Results 1 to 20 of 1120

Thread: Winning the War in Afghanistan

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Thumbs up I don't disagree with anything you wrote.

    In fact, I strongly agree with virtually all of it. However, (he said, clearing throat), Uhhmm, are we being realistic in what we both agree would be beneficial. Seems to me:

    Your first two paragraphs are not only beneficial but easily achievable -- we really ought to get started on both those things. Today.

    The issues of not pressing Pakistan and local satisfaction with governance -- regardless of international desires or 'standards' are possible. Difficult but possible. The biggest problem with both would be, I think, getting the consensus required. That said, we should certainly try.

    However, with respect to not using NATO, recognition of the fact that borders are really becoming passe, the Pashto zone and the "legitimacy" issue, I suspect we can wish but are unlikely to see in our lifetimes. Unfortunately -- because those three and a half are quite important. The good news is that they are not necessary for the other issues to be pursued.

    You're of course correct about borders and wars. The British and the French have much to answer for in that respect. I suppose they can be forgiven to an extent as they just did what seemed right at the time but those fault lines they built have been problematic for many years -- and likely will be in the future...

    Thanks for the considered response; I'm old and retarded, all I can do is say Attaboy and agree -- you can push for those things as policies and I'm sure you are doing that. I wish you success.

    But I still don't think we can truly do a national strategy...

  2. #2
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,366

    Default Ink spot application

    The 'ink spot' paper reads well and fits COIN theory and practice. The first place to try it in Afghanistan are not "the usual suspect" provinces along the Durand Line, but the northern and other provinces where the local and national Afghan government has some impact. Maybe - from faraway - this is shoring up safer areas and not where the fighting is. Better try up north where there is a chance of success IMHO.

    Controlling the border with Pakistan is a seperate, related issue and simply unlikely to happen. All the high-tech tools sound grand and can we distinguish between traders in civil goods from arms carriers or refugees with personal weapons? No.

    davidbfpo

  3. #3
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    The article has a lot of systems thinking in it and should be viable if we choose to do it......but as Wilf said..... do we have the Political will to do it for X number of years.

    In "General Systems Theory" (cain't spell the guys name) the first popular book on the subject you will find that the first question to ask when analyzing a system is what is inside the system...then what is outside the system...then what is the material (boundary) that separates them. Pretty much all successfully COIN strategies I have seen follow this pattern whether by design or by default. The Perimeter/Boundary/Filter/Access Point and being able to control what or who comes in or out is the key IMHO.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •