• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Michael Yon in a Panic over Afghanistan

Frederik G said:
Nostradamus predicted 9/11, too.
[sarcasm]
Whoa...whoa...whoa....

Nostradamus predicted that there would be an eleventh day to the ninth month?  That man was pure GENIUS!!!!
[/sarcasm]
 
Predicting Sectarian violence in Iraq is on par with predicting a mugging in downtown New York.

The fallout from new weapons being used by Timmy? Well, we adjust tactics as required, and keep on fighting. And find out who provided said new weapons.
 
Scrooge_Des said:
Predicting Sectarian violence in Iraq is on par with predicting a mugging in downtown New York.

The fallout from new weapons being used by Timmy? Well, we adjust tactics as required, and keep on fighting. And find out who provided said new weapons.

... and there in lies the problem!  So, you find out that the weapons are Korean or Chinese, but purchased through any one of a dozen third party states.  What do you do about it?  NATO isn't even willing (yet), to deal with the Pakistani safe-zones where most of the Taliban are being trained, armed, rested, and cuddled.

Don't get me wrong, if I had my way there would be no safe-zone anywhere, ever, in any neighbouring country; I'd make Nixon look tame.  But that's just me.
 
FuzzyLogic said:
Don't get me wrong, if I had my way there would be no safe-zone anywhere, ever, in any neighbouring country; I'd make Nixon look tame.  But that's just me.
Now what exactly do you think the situation would be in Iraq if there was a group that ran across the border into Iran and the US hit them there?
Or the situation with Syria with Israel bombing Lebanon and hitting Hezbollah inside Syria?
 
midget-boyd91 said:
Now what exactly do you think the situation would be in Iraq if there was a group that ran across the border into Iran and the US hit them there?
Or the situation with Syria with Israel bombing Lebanon and hitting Hezbollah inside Syria?

I guess it all depends how long one plans on dragging out the inevitable.  If Afghanistan is winnable with safe havens in Pakistan producing a "spring offensive" each year, then stay the course.  If though, domestic support in Canada and elsewhere can be measured only in a few years then I think you know the end result.  Do you want to win in the long run, or do you want a repeat each year of the same thing.  Build a school, they burn it down.  Hier a teacher, they kill her; not to mention night letters on doors.

Call me a cynic, call me a realist, or just reckless … but it’s my contention that this conflict is heading the way of Iraq if something drastically different isn’t done.  There is more than a grain of truth in the enemy’s maxim, “You’ve got the watches, we’ve got the time!”  Extra-national safe havens are, were, and will always be the one single thing that enables insurgencies to outlast superior armies.  It’s like having a neighbour with dandelions … you can spray all you want, but new seeds never stop drifting in.

 
However, if we can get to a point where we are sitting on large portions of the Pakistan border and can provide concrete proof of the bad guys hiding out there, political pressure can be brought on them to get a grip.  As it is now, there is this big no-mans-land and PAK can claim that nobody is border jumping.  Everyone knows that is crap, but politics is a big childish game of "you can't prove it so it doesn't exist".  Heck, the PAK embassy is trying to say that Mulla Omar is in Kandahar conducting operations.  Article link You would think someone might have noticed him by now? 
Once the border is shored up, though, if PAK is held to some accounting and brow beaten into action the bad guys are going to be feeling pretty squeezed and trapped. 
Yes, and my sky is a rosy cotton candy colour. 
 
FuzzyLogic said:
... but they need casualties to get the effect they want.

Fuzzy, they already have casualties.
Our press are repeating ad nauseum on a daily basis that we have lost 40+ troops since 2002.....
 
FuzzyLogic said:
Call me a cynic, call me a realist, or just reckless … but it's my contention that this conflict is heading the way of Iraq if something drastically different isn't done. 

I'm on the ground in Iraq and I have a year and change in Afghanistan.  Afghanistan is not made up like Iraq so it does not have the capability to descend into the same type of ethnic violence.  Please consider the size and population of Pakistan before you so naively and cavalierly propose to bomb out areas of it.
  Finally consider that the USSF pers do not have nearly the presence or coverage in Afghanistan these days Michael Yon's commentary is tragically alarmist.
US Department of State distributed the same sky in falling stuff last year from him.






 
Wow, this guy is clearly on somthing and I'm willing to bet its green. We should invite Mr. Yon to join us in the discussion..... :dontpanic:


As for intervention on behalf of or inregards to Pakistan, it'll be hard to make them budge. The current government isnt in the most stable position, it very much depends on radicals to prop them up. Meanwhile they have the US breathing down their neck. It's a tough spot for President. Muz.....forget it... to be in.

He's being forced to walking a fine line between American backlash and domestic riots. Hence the title of his recent book, In the Line of Fire (or somthing very close to that effect)

Its clearly having an impact on the situation our boys face, making it much harded to sort out this problem, but its we all know its going to be a process and a half to restore A-stan. For the time being, the Pakistan army's "attemps" to clear the border region will have to do... It'd be nice if we co-ord our fire plan with thiers :threat:
 
Desert Fox said:
He's being forced to walking a fine line between American backlash and domestic riots.

Agreed.  But he still has plausible deniability in his favour, and the only people who can say for a certainty are the secret squirrel types and they aren't going to give it up. 
 
zipperhead_cop said:
Agreed.  But he still has plausible deniability in his favour, and the only people who can say for a certainty are the secret squirrel types and they aren't going to give it up. 

Or will they?  ;)  (probably not)
 
There is a big difference sending in surgical assets to eliminate the occasional target of opportunity, and sending in troops and support to wipe out a village that is a training center.
  We get away with the covert stuff, taking risks and occassionally losing whole teams.  But a conventional attack would topple Musharef (sp).

This is COIN, where everything you do has a strategic impact, down to the troop in the back of a LAV who throws candy or fuel tablets (as candy)
 
Back
Top