Ambassodor Crocker goes off the reservation
Ryan Crocker does not mince any words when discussing the current situation in Afghanistan in this story.
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...-reckoned.html
Lastly and most interesting to me Amb Crocker said it is possible that another 9-11 could be launched from a Taliban II controlled Afghanistan and he said this about promises.
Quote:
Crocker also warned of a possible bloodbath if the U.S. pulls out before ANSF is ready to take over. "Who gets it in the neck? It's all those people we made all those promises to, starting with the women" of Afghanistan who have struggled for civil rights and education in the male-dominated society, Crocker said.
This was a very interesting story.
"Taliban get back-Stand by for Al Quida."
That is what Amb Crocker said in the presentation I linked to. He said the links between the two are still strong and if a 9-11 were to occur here again, it would most likely originate from a Taliban controlled Afghanistan.
You all MUST listen to this presentation. He does not mince words. It is the best thing I've heard on this in a long long time.
I agree with this, not that I know anything....
Originally Posted by Bill Moore:
Quote:
Our overt occupation of Muslim lands is absolutely essential to AQ and related groups' propaganda. Best to transition this war to the shadows, which we are now well prepared to do. We weren't well prepared to do this prior to 9/11. Afghanistan won't become a safe haven that we won't disrupt again.
To which Slap replied:
Quote:
That should be tattooed on the inside of our senior leaderships skulls (both elected and non-elected). Highlight was added.
I mentioned this elsewhere, but I seem to be the odd one out in that I agree with carl's diagnosis to some extent but disagree with his cure....
What I mean is that safe havens are not "inert" lumps of soil, simply spaces on a map, and are not necessarily interchangeable. Safe havens have a meaning to the people that use them --emotional and personal and ideological -- and some safe havens have access to militaries, especially retired military well trained in certain activies and arts. These safe havens have well-developed networks that reach back to other parts of the world, whether it be Europe, Africa, or simply back into cyberspace.
I no longer trust assessments on intelligence from, well, pretty much anybody (that is not directed at anyone here : ) ) I mean, who knows, you know?
All that being said, I agree that conventional forces and occupying forces are the wrong way to go, they infuriate the local people (naturally so) and the results do not justify the expenditures in blood and treasure. In short: it don't work.
But on the "one safe haven is the same as the other" stuff, I'm not so cavalier....I look at it as nodes within a network that have a certain prominence to them, which may change over time, but then again, the node may have a meaning outside of our mirroring look at them; seeing what we want to see.