraq was the wrong War, Afghanistan is the Right War".

Marchant - Bush started it.

Nope, the 9/11 2001 Attacks as accomplished due to the Fundamentalist Islamic Taliban Government of Afghanistan providing Osama Bin Laden and Al Quada with Islamic Sanctuary in accordance with Islamic Law, as well as providing the support for the Main Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadist Training Camps.

Marchant - Longest War in the History of the United States.

How about this go research how Asymmetric Wars are fought. And if you have not figured it out, the US Politicians demands to do "War on the Cheap" does not help either, unlike previous "Popular" Wars that had the full backing of the Entire US and as soon as the backing disappeared then result Vietnam. As like now only 1% of US Citizens are currently Serving in the US Military doing what the 92% (First Lady Michelle Obama 99%) of US Citizens refuse to do while being paid below minimum wages.

First Lady Michelle Obama on Letterman Show:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5e1R0lliFHc

Marchant - Thanks Karzai. You are a Corrupt, ungrateful Jerk!

Read the above about who was actually Corrupt.

Marchant - Why should this Soldier now be penalized for killing their 16 or more people. It's over--"An Eye for an Eye"--Apologies, they do not work either.

Really. Lynch Mob Rule at US; Zimmerman, Martin; Court of Public Opinion before Investigations over Demanding False Arrest and Convictions.

Rick-525236 - Osama and al-Qaeda would have formed even without our first intervention in Afghanistan. Osama felt that we had cheated Muslims out of tons of money by paying the going rate for oil

That is NOT the reason Osama Bin Laden and Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadist Organization Al Quada were formed, it was because of Fundamentalist Islam versus US (Christians, Jews, Unbelievers), US Allies "Crusaders", US Ally Sunnis (Moderate Liberal Modern Western Interpretation of Holy Koran (Quran) Saudi Arabian Government. THAT IS WHY THE FUNDAMENTALIST ISLAMIC TALIBAN, AND FUNDAMENTALIST ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN SUPPORTED THEM.

The first action that incited Osama Bin Laden against the US was the 1998 US Military Operation Desert Fox, as the Shot Heard Around the Islamic World. With the Islamic Nations declaring the US the Great Satan. As you NEVER EVER f**k over, kill, the Poor of Islam as the bombing and cruise missile attacks of the urban poor areas of Baghdad did, as demanded by Commander In Chief President Clinton, with his belief that you must have an Iraqis Government left so that you can negotiate Peace, so Iraqis Government, Iraqis Government Buildings, etc. were out of bounds (Restricted from targeting). Do you even know what would have happened to us if we got caught while on the outskirts of Baghdad conducting Target Damage Assessments (but not allowed to do Targeting per President Clinton.), regardless of our oppositions about killing the poor of Islam.

Rick-525236 - and got rid of ObL and al-Qaeda to boot.

STOP ALREADY, I told you before Osama Bin Laden was NOT the Mission, until 5 years later after the 9/11 2001 Attacks AFTER President Bush Amended the US No Assassination Policy in 2006 regardless of the US Congress' Oppositions (as now a "Rogue Nation" can declare anyone a Enemy and assassinate them, especially US Politicians, according to the Harvard International Law Review US No Assassination Policy On the Offensive).

You just like the US Politicians keep attempting to downplay the INTERNATIONAL Al Quada FRANCISE. Think McDonalds as a Franchise. Except in the case of Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadist Organization Al Quada they are supported Worldwide, with Funds of Trillions USDs each year.

And instead of pushing Burgers and "would you like fries with that" at a McDonalds Franchise, they are pushing and fighting for Fundamentalist Islam as for Fundmentalist Islamic Believers, Islam is ALL, ALL Politics, ALL Laws, ALL Religion, ALL Ways of Life (and Death), All Culture, ALL Beliefs, etc. that superceed the politics, laws, religions, ways of life, cultures, beliefs, etc. of all other Nations (borders not recognized), as Islam is NOT your restrictive limiting western term of "Religion".

The extent that Al Quada (Shia) will go, is evidenced by even pissing off those that provide Al Quada with Support Worldwide, Fundamentalist Islamic (Shia) Republic of Iran. As the Russian Federation is an Ally of the Fundamentalist Islamic Republic of Iran, and so is President Assad of Syria (Sunnis) as the Russian Federation Port of Tartus, Syria. It is known that Al Quada Syria (Shia) is the Majority of the Rebels at Syria; just like the Majority (80%) of the Rebels at Libya were Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadists of Al Quada Saudi Arabia (AQ), Al Quada Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), Al Quada Syria (AQS), Al Quada Yemen (AQY), Hezbollah, Al Quada Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), etc..

To assist President Assad of Syria (Sunnis) against Al Quada Syria (Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadist Shia) the Russian Federation sent their Admiral Kuznetsov Aircraft Carrier Battle Group (larger than a USN Aircraft Carrier Strike Group) to the Port of Tartus Syria, 2012. In response to what is happening at Syria the US has redeployed US Military Forces that left Iraq and went to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia to Jordan.

DAvid, you have misunderstood my statements.

... that is what we do, exploit the Political Involvements (interference) to cause defeats.

And in that way (among others) politics is a part of war. Politics is always a part of warfare. The problems come about when we let politics hamper instead of enhance our war efforts. Politics is a tool just like any other - it can help or hurt our efforts.

Rick-525236 - I believe that al-Qaeda would have risen anyway.

david-475776 - That could have been nipped at the bud, before they even became well known.

This may be true; but what would have risen in it's place? Are you suggesting that no other group would have ever formed to fulfill the basic desire of the militants for religious supremacy?

Rick-525236 - I think that it was the inevitable consequence of the growth of radical Muslim factions.

david-475776 - Do NOT underestimate the size, scope, funding of Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadists...

And where have I given any indication that I have downplayed their role? While tithing may be mandatory; where and how those funds are utilized is not. And even though Shiite Muslim fundamentalists can be dangerous, the Sunnis have their own fundamentalists that can be just as dangerous (Salafi). In fact bin Laden was Sunni.

I think that the Saudi govt. commited a major fau paux by pouring so much money into Wahhabi madrassas worldwide. I believe that the investment of oil revenues from us (and the rest of the world) into these fundamentalist schools is a major factor in the current (and future) rise of fundamentalist Islamic militants.

Rick-525236 - Osama and al-Qaeda would have formed even without our first intervention in Afghanistan. Osama felt that we had cheated Muslims out of tons of money by paying the going rate for oil

david-475776 - That is NOT the reason Osama Bin Laden and Fundamentalist Islamic Jihadist Organization Al Quada were formed, it was because of Fundamentalist Islam versus US (Christians, Jews, Unbelievers),...

That is precisely my point - and the reason behind my statement in #1.42 " but, if it weren't for one excuse, things would have happened for another." The "reasons" that bin Laden gave were nothing but excuses to hide his true purpose. Fanaticism often relies on having an adversary for it's growth and it's sustainability. For many radical Muslim fundamentalists that adversary is the US, and nothing we do is going to fundamentally alter that point of view. Until Americans realize this, they will constantly be shooting at phantoms - trying to point the finger at this or that as the reason for why the fanatics don't like us. The fundamentalists present disinformation - and exploit the uncertainty that results from it.

david-475776 -The first action that incited Osama Bin Laden against the US was the 1998 US Military Operation Desert Fox,

On this I would beg to differ. By Osama's very own words he had eyes on the US (and even fought against us) since the 80's. Desert Fox may have given bin Laden a much needed "legitimate" excuse; but - again - it was merely an excuse.

david-475776 - STOP ALREADY, I told you before Osama Bin Laden was NOT the Mission, until 5 years later after the 9/11 2001 Attacks ...

Then perhaps you can explain why Clinton sent the cruise missiles into Afghanistan well before that time. It may not have then been politically expedient to blatantly defy our law against assignations; but, the elimination or removal of bin Laden was "A" goal nevertheless - albeit a covert one.

Thanks David for providing a welcome insight into our military operations concerning asymetrical warfare.

They are a lost cause. It's time to close the purse, packup out toys, and get out troops home before we lose any more. We need the troops at home guarding our own borders.

Well, we just tied another hand behind our back.

I agree.

That Karzai has to be protected by special US special forces.

What a way to fight battles with all hands tied and loads of manual!

Dbeckerny so we can get the hell out of that country. I do agreen with what you are saying, but it is way past time to get out and stop wasting lives and money on a country that is never going to change.

There can't be any tactical reason to give the insurgents a free home base in the middle of the fight. Get our troopers out of there and let those stupid rag-heads get on with their 14th century existence. We have already lost too many lives of our courageous heroes and have spent too much of our treasure and good will for this worthless piece of sh!t country and their worthless piece of sh!it sultanate.

I guess we forgot to get their permission to wipe our @$$ with toilet paper too! The "Pimp of Afghanistan" or President Karzai wants the U.S. and its allies to act as his personal body guards. So he wants his cake and eat it too! And we are the cake!

Ludin said when the night raids deal was concluded, work would start immediately on the wider security pact, which will require a vote of approval in the fractious Afghan parliament.

Imagine asking Hirohito to agree to Allied security measures for Japan after the war, especially, when they surrendered to us; or perhaps Adolph Hitler for Germany had he not committed suicide?

It is not hard to come to the conclusion that Karzai is the Taliban's little spy beech. Whether the U.S. and our allies know this is another question. What they intend to do about it is another matter.

We have no more business in this toilet of a Third Word country - GET OUT!!!

I am with you.

Either fight wars with no rules as these al-Qaida and Taliban do or keep miles away.

I am strongly against doing Saudi & co dirty wars in Iran and Syria. We did enough with the Iraqi wars.

Either fight no-holds bar wars or just withdraw.

Carpet bomb that Paki staging areas and militant areas in Afghanistan.

If these are not acceptable, why put the soldiers through tortures? Why drain our tax monies into hell holes with most ungrateful people on earth.

Iran and Syria are NO, NO. Let them kill each other!

jus-passin-thru

We got an invitation to the party with 9/11

Rufnek 2001 News alert!! WE WON!!. Just not in the sense that you understand.( Obama= 1 Osama=0) FYI!! WE won in Iraq too. I would explain but I don't think you would understand that either.

Correction.....( America=1 Osama=0)

Afghanistan didn't attack you. Pakistan didn't attack you. If any country attacked you, it was Saudi Arabia. And Bush's only response was to his Saudi oil pals was to whimper "please don't do it again" if he even did that.

Leroy, need to get your head out of the sand and in to reality. Understand why the troops are there.

I really like the "ignore author" option! No more silly ramblings from leroy brown will be seen on my computer screen.