The 5 Biggest Insults to American Manhood by the Rules of Engagement in Afghanistan
2. It Spoils Them Rotten
As West spells out in frustrating detail, the nation-building policies of the last two administrations have made welfare clients rather than allies out of Pakistani villages. Even if you think that counterinsurgency programs rather than counterterrorist missions are a wise policy, all carrot and no stick is doomed to fail.
Thus, our military became a gigantic Peace Corps, holding millions of shuras, drinking billions of cups of tea, and handing out billions of dollars for projects. Risk in battle was avoided because generals proclaimed that killing the enemy could not win the war. Senior officials fantasized that the war would be won by protecting and winning over the population. The tribes however, were determined to remain neutral, while the Afghan president tolerated corruption and ineffectiveness. The futile effort to build a democracy diverted the energies of our soldiers and weakened their martial spirit.
For years, Pakistan was in the hunting-bin-Laden business, to the tune of $2 billion a year. If they actually had “found him” it would have been nice publicity, but that would have ended that particular gravy train.
Of course, as Flynn details in The Last Man, the ISI, the Pakistani intelligence agency, was neck deep with bin Laden from the beginning — and the location of his ultimate hiding place only adds to the suspicion that that association did not end after 9/11.
Our policy now is of continuous handouts to tribal leaders whose hands are constantly out, but who will do nothing to help us against the Taliban because they know there is a date certain where we will be gone and they will be on their own. All the while we do nothing to make them regret coddling the terrorists.
I read an article about some whining by Army brass, in a _Foreign Policy_ article, about how our killing by drone campaign in AfPak could not, by itself, produce victory in a “counterinsurgency campaign”. These guys are unhappy that war is about politics, and in particular that the US government responds to presssure from the American people to keep foreigners from killing us at home. 9/11 didn’t happen for them.
Sure it would be nice if President Obama and the Democrats would educate the public, and whining Army brass, about broader things than whack-a-jihadii. But we’re stuck with whack-a-jihadi while the ****ers keep coming after us.
The Army brass will be even more upset when the American people go full Jacksonian and give the Army’s budget to the Air Force for a more thorough and final solution to the jihadii question.
We shouldn’t be surprised. Just consider the best-seller “All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten”. We in the United States are in the process of re-inventing the human being. We just neglected to send the Muslim World the memo!
(I almost said “We in the West”, but then I remembered France’s recent operations in Mali. I wouldn’t be surprised if they had some “Eric Sevareid” moments there too.
I’ve often wondered; what if Bush had gone Full-Postal at Tora Bora in December 2001 and used hundreds of Daisy-Cutters and earth penetrators?
“I’ve often wondered; what if Bush had gone Full-Postal at Tora Bora in December 2001 and used hundreds of Daisy-Cutters and earth penetrators?”
Got ol’ Bin Laden and a bunch of assorted Taliban and Al Qaeda nasties right then and there? Resounding victory, followed by only a nagging insurgency (banditry) most Afghans would find an annoyance? Nothing like decisive military action.
“…we will be gone and they will be on their ow.”
Definitely on their ow.
Afcrapistan is far more an insult to intelligence than to manhood.
A number of my high school teachers were Vietnam veterans (one special forces), or had served in other screw ups like Lebanon. They all said the same thing: the Rules of Engagement got in their way, cost lives and contributed to losing the engagements. The rules, they said, were written by generals concerned about their promotions and post-military careers, especially if they had political ambitions.
Today it is even worse. I’ve read that the Pentagon has some 20,000 lawyers who must approve of each little mission let alone broader policy. Practically every raid involving our troops has to have a lawyer to at the planning stage to make sure all manner of laws, particularly international laws, are followed to a T. I’m not saying that every patrol by troops in country is planned that way but you can bet that before they were sent forward every detail and every rule was sniffed by at least one lawyer.
During the build up to the Iraq invasion, a lot of folks I knew, particularly the military ones, were excited. I would tell them I thought it was a mistake because we didn’t have the ruthlessness to secure the peace once we beat Saddam. The enemy there quickly figured out our rules of engagement and how to use the press as a weapon. They have played us like a fiddle since. It was the same in Afghanistan.
Perhaps it’s time to send the lawyers overseas, attach them to infantry squads and make them walk point. After 6 months of doing that – if they survive – then they can write the rules of engagement.
I had always thought along the lines of the Soviet penal battalions. Putting them on point would expose real soldiers to danger. Putting the lawyers and others in their own units with security detachments and now drones watching to make sure they did their job would be safer. But then, dropping them deep in enemy territory by themselves with bounties on their heads would be safer still.
It’s another Alinsky principle kicking us in the ass. He said something like “Force your opponent to play by his own rules.” We think of ourselves as the “good guys.” The left has us convinced that “good guys” never do anything “bad” – like hurting the enemy. Never mind Afghanistan, they have all but convinced us that fighting WWII was wrong. So we’re paranoid, paralyzed by self-doubt and second-guessing.
GREAT IDEA! It worked so well for the Russians and for the British during the Second Afghan War…I’m amazed we haven’t chosen your BRILLIANT strategy, Commander Keyboard. LOL!
Ah yes, the British and Russians cliche trying to pass itself off as hiatorical analysis. Try to keep up Mittens the collumn is AGAINST occupying ala those 2 colonialpowers.
A major factor in America’s : Afghan Experience, is that when the loony wimp promoters hear the term : “High Noon”:, they think about global warming. If you want the hearts and minds of those who would kill you, double tap and then gut them.