Safe Haven(s) in a new thread?
Thanks Dayuhan:
Quote:
Straying a bit from the thread topic, but I expect David will sort that out...
Yes I will. The issue of safe haven(s) for AQ and other terrorist groups has appeared before, so I'm not sure if there is an alternative home for these posts, if not a new thread will emerge.
The new consolidated thread on safe haven, sanctuary, sanctuaries and ungoverned spaces is called 'Sanctuary or Ungoverned Spaces:identification, symptoms and responses':http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ead.php?t=3905
A "too true" -- and a not likely...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gurkha
I think you guys are being too hard on yourselves or have extremely inflated opinions about the abilities of your armies !!
Accurate assessment on your part and correct on both counts. The latter problem leads directly to the former. That uncharitable opinion is also influenced heavily by US domestic -- and electoral -- politics. JMA is right to assert that both the Politicians and the Generals bear responsibility for most of the errors (of commission and omission...) but the US milieu virtually demands that the Generals accede to anything, no matter how stupid, the Politicians want and that those Politicians (and by both affinity and direction, the Generals) never admit error. Dumb way to do business but we've managed to live with it for a couple of centuries...
Quote:
... you have a rabidly anti US country through which your major Lines of Communication pass. I think that you're doing pretty well for now. My solution : shore up the moderates, Hazaras, Shias & Tajiks, kick the Pakis in the balls while you skedaddle.
Sound advice. Regrettably the US Foreign Policy 'establishment' would have conniption fits at the mere thought the 'unequal treatment' thus shown -- or of admitting that the entire early moves were ill advised. They will also dismiss that last part, they having never subscribed to the reality that if one grabs an opponent there, hearts and minds will follow.