The Times Online says the administration is now pressing Islamabad to fight after its disastrous peace agreement with the Taliban in the NWFP inaugurated a pell-mell retreat. Secretary of State Clinton and senior diplomat Richard Holbrooke urged Pakistan not to abdicate to the Islamic extremists as they moved closer to the capital itself. Meanwhile, Bill Roggio, who has been warning against the peace deal with the Taliban from the beginning, notes that Pakistani Rangers have been deployed on the outskirts of Islamabad.
Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, accused Pakistan this week of “abdicating to the Taleban”, which “poses a mortal threat to the security and safety of our country and the world”. … Mrs Clinton’s remarks followed a recent deal between Mr Zardari and the Taleban in the Swat Valley, allowing them to establish a fundamentalist enclave in the former tourist area in exchange for laying down their arms.
The Taleban have not disarmed, and this week its fighters poured out of Swat into the neighbouring district of Buner, taking control of government buildings and digging in at strategic positions around the major towns.
Advertisement
However, the administration itself has been talking about negotiating with the moderate Taliban for some time. Carlotta Gall, writing in the New York Times, said last month that preliminary talks had already begun. “Even as President Obama floated the idea of negotiating with moderate elements of the Taliban, Afghan and foreign officials here said that preliminary discussions with the Taliban leadership were already under way and could be developed into more formal talks with the support of the United States.” While it is difficult to equate the Pakistani agreement with any that Washington is contemplating, the Pakistani experience underscores how badly wrong ‘peace deals’ can go.
Bill Roggio says that military sources are astounded at the speed with which Pakistani resistance has collapsed. Some of his sources suggested that Pakistan lost an opportunity to defeat the Taliban and by turning to a policy of appeasement snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. While things could still be turned around, it meant the road back would be longer and harder than ever.
A senior intelligence official said the lack of response by the Pakistani government and military ensures a bloody fight. “The longer the state has deferred taking the Taliban head on, the stronger the Taliban has gotten,” the official said. “Any attempt to put the Taliban genie back in the bottle will result a major bloodbath. Assuming the Pakistanis make an effort to defend themselves, that is.”
The rout began with an ill-conceived peace agreement with the Taliban. The collapse of the Pakistani efforts to contain them unfolded with shocking speed. Roggio writes:
US military and intelligence officials have expressed horror at the speed of the Taliban advance and the lack of a strong response from the Pakistani government and military. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the sensitivity of the issue. … “The Pakistani Army is sitting on the sidelines as the Taliban march all the way to Islamabad’s back door,” one intelligence official said. “Why is the government putting inferior troops in the path of the Taliban, only to watch them get chewed up and spit out. Where is the Army? The Army is purposefully sitting on the sidelines, either demoralized by losses or unwilling to fight, while Pakistan is burning.”
A military officer said the Pakistani government missed its window of opportunity to contain the Taliban. “The time to stop this madness was five years ago, in Waziristan,” the officer said. “Instead, the government caved to the Taliban in North and South Waziristan, and this only emboldened them to conquer more and more territory. Now the Taliban is within reach of the capital, yet the government still seems to have no grasp on the threat.”
There may have been a major miscalculation, whose consequences are now creating grave concern in Washington. The Times Online used the “nuclear” word in its lede and added: “The US considers rooting out militant sanctuaries in Pakistan critical to success in the Afghan war. Washington is also worried about the security of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.”
From handshakes to worries about nukes. From “peace in our time” to the Battle of Britain. Once the overall design margin of a system has been eroded, failure when it comes manifests itself in a rapid cascade of events. The hidden stresses suddenly pile on each other and the structure, raddled with hundreds of weaknesses each minor in itself, collapses under their simultaneous impact. Today the United States is under threat on a number of fronts, from the Black Sea to cyberspace and South Asia. Since November 2008 America’s response to those challenges has been informed by a new set of assumptions about the nature of the world and the appropriate response to them. Now those assumptions will be put to the test. More than ever the United States needs good intelligence: about Pakistani intentions, the security of that country’s nukes, Taliban capability and foreign support against US troops. More than ever the public needs to know whether the world view of the new administration is part of the solution or part of the problem. Like the Islamabad, Washington will eventually find out.
“Moderate” Taliban? No such animal.
This one is not credible. Rather it looks mighty like the Pakistani army is trying to roll either the nominal “civilian government” by threatening not to protect them from the mountain barbarians, or to roll the Obama administration with the classic game from Blazing Saddles when the town discovers their new sheriff (Bart) is black, and all pull their guns on him. Sheriff Bart responds by pointing his own pistol at his head and threatening to shoot himself. “Hold it! Next man makes a move, the nigger gets it! “ The townsfolk believe he’s holding himself hostage and let him go.
This is not likely to work on the Obama administration given that Richard Holbrooke is its Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Holbrooke is a real hard case and his appointment indicates the Obama administration is serious about the area.
The time to really worry here is when a major factional fight erupts within the Pakistani army, because that is the group with the power in Pakistan. It could crush the terrorists like bugs, outside the tribal areas. The terrorists just don’t have the power, and only local alliances with tribes in the tribal areas keep them alive. Such a factional fight within the army would be pretty obvious if and when it happens. Andrew Krepinevich well describes a scenario for this in his recent 7 Deadly Scenarios: A Military Futurist Explores War in the 21st Century.
NONE of the threat indicators described in Krepinevich’s Pakistani collapse scenario is present at the moment. I.e., what is going on now is the Pakistani army trying to get something from either their own government, or from the U.S. government. What we are seeing is almost certainly a charade.
“While it is difficult to equate to compare the Pakistani agreement with with any that Washington is contemplating, the Pakistani experience underscores how badly wrong ‘peace deals’ can go.”
Entirely correct. Which is why are peace deal with the pro-Jihadist Sunni extremist groups in Iraq was such a profound mistake. The pay-off deals with American forces just allowed them to bide their time. They will tell any journalist that ask that they will never peacefully live under a Shiite-led government. The recent suicide bombings illustrate that clearly enough.
Knowing that her patron is negotiating with the Taliban is gutting the resolve of the elected government of Pakistan.
What’s important is matters still unknown to us.
Just what is Holbrooke-Clinton-Obama putting on the table?
General Petreus will urge the Big 0 to secure the nukes by using a rapid deploy strike force. The Big 0 will respond “ah, well, ah, ah , uh gee, well ah, ah, I’ll have my Attorney General investigate the matter”…and oh boy another crisis in which the Big 0 will be tested…and fail. India will be watching this closely and god only hopes that they have a plan to get the Paki nukes before the Taliban do. If the ISI control the nukes then its already too late.
#1, elementary teacher: you beat me to it; ditto
Anybody remember the fall of the Shah of Iran? We’re looking at Jimmy Carter II.
Well said, #5.
This could be a blessing in disguise. If central authority broke down in Pakistan then either the United States, India or NATO could launch lightning raids on Pakistan’s nuclear weapons infrastructure, nab all of their existing nuclear bomb pits and spike what’s left of their nuclear weapons production capability. This is probably way over Obama’s capability but someone or some nation should be having frank and meaningful discussions with the Indians about launching these raids.
It reminds me of a childhood fight I witnessed where one guy tried to kick the other guy in the family jewels while he was taking his coat off and missed.
“Heh,heh, I was just kidding “were his last words before a severe beatdown ensued.
We all knew these innocents abroad were in for some severe challenges, but no accounting for the dumbasses who were so enthralled with the Dream- Weaver-In -Chief that they ignored the mad world we live in. God help us.
He who makes deals with the Devil is a fool, as the Devil never really keeps his word. And beyond the incompetence of the fool is the imbecile who never realizes that the one he makes a deal with IS the Devil, despite the obvious horns and forked tail.
The folks in Pakistan were fools. I fear that our present leader in the US is an imbecile. God help us all.
I am shocked — Shocked! — at the lack of understanding of international affairs demonstrated by my fellow posters.
Clearly, Secretary Rodham-Clinton is already preparing to ask (humbly, of course) for a suitably strongly-worded declaration from the United Nations. That will automatically fix the problem, while gaining the US the respect of the whole world!
Anybody remember the fall of the Shah of Iran? We’re looking at Jimmy Carter II.
This is the obvious nightmare scenario. The problem then, as now, is that there is a very narrow window of opportunity to do something; and those somethings are all risky. Here is where the sum total of the political coalition that brought Barack Obama into power will come into play. While some parts of that coalition may recognize the danger and may in fact be acting right now to avert it, vast parts of it will either deny that a problem exists or maintain that the best course lies in accommodation. That means that if the crisis comes on Obama’s watch, there is some likelihood that the political preferences of the left wing coalition which constitutes a large part of his base will be served and the rest of the country will have the remainder of his term to ponder the consequences.
The shocking apparent collapse of the Islamabad’s response is reminder of how fast things can go downhill. Nobody can foresee the future and the status quo has a remarkable amount of momentum going for it, like a vast iceberg that cannot easily be shifted from its course, but once a crack starts, it can spread with lightning speed. That’s my a priori on this. My problem with Obama from the beginning was the potential downside to his actions in a crisis were huge. They don’t have to happen, and I think we ought to watch out for a partisanship that guarantees that the worst comes to pass, though it goes without saying bad things may happen anyway precisely because they are perceived as good things, as the Swat peace deal once was.
#5 & #6, this fall has been a long time coming. Pakistan has been a failed state for years. It was Mushy who started making deals with the terrorists which were obviously a bad idea. It’s hard to blame O for this. What could he do to prevent the fall of Pakistan? Send in the marines? It’s up to the Pak govt to sink or swim.
If so, we’b better get away from the Afghanistan hole, there isn’t any hope there
It’s hard to blame O for this. What could he do to prevent the fall of Pakistan? Send in the marines?
Assigning blame for things past is pointless, although it is a time-honored tradition of the Democratic party throughout the last eight years. The question is: what, if anything, will he do about it other than to mouth platitudes that are supposed to demonstrate his moral superiority?
Speaking of ill-conceived plans…it gets even better:
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/197420.php
Still deciding on whether the bus is being driven by complete idiots, clumsy opportunists, or Quislings.
But I won’t be dwelling on it that much longer…
I do have some faith that the Pakistani army and other powers that be are ready to cut the knot at the right time, as Krauthammer and Wretch and others have suggested.
HOWEVER, it’s hard to be 100% confident in that intuition when there have been so many absolutely abject surrenders of common sense all along the line over so many years that it strains credulity to imagine that, somehow, the Court will spring into efficaciousness.
I know gallows concentrate the mind, but I’ve begun to doubt there is a mind there. I hope so. If they had any brains, and things really depend on some kind of deal, now would be the time for Pakistan to communicate that Kashmir is now India’s, it would cut off all support for JI & Co. – it would just appreciate if India would not interfere while Pakistan takes care, once and for all, of its ancient problem. I guess we’ll see.
I was only 3 when the Iranian revolution happened though – is this what it looked like from the USA?
Pakistan WILL fall to the Taliban, it’s guaranteed. Period.
It’s guaranteed because the internal contradictions of Obama and Dems: hating America and it’s people while wanting to run it, have come straight up against hard, angry, lean men who want to be not just regional leaders but aspire to “Greatness” as a Mega-Regioonal leader. The new Osama.
And once Pakistan falls to the Taliban two things happen:
1. An Alamo like fight with all the US forces that cannot airlift out getting massacred or death-marched, and a miserable defeat followed by Obama groveling and begging once more …
2. And losing several at least US cities to nukes from “shadowy” organizations that are fronts for the Taliban.
Whatever happens,
they have got
the nuclear bomb
And we have not
… the will.
We are looking CONSERVATIVELY at the death of about 20,000 US troops in Afghanistan, probably higher, and the death of about 6-12 million civilians in the US. THAT is the cost of playing Yuppie cool morality tales, and appealing to the “young, hip” crowd that worships Obama: Women (see Megan McCain), Gays, SWPL Yuppies, and so forth.
Who lack any realism about the nature of the threats and the cost of it. The people AFTER Obama is yanked from office will not be pols. We might get a Petraeus or some other limited care-taker, or we might get Ron Paul or someone like him currently unknown. There is a huge gap between security and pols particularly Reps pushing the issue. Dick Cheney has been the only one with any courage to take on Obama.
Now Obama is focused on demoralizing the CIA which will do NOTHING about Pakistani nukes or anything else, the military (with release of “abuse” photos), show trials for the Bush Administration, CIA, and the Military, release of hardened killer Uighur Jihadis in the US from Gitmo (who will be given Welfare) and general groveling before foreigners. That gets Obama the approval of the female-dominated media and Megan McCain, but does not prevent a total disaster. It does point to his mindset: no real view of a downside of a nuclear attack on the US or wipe-out of the Afghan forces. Heck Obama would welcome both, anti-American to his core as the man is.
Obama could probably impose a “soft” (per Mark Steyn) female-supported PC police state on the US after a series of Madrid-London bombings. “Too big” and people both desperately angry (the Afghan Death March will be all over the International Media) and fearful (after NYC and others die) is simply unsupportable.
The true bill for stupid Anti-Americanism is coming due. Even to Megan McCain.
It’s hard to blame O for this.
I don’t think the O can be blamed for any policy which he didn’t initiate or continue. But his own attempts to negotiate with the Taliban indicate that the administration was not averse to the negotiation track. More tellingly, Holbrooke’s quest for a grand bargain suggest to me that Washington, including the Obama administration, possibly underestimated the gravity of the situation because attaining a grand bargain requires more time than we may have.
I agree with TCobb that we are facing a marginal cost decision. Whatever happened in the past, the question is which path leads to best outcome now.
While many of us here at BC believe obama is sending out the wrong messages, both domestically and internationally that is not the case with a majority of Americans.
By now most of us have seen the polling on the “right” direction the country has now embarked.
We have had good discussions on how to escape what we know are wrong policies and April Glasby signals obama is sending.
There is no escaping. The question is, have we reached the tipping point in a multitude of vital areas, financial, military, and philosophical.
I believe we have. I also believe this nation will be in a civil war within five years. Should the Chinese cease buying our debt it could be sooner as obama institutes more draconian measures on moral and ethical compacts that have existed now since the 1930′s..that being Social Security and a failure of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
Those are two very non definitive tipping points. They are simply two of hundreds of variables that if they find failure then civil unrest is as predictable as the need for oxygen is to human life.
Tipping points. Past the point of no return in severity and number. Let’s see your war face.
I heard the news and I cried out “Oh, gadzooks!
What’re they gonna do about those Paki nukes?”
And that Taliban man with a big read button
Who’s gonna turn New York to great big nothin’.
Nothing but a smokey grimey fallout haze,
Yeah, that’s enough to ruin any good day.
And what they’re doing down in old Islam-a-bad
Should’ve been enough to make the feminists mad.
Their women kept veiled in those burqas long
Are even now singing out a ululating song
Barefoot and pregant, how the their children soon
Will grow up to be jihadies who will bring us doom
And that they’ll make America go bing bam boom.
dan…the problem is that it’s a question of minds, would that there was a single ‘decider’.
The players are: the pro-taliban pols, the anti-taliban pols [and their respective supporting population groups...],the autocratic elites, the military, and the ISI. Who squares off against who has yet shake out…fully.
One sure indicator as to where things are heading is…who’s fleeing [or whose families are being sent away]. Sadly, that will be the best indicator. I’d like to think that the key players would have the stones to stick it out, but past actions tell me other-wise.
In answer to your final question: no, the end of Iran’s secular world came as a mighty rush at the end. Of course, they [current ruling elites...] had Carter greasing the rails for them, among other things.
My contempt for that man will be eternal; God forgive me for saying it, but the world will be ever-so-slightly safer when that man is gone to his final judgment.
Dan, what it looked like in the US, apart from lines of cars at gasoline filling stations, was not much of anything. At least not until that Reza-Pahlevi fellow, ill with cancer, took refuge in the U.S. and the Iranian “students” countered with taking the entire US Embassey hostage.
Then what it looked like was the yellow-ribbon thing, the candle light vigils, and other such tools of statecraft. The media, notably ABC News with their creation of Nightline just for the occasion played along. It was “Day 10 of the Hostage Crisis” and later on “Day 30 of the Hostage Crisis.” If I remember correctly, it got into triple digits.
Early on, the “Day N of the Hostage Crisis” was part of the yellow-ribbon and candle light vigil response, but as the thing wore on, this manner of media coverage became almost a nag at the impotence of the Carter Presidency. It became a self parody, both of what was happening (or not happening) and of the way the media covered it.
The whole episode engendered a goodly amount of closeted hatred in the recesses of the American consciousness toward Persians and towards the Middle East in general. I remember reading something on a toilet stall wall at an otherwise progressive institution of higher learning that I won’t repeat here. Of course they hated us more than we could hate them on account of that Commie Guy we kicked out to put the Shah in, and we remain the Great Satan and Death to America.
So it is just like the anti-Barney — I hate you, you hate me, and so on. And so it continued until Lt Colonel Oliver North’s “neat idea” where we were trading parts for Hawk anti-aircraft missile batteries for hostages held in Lebanon — does anyone recall the treatment of US captives in Lebanon and why some of us have good feelings about Camp X-ray?
As I understand it, we were in some way violating our tough stand against hostage takers, but we were having an actual dialog with at least some faction in Iran, and Iran was armed with aging US anti-aircraft rockets instead of the latest Russian models, and Israel (Israel!) and Saudi were acting as the go-between (the famous Country Number 1 and Country Number 2).
So there was a time when you were 10 that we were actually talking to the Iranians as Mr. Obama so wishes to do, and I even remember there was a cake exchanged as a neighborly gesture, but a certain Special Prosecuter would not take yes for an answer and I think you now know The Rest of the Story.
From ABC News.
I said two days ago that case officers in the field were seeing their HUMINT assets drying up and simply walking away in light of obama
ABC headlines:
Former CIA Official Says Former Colleagues ‘Don’t Believe They Have Cover Anymore’
Now we have a situation where our case officers are getting out of the CIA. I lived through this once. This country will be unimaginably more vulnerable within months.
No indigineous assets; no CIA covert operators. This isn’t good. obama is a clear and present danger to this country.
http://tinyurl.com/d6ycwj
Obama’s actions, and advanced perceptions of what his actions were likely to be, have certainly emboldened the Taliban.
As to Whiskey’s comments…Ragnarok in Pakistan will be Dear Leader’s ‘fish or cut bait’ moment. Sure, he’ll loudly proclaim ‘it’s all Bush fault’, but that will only gain him a breath or two before the wall falls on him. If he fails to secure the Paki nukes, the MSM cloak of protection won’t be able to cover his sorry ass for two milliseconds…and no, making the military the ‘fall guy’ won’t fly either.
Abandonment of the Afghan Area forces [not to mention all the NATO troops present...] would be the end of his administration. Americans don’t look kindly on quitters, they’re even less kindly towards clueless, timid leaders [see Carter's current 'street-cred' with average 'normal' American...screw the moonbats, they're a minority amongst the general population].
All of the current Beltway ‘street theater’ would disappear like a puff of smoke should Ragnarok come.
One other point, if you think Cheney’s noisy now, you ain’t seen nuthin yet. He’ll become DL’s worst nightmare…and he’ll get all the air-time he needs [and I might add, turn into the defacto head of the Repubs in the process]. And as to Petraeus, he’ll be too busy with his own ‘Chosen Reservoir’ moment to worry about the goings-on back here…but if anybody could pull it off, he could.
what, if anything, will he do about it?
What, if anything, CAN he do about it?
The Pak military can muster over 1 million men. They surely have superior weapons and training than the Taliban. There is no way that the Taliban can win against that force if the Pak military chooses to win.
It’s up to the Pak leadership to choose the right path to win. I can only hope that it’s not too late but I don’t see what influence O has in this. He can/could attempt to pressure the Pak govt towards one or another outcome but it’s their decision. They haven’t done so well up til now.
Securing the Pak nukes is something the US military has planned for for a long time. All O can do is say Go. He could dither, or not say Go, but if he says Go then whether the nukes are secured or not is up to the military.
I don’t know. It shouldn’t be too tough to track down & take out the taliban leaders if the Paki ISI are sufficiently frightened of the consequences of a Taliban take over.
But I thought I read a just a few weeks ago in those bastions of truth and news that the Al Qaeda was falling apart because of all those clever Predator strikes that were “de-capitating” the leadership of Al Qaeda?
And now, al Qaeda and the Taliban are close to their biggest victory ever; the capture of a nuclear armed state.
Where is A.Q. Khan in all this mess? Which side is he on? Now that he is no longer under house arrest, what is he up to?
Consider the weaknesses and defeats of “our side” in Pakistan in the last few years;
Musharaf ousted
Benazir Bhutto assasinated
A weak civilian government installed
Compromise after compromise with the Taliban in the Northwest Provinces
No wonder the Pakistan Army is unwilling to fight. They have been demoralized by the leadership of their country (or paid off). Is this the ultimate victory of the ISI against the westernized ‘elites’ of Pakistan? One wonders how much money from patrons in the House of Saud is going to the Taliban and friends in Pakistan.
Iranian proxies fight in Gaza and Lebanon against the Little Satan, Israel, while the proxies of the militant, anti-western House of Saud fight for control of Pakistan and the following larger war against India (after clearing the flank and expelling the US and Nato from Afghanistan). I wonder just who has the shrewder strategy?
In my opinion, Obama has no ability to make a bold and daring foreign policy decision of any kind, and he is also in the process of cutting the legs and the guts out of his intelligence system just when he needs them the most. Regardless of what we may think of his ultimate values, he is definently not a strategic thinker, and I doubt that there is anyone in his administration that is.
Taliban’s latest excuse / reason is that they’re upset and angry about white women soldiers in the American army coming into their dreadful little country. I wonder just exactly how they’ll respond once Hillary tries negotiating with them.
I don’t understand all the hyperventilating about the Taliban taking over Pakistan. Just nuke the whole country and be done with it. Who will complain?
Am I wrong here, (or wrong for thinking wishfully) but all we need are just one boomer skipper and XO who are willing to step out of the box?
The MIRV’s go up, they come back down and some problems go away.
Average Pakistani has something like a “Catholic guilt” about Islam–they can’t bring themselves to believe that the Taliban need to be killed–this is not a perfect analogy, nor am I the best person to bring this news, but something like this is part of the answer to the puzzle of why the Pakistani military is rolling over passively in the face of the Taliban.
Things are scary on the subcontinent–we see India afraid to retaliate for Mumbai attack, which seems pretty clearly (I don’t think I’m out on a limb here) fomented by LeT, which is handmaiden of ISI. USA cannot easily count on India–India is more like a European country (not in wealth, obviously, but I mean in terms of its elites buying into anti-US/afraid of riling up the Muslims type of thought). There are some good people in India, but they are not in charge. BJP party seems on surface to be better, and a lot of them are, but even they are kind of corrupt.
Whole situation is bad people taking over because good people do nothing.
Jamie Irons,
Thank you for the nice comment on previous blog-post–haha, you are making me feel pressured now to make sure I make good points!
Nahncee said: “Taliban’s latest excuse / reason is that they’re upset and angry about white women soldiers in the American army coming into their dreadful little country. I wonder just exactly how they’ll respond once Hillary tries negotiating with them.”
Nahncee, for some reason, your statement reminded me of an old saying: Where the Devil cannot enter, he sends an old woman.
Only Satan himself could have dreamt up such a nightmare scenario as the current situation in Pakistan, and with his inimitable sense of humor, will send an “old woman” to do his work….
Just nuke the whole country and be done with it. Who will complain?
Haha–this is what we Hindus (also, Sikhs) would say growing up in India. I’m a naturalized American (at Jefferson’s Monticello, no less!) now, though, c’mon, we need to recognize the inherent humanity of the average Pakistani, who is not a Taliban! USA does stand for something! Let’s wipe out the Islamists, yes–doesn’t mean killing 170 million Pakistanis (who are, let me be clear, not exactly my “cup of tea”).
How do we know the collapsing defense of Islamabad isn’t intentional? Far too much of both the military and ISI are Taliban sympathizers, and I bet a bunch of the civilian leadership is too.
Arthur Keller, in Propaganda and Peace Deals: The Taliban’s Information War in Pakistan, on page 15 of the July, 2008 CTC Sentinel foresaw Pak collapse. Highly effective Taliban PSYOP described.
“Any U.S. plan to combat Islamist extremism that relies on effective ground action from the Pakistani Army, the FC, or the Khasadars will fail.”
30. RaviT:
“Average Pakistani has something like a “Catholic guilt” about Islam–they can’t bring themselves to believe that the Taliban need to be killed– . . . but something like this is part of the answer to the puzzle of why the Pakistani military is rolling over passively in the face of the Taliban. ”
Pakistan is 95% Muslim. Doesn’t that tell anybody something?
33. RaviT:
“Let’s wipe out the Islamists, yes–doesn’t mean killing 170 million Pakistanis (who are, let me be clear, not exactly my “cup of tea”).”
Are you sounding like a good old boy Texan talking about Mexicans? You can always volunteer in the armed forces. I’m not defending the Islamists, it’s your macho attitude.
Are we really ready for Socialism,with a dominative Muslim religion? We’re head there.
I think that if Pakistan really goes into the sh*tter, and we have to think about getting our people out of Afghanistan, we’ll probably make some sort of deal with the Indians for them to punch through and open a corridor — they’ll be scared sh*tless of the Paki nukes and they can probably beat the Pakis in a stand up fight, especially if the US is giving the Indians tactical and intelligence support. Signs that something along these lines is coming would include a shift in the way our air and logistical support for Afghanistan is based – right now we have a lot of assets in Pakistan. If we begin to draw down there, katie bar the door!
The Taliban is not in a vacuum…
The “Big O” wants to “talk” to the moderate Taliban..
He sent and spoke with Hamas and Syria BEFORE he was even elected…
Yep Moderate “Beheaders”
Look at a world Post Obama:
Pakistan, Iraq, Somolia & Gaza state of war failed states
Russia gobbling up more of Georgia
North Korea selling its rockets to Iran
Cuba enjoying a new influx of cash from ex-pat’s to families (after cuba taking 10% off the top)
Iran having 10 -12 nukes
On the bright side? Israel will be cuckolded… Poland will be cuckolded… Japan will have to build it’s own nukes to counter nkor… Asia will crap when Japan re-militarizes…
Thank all that is holy for the promised one..
Just remember- whatever catastrophic policy The Self-Exalted One decides to put into motion, no matter how badly it turns out, it will really be The Right Thing To Do.
How do I know? Why, because Joe Biden, Vice President and Formerly The Smartest Man in The United States Senate, says so.
Of course, he could be wrong- couldn’t he?
Yes, I’m being sarcastic. The point is, when Biden made that famously fatuous statement, he was serious.
I personally believe that the leftover Sixties burnout cases who compose the majority of the political compost in The One’s administration want a Vietnam-style “last helicopter out” defeat in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq so badly they can taste it. They want to relive their “triumph” when Saigon fell in 1975, and they then went on to gut the American military, and basically invited the Soviet Union to rule the world- with themselves, of course, as the “guiding lights” of the new, “enlightened” world order.
What these fools do not realize is that the people they are playing footsie under the table with now are on an entirely different level of motivation. They operate on an eschatological philosophy which boils down to “we are perfect, you are not us, therefore you must submit or die- and we reserve the right to kill you even then, in obedience to our beliefs”. With a side order of “We are willing to kill and die to fulfill our prophecies; either way, we win”.
Believing that someone with that sort of mindset can be “reasoned” with is as great and destructive a fallacy as the one Chamberlain took to Munich. Of course, he didn’t have to worry about nuclear weapons- then.
Perhaps the greatest fallacy of this administration’s policies in the region is the “if the Israelis were just more ‘reasonable’, we wouldn’t have any problems” one. True, the Taliban & Co. would like nothing better than to erase Israel from the map- but only as a first step toward the eradication of non-Islamist civilization from the face of the earth, including not just us, but any Muslims who don’t measure up to their standards of “piety”.
Sal-e-Hedin the Elder, aka Saladin, realized this when dealing with Hasan-ibn-Sabah and his Hashashin, the Taliban/al-Qaeda equivalent of his day. And he solved the problem by besieging, and finally burning, Hasan’s stronghold of Alamut, making sure that Hasan and his followers didn’t survive the experience. he at least understood the danger represented by fanatics with the ability to make their power felt at a distance.
What is more dangerous? Such fanatics with the ability to attack those they hate with hidden daggers- or with smuggled nuclear weapons?
The Self-Exalted One apparently either doesn’t believe that the Taliban & Friends represent any sort of danger, or if they do, it’s strictly a “local” problem in the Indian Subcontinent and the Hindu Kush, and thus nothing we need to worry about.
Well, thanks to his inability to grasp reality, that “local problem” is about to acquire nuclear weapons. Which makes them a “local” problem in any neighborhood they can get them to.
Including ours.
clear ether
eon
I have two hypotheses on the Pakistan’s military abdication to Taliban (Sharia rule).
The first is that fundamental islamicism has taken over the beliefs of lawyers and judges. Note the chief judge, that Musharaff deposed, was the one that refused to allow military to act against the Red Mosque that presidential action started the movement to get rid of Musharaff. The fundamentalists have infiltrated the lawyer class and the ISI and the lower levels of the military
Large populations in Pakistan have been very sympathetic to fundamentalist’s ideals.
Perhaps the refusal to fight the Taliban in the NW territories and to surrender the Swat Valley is that a good portion agrees with the Taliban. So the military are surrendering to allow the Taliban to win domination of Pakistan.
The other idea is that the military is using troops, police and allowing them to die and face the consequences of their support of the Taliban. Maybe the military is teaching the country a lesson of indulgence of Taliban rule. The politics of Pakistan has been tilting to fundamentalist and Wahabist teachings and the military may be throwing those in the military who side with those teachings to die in fighting the encroaching Taliban forces. It is a neat way to eliminate those infected with Taliban. The horror stories may enlighten those in Islamabad the dangers of Taliban and Sharia law indulgences that have been fostering in dialogue among the middle and upper classes. Maybe the military wants the civilian to really recognize the danger by allowing the Taliban to threaten Islamabad.
If so, that is dangerous since it is harder to take back territory once it is lost and hard of the families that have suffered under Taliban rule.
There is a parallel with Iraq that it took some time for the Sunni tribal clans to suffer under Taliban or AQ rule to decide that it was not a good idea and to reject that philosophy and decide the Americans were not worse.
We could afford that since it was not happening in America but the human cost was among the Iraqi’s. That is more dangerous tactic to take within one’s own country.
Vivo – macho may be politically incorrect and cartoonish, but this situation requires resolution and if macho is what it takes, let’s show some.
“Bill Roggio says that military sources are astounded at the speed with which Pakistani resistance has collapsed.”
Oh my. Don’t you just hate it when military sources are astounded?
Just last month, Wonder Boy said he would talk with moderate Taliban and everything would be ok.
There is no political reason, of course, that Pakistan’s shaky government should have tried to stand up to the Taliban at this point.
They clearly had been made aware that the United States of America was now led by BO, who is usually just looking for the next bush he can pee on to mark his territory.
Again, if it weren’t so serious, it would be a lot funnier watching our SSOS (silly SOS) get all mad about the enemy walking in and taking over, after she and her owner rolled out the red carpet for them.
41. what is occupation
“moderate beheaders”—I like that.
I’m sure bo will let us know as soon as he finds some.
With all due respect for the intelligent posters, I think the more economic explanation is political beinkmanship. The army is letting the taliban succeed to scare the Paki democrats-appeasers (PPP) into flight or abdication. The senior army principals could not take orders from clerics (their fate in any alliance with the taliban) or deal with a possible war with the West over islamist’s possession of the nukes. I see Mushy returning in a state of emergency to swat the taliban back to NWFP and Waziristan, covertly inviting Nato accross the border to help, while assuring India backchannel that the tough Nationalist rhetoric is just that.
hey
most are using the ”fall of iran” senario viz pakistan heading into the crapper. i see this more as the cuban fall under batista.
zardari is a pimp and a total con man. makes bastista look like cheney in terms of statecraft. the taliban tide is rolling in from the north. the majority of ”power pakis” could give on good shit any day of the week. the pathans are the low of the low by paki standards. its called the ”provinces” cause its out there and to far out of site to matter. this is also the region that the real paki troopers know like the back of their hand. they could put up a blistering fight if required.
before a total fall of pakistan, i see ex-president ”mush” and a band of old timers rally the troops to protect the real ”pakistan” -punjab, sind, etc. the wild card being the baluch separatists but they can’t be that keen on the t-ban…they have strategic importance with coastal ports like Ghawdar and possibly offshore oil.
so who will provide the front line defense for Islamadad and nuke sites.
forget the indians-absolutely spineless troops, inferior special forces-great job in Bombay huh…crap pilots in russian under maintained jets. pakis under general mush have already faced their best on the glaciers and the high valued indian forces didn’t measure.
besides the chaotic national elections, india is reeling from the economic downturn in key areas like food security and foreign remittances to bolster GDP. war just doesn’t seem in the cards.
the U.S. is well position in the region with Oman ”willing and able to provide logistical support” and Dubai -available to the highest bidder- with slick willy pimping for the dubai royal family in d.c..
so i feel we will be involved with the paki army special forces to protect the nukes. if you’ve been asleep this week heres’ the news flash, the NWFP-northwest frontier provinces just became part of Talistan. the real Pakistan could give a toss.
Afghanistan will be the war that never happened as our surface links are cut with the above political adjustments in NWFP.
soooo, looks like all the Emirates Airlines cargo and passenger planes that are sitting idle doing nothing in downtown dubai will get some service afterall. its amazing how little is being sent to Kabul via Dubai. doesn’t look like past operational mobs to an expanding war zone, at all.
i also anticipate a hugh pakis middle class exodus to the emirates that has surplus housing and a need to sell real estate and residency visas pronto.
hope i’m real wrong on the above, but its clear we are now more involved in Pakistan than Afghanistan, for better of worst.
There may be impious Taliban. There may be sinful Taliban. There are no moderate Taliban.
For months prior to the November 2008 election I warned that anyone willing to concede Iraq to al Qaeda and Iran was per se unfit to be CIC.
The unwillingness of the left to win the small war in Iraq has not only emboldened the enemy but has left America ill equipped psychologically to fight the bigger wars which will follow. Would you put your life on the line for Obama?
The problem is not so much that Obama won’t wage war but that the only war he wants to fight is against the legacy of George Bush. And buttressed by support from 90% of the media he’s clearly winning that war. But it will be a Pyrrhic victory. The wages of partisanship will prove burdensome indeed as developments in Pakistan and Afghanistan foretell.
What he and they don’t understand is they are waging war upon the America that defended America and the world for the past 8 years.
They didn’t do so perfectly, but the success achieved in the face of virulent opposition from within was as much as one could realistically expect.
Eggplant
If Pakistan ceases to exist, some of their nukes are going to get away. It is only a question of how many.
Then it is just a matter of where and how those nukes show up. Best case scenario is probably Iran. A likely scenario is that several nukes show up in American cities as “flaming datum”.
There are many good points raised regarding this article. For those who think we are going to swoop in and secure the Pak nukes, don’t assume that would be logistically easy or that Pak forces haven’t anticipated such a raid. This would be a challenge supreme even for our most elite, high end special forces soldiers.
Another point, the cadre of junior Pak officers who have been influenced by US training has been severly diminished due to our short sighted policy of punishing Pakistan after Musharaf took over. This is yet another legacy of the Clinton administration. It explains alot about loyalty and how people fail to percieve it’s long term importance. If Pakistan collapses its weak cadre of junior officers will have influenced the outcome.
The USA needs to secure the first nukes, then shock and awe the Taliban to their waiting virgins.
47. Flying Squirrel
Yeah. There’s a thought. I hope you’re right. That would be a nice surprise.
1. The Taliban can have Pakistan and Pakistan can have to Taliban, they deserve each other.
2. the taliban cannot have Pakistan and nuclear weapons.
3. The only way to prevent the nuclear weponization of Taliban is Obama.
I predict Hillary and Obama will talk, talk, talk until a mushroom cloud from a Nuclear VIED over Kabul or Kandahar then after a strongly worded protest from The US we will recognize the Taliban as a Nuclear power and we will stop fighting them.
Then to stop the real enemy from having Nukes Obama will bomb Israel.
Terry.44
“Vivo – macho may be politically incorrect and cartoonish, but this situation requires resolution and if macho is what it takes, let’s show some.”
Don’t go scaring Vivo now.
Let’s not go PC and start apologizing, even indirectly, for resolution and macho. Of course, the problem for this group is that they probably can’t “show some” since they apparently don’t have any.
Resolution and macho produce good results and are irreplaceable when the igoals are national security, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
I think we’re reaching a tipping point here. The “international community,” whatever that really is since all countries are only interested in their own narrow interests, isn’t going to do a thing to help Pakistan. And why should they? It’s easy for people to say, “Go in there and do something,” but who are the poor saps who are going to have to be sent in there to do the dirty work, let alone the killing and the dying. The United States already has two wars going on right now and a major push in Pakistan is out of the question. If Obama even thought about going in there for a prolonged period of time, he would lose all support with his far-left base and probably with most of America. There just isn’t any stomach here in the US to do much about this.
Having said that, where are the Pakistani people in all of this? I don’t see massive demonstrations in Islamabad against the Taliban. I don’t see people lining up to fight the Taliban. I don’t see the ISI coming out strongly against the Taliban. In fact, I’m not hearing much of anything in terms of protest from the bulk of the Pakistani people or press criticizing, let alone condemning, what the Taliban are doing. Doesn’t anyone here remember the Shah and the fall of Iran? Folks, we’re seeing an instant replay of a once capitalistic Muslim state turning into an absolute Muslim theocracy, only this time armed with nuclear weapons. Bin Laden was smart. He doesn’t have to buy nuclear weapons on the black market when he can get access to them once the Taliban are in power. The “international community” will stare in shock and disbelief, they will certainly protest at the United Nations, they will even (heavens) write nasty Op-Ed pieces in the New York Times. But they will still do nothing. Within months this game will be over.
Well, as the commercial went during the past presidential campaign, it’s 3:00 AM and the phone is ringing, Mr. President. Where do we go from here?
Appeasement. Doesn’t work in Pakistan either? Whodathunkit?
Wait a minute, we have to understand that this is all caused by America, especially George Bush, for the distraction of Iraq. If only we hadn’t gone into Iraq, Afghanistan would be as sweet and peaceful as New Jersey or California right now, and Afghanistan wouldn’t be threatening Pakistan’s stability.
Okay, just to be safe – SARCASM ON!
This is how the liberal fools in America view all world events, if anything is going wrong, it is clearly America’s fault. And now we have a liberal fool as President, who is objectively, relentlessly weakening America. And the liberals here praise his determination, as if sending 21,000 troops to Afghanistan now is BETTER than sending the 30,000 we were planning to send (for starters) before President Pantywaist took power (as the libs see it).
Attacking Pakistan, with their fairly modern air force, is going to take something on the scale of Desert Storm, not just a stealthy commando raid to snatch and grab their nukes.
Will Obama do anything like that? Well, let’s examine how the Obama teams views weakening and prosecuting the CIA for their successful defense of America in the war on terror under Bush…
Look at this, how faithfully ideological Obama appointees are, here’s Adm. Blair:
“The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security.”
He is saying the “damage” to our reputation “outweighed” preventing another 9/11? What damage? Have you been to the WTC lately?
Further in the article:
“Mr. Obama’s team has cast doubt on the effectiveness of the harsh interrogations, but in a visit to the C.I.A. this week, the president did not directly question that. Instead, he said, that any sacrifice from banning those tactics was worth it to uphold the nation’s belief in rule of law.”
In this case, “any sacrifice” including another 9/11 “was worth it?”
Do these people think America is invulnerable?
Dan,
You wrote:
I was only 3 when the Iranian revolution happened though…
Makes you the exact contemporary of the oldest of my four sons…
- is this what it looked like from the USA?
The way I remember that era, there were many, too many, disturbing similarities to the present situation.
Jamie Irons
5. watcher:
Anybody remember the fall of the Shah of Iran? We’re looking at Jimmy Carter II.
~~~~~~~~
This time the radicals will have nukes with their “new” country.
7. Eggplant:
If central authority broke down in Pakistan then the United States could launch lightning raids on Pakistan’s nuclear weapons infrastructure, nab all of their existing nuclear bomb. This is probably way over Obama’s capability
~~~
Ya’ think?
Wonder how Pakistan’s nuclear Khan feels about the Taliban … whether they’ll contine to fete and adore him, or send him off to an Islamic gulag for “re-education”.
You’re welcome, Ravi.
And don’t worry, making good points seems to come naturally to you (as in #30)!
Jamie Irons
Grave situation with no certain outcome, but the Alamo Syndrome in Afghanistan is bunk. One, Obama is not that stupid and unsophisticated politically (note I said politically) to allow American forces to be massacred by third world goathumpers. Two, loyalty oaths aside, the heads of the military are not going to sit idly by and watch that happen. At the very least the joint chiefs would resign. Three, the American people would turn on Obama so quickly every boot licking sycophant in the media couldn’t save him.
Trying times, but try to keep some perspective. It’s the freakin’ Taliban ,not the Wehrmacht in the Argonne forest.
“It’s hard to blame O for this.” No its not. O is the living embodiment and anointed personification of the Dream of the Left. He represents the left, they chose him and he accepted the charge. This unfolding debacle is the direct consequence of the Left’s policy prescriptions carried into action. The Left, represented generally by the Democratic Party, did their utmost to undermine the Bush administration, not only hoping for failure, but straining every sinew to cause it. Now O is the head of the Democratic Party and de facto leader of the Left. The plan was, as it ever is with them, to wreck the existing order, step in as saviors and seize reins of power. This they have done. If the pattern if history is any guide, the next step is to tighten control over the population and stifle any effective opposition.
Prediction: The line of supply through Pakistan will be cut by the victorious Taliban. US forces in Afghanistan will be cut off and ordered to surrender. Whether they will or not, I don’t know. If yes, then mass beheadings, televised torture, more Blackwater at the bridge footage. If no, then a fight to the sea. I can envisage orders against support by air and the Navy ordered to stay out of Paki national waters. Followed by a general withdrawl of American forces across the board.
Bet me.
In any event, an increase of respect for the USA in the world, greater peace and tranquility all over the globe now2 that the US is not playing world policeman any more, and a huge sigh of relief knowing that all those vets won’t be coming home to join right wing militias.
Pakistan is an almost 100% muslim country . Muslim countries , unless they have immense natural resource wealth don’t work, just as socialist countries don’t work. An in just the same way when things don’t work and the country grows steadily poorer the question is not whether the ideology/religion should be discarded but how it’s hold should be strengthened. Thus Pakistan is an economic mess with a substantial portion of the military and government sympathetic to sharia and a strict Muslim state (including war with the infidel state India) . This isn’t going to change . And negotiating with those who consider you subhuman and are determined to kill or enslave you remains idiotic.
Did the new US advisors to Pakistan push the Pakistani’s to do the Swat deal as a test for Afghanistan?
I’ll play the devil’s advocate once.
Isn’t it true Obama surrounds himself with ex-Clinton holdouts? He’s been getting the same sort of advices from the 90s crowd with a rosy tinted glasses. And these people never treated the national security as a serious subject. Remember serendipity prevented the millennium bombing.
Even though he kept saying the buck stops here (meaning he is responsible), but he never truly meant it and never will pick up the responsibilities that comes with the office. And so I give him 80% of the blame here.
“It was Mushy who started making deals with the terrorists which were obviously a bad idea”
Your ignorance of Pakistani politics is underwhelming. The late Bennazir Bhutto, when she was running things, was doing deals with the devil. Her husband is currently running the country and her son (still in school) was elected to head the political party.
Change we can believe in.
We can’t blame “O” for this? What the hell? We’re faced with the possibility of a terrorist group getting their hands on nuclear weapons and Carter II’s supporters are still concerned about how they are going to spin this?
Right now it doesn’t matter what side any of us are on because if they DO get their hands on those nukes, we are ALL going to be on the receiving end of them. Hopefully Carter II and Clinton will remember that and keep Americans safety and security in mind instead of trying the never ending campaign approach.
Take No Prisoners….
“Taliban Islamic radicals have attacked a community of Christians, executing two of them following a rally that protested Muslim graffiti in their neighborhood that ordered them to accept Islam or die, according to an international Christian organization.
The attack in Pakistan follows only by days an expansion of the territory occupied by the Islamic Taliban members”.
Islam, a religion of peace…those nukes in the hands of AQ are going to change the balance of power in the GWOT. I sleep well at night knowing that the TOTUS CINC and Janet Napolitano are keeping us safe.
There is an odd dynamic at work in our nation, which is quite worrisome. The left succeeded in their efforts, during seven and one-half of the eight years of the Bush administration, to persuade a majority of the American people that 9/11 was a sort of freakish event, a kind of one off catastrophe, that was very unlikely to happen again, and that our efforts to deal with the people behind it somehow only made bad things more likely to happen. Hence the repudiation of all things Bush, and the inauguration of a new era of abject apologies for our purported “arrogance” and all the rest. Somehow we are now safer.
But as the reality principle gradually makes itself felt, as Pakistan goes down the tubes, as it becomes evident that apologies aren’t really getting us anywhere, whence comes the resolve to approach the struggle with any…well, with any resolve, any moxie, any Jacksonian fierceness? Are there enough Americans left — are there any at all in our political class — with a desire to fight? Have we bled ourselves dry?
Jamie Irons
Let’s see. USA was unhappy with “undemocratic” Musharraf and pushed for elections. Now it is even more unhappy with thoroughly predictable results and consequences of those elections. Why do all that handwringing now?
A funny thing happened the other night. After work, I went to a poetry reading in a Bay Area town where a friend was reading from a new book, and a few others also read from theirs. Bay Area poets are uniformly, extremely “liberal,” and I expected to hear a fair number of poems that either celebrated the onset of the messianic Obama, or the repudiation of the evil Bush, or both. There were indeed several such poetic efforts. (I find political poetry by the way, of whatever orientation, to be sterile and uninteresting.)
But what struck me (and I am a psychiatrist with a fairly well-developed, though of course not infallible, ability to “read” people), what struck me was how both the readings of these poetic efforts — and the small crowd’s reactions to the reading — were altogether joyless.
Don’t know quite what to make of it.
Jamie Irons
I recall reading (here?) That the US had advisors in Pak to shepherd the nukes and provide C&C and other tech support to them. I pray that’s the case, because if so, they’ll not be in control of hostiles, either thru removal or really permanent demolition.
Otherwise all bets are off.
WRT the Pak military, are they waiting for something?
Somebody up thread slammed the Indian military, and cited the Mumbai raid as an example. That exercise was handled by civilian police. I have no firsthand knowledge, but what I can gather from a skim thru Strategypage, is that they aren’t a mess, but they ain’t the 4thID either. Howsomever, there are 1.1 Million of them and an all volunteer bunch to boot. I suspect the Taliban would find them inhospitable.
They have done some exercises about reducing Pakistan.
Hopey changey
There are three issues I can see with Pakistan’s nuclear weapons: the bombs themselves, the technologies, and the materials.
Exploding a couple tons of high explosive around the detonator assemblies will destroy those objects and make it hard (maybe very hard) to reproduce the technology. Likewise, removing the explosive charges from the devices and exploding them with some extra HE to ensure their complete destruction will make it harder to duplicate the explosive lensing necessary for nuclear ignition.
The explosive assemblies themselves include both a great deal of dangerous nuclear material and the technology embedded in the geometry and materials of the bomb. That’s harder to deal with. Disassembling the bomb assemblies, removing non-nuclear materials that contribute to the explosion, and destroying the geometry is much more dangerous and will take much more time. And that still does not render the fissile material unusable.
Maybe the real test will be whether Pakistan would rather let India take the weapons (or at least the fissile material) rather than let the Taliban have them.
It seems to be about money.
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20090425bc.html
trangbang68 (65):
One small problem that everybody seems to miss: Behind the Taliban is Iran, behind Iran is China. The Iranians are getting a lot of there weapons from the Chinese, who are galaxy-class experts in subterfuge and nasty politics. (Why do you think that the USAF want’s the F-22 so badly; it ain’t the Taliban!)
Holsinger: that’s a persuasive piece, except it does seem that Pakistan is actually in danger of collapse, subversion, or some kind of civil war – not merely “playing the failed-state card” in order to extort money from the West. Of course I’m just a guy with a computer, but.
Dan,
It’s a question of power. I think everyone agrees the Pakistani army can wipe these guys out, and won’t because of Islamic extremists in the army. But it’s also a question of lowland Pakistanis against the mountain barbarians, and that has been going on for more than a thousand years with the same result every time – the lowlanders smash the barbarians when the latter get too bothersome.
It is pretty obvious that the Pakistani army is playing games here.
The thing to worry about is a major factional fight within the Pakistani army. That would be pretty obvious if and when it happens. Andrew Krepinevich well describes a scenario for that in his recent 7 Deadly Scenarios: A Military Futurist Explores War in the 21st Century.
NONE of the threat indicators described in Krepinevich’s Pakistani collapse scenario is present at the moment. I.e., what is going on now is the Pakistani army trying to get something from their own government, or from the U.S. government, or money, and the Japan Times article is pretty good evidence that it’s money from generous and gullible foreigners.
What we are seeing is almost certainly a charade.
If Pak goes to hell, look for a sudden and welcome offer from the Russians to let our forces evacuate through their territory. But behind the scenes, can you imagine the price they will have demanded?
For that matter, Iran too might take pity on our plight, in exchange for…Oh, I don’t know…what do you think might be on their wish-list?
Any such Western remittances will provide flight-capital, nothing more.
Lest anyone forget, Pakistan is ultra-broke.
The Taliban are sweeping all before them by the method of the Long March….
The land redistribution enacted by the Taliban is completely impeaching the street cred of Islamabad.
I don’t think that the generals figured on that.
This gambit looks like it was cloned from Mao. Gee, are there any Chinese-Pakistani connections?
Whenever the Paki Army was deployed against the shadow army it got its tush trashed.
Read and weep:
http://tinyurl.com/ddlvqb
“Hey, you said I had six months, Joe!”
It could be that Obavez is a tool of Soros and of the radicals.
It could be that for them “the worse (scenario for America) the better”.
In this case, he could be described as a great politician and leader, because he’s doing everything the radicals could possibly wish to weaken America.
Or maybe I am wrong.
Time will tell, very very soon.
Demented budget and cap and trade for the economy, iran and pakistan gone wild for the foreign affairs, add some judges nominations at the SCOTUS and VOILA’ we will be in the most horrifying “day after” imaginable.
Or maybe I am wrong.
If I am wrong, this is the most incompetent administration ever appeared in history, all the banana republics included.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Trying not to panic but with Pakistan about ready to fall into terrorist hands and the Swine flu heading our way across the border and the CDC using the term Pandemic, I’m starting to see the makings of a perfect storm for Carter II. His big test might be coming sooner than we have all dreaded. I’m hoping he’s got the battery on his teleprompter fully charged. He’s going to need it.
Another reason the Alamo Syndrome will not happen- the US military won’t be defeated by the Taliban, even when they seem hopelessly outnumbered. One spec ops squad can take on 200 Taliban and win. The only way the Taliban would be able to kill 20,000 US personnel is if they used a tactical nuke, which, knowing their lack of sophistication, would likely wind up defeating the Taliban by itself, never mind the fact that Obama would probably cave to the overwhelming evidence to unload 24 Trident II D-5′s on them in retaliation for using a nuke on our troops.
As for the rogue Ohio Class scenario, it’s going to take more than just the Captain and the XO going along with it to work. You’ll also need the Weapons and the Operations Officers to sign off on the act. Weapons because he has to actually launch the missiles, and OPS because it would constitute an unauthorized launch of nuclear weapons, which would justify the OPS officer relieving both the CO and XO of their command and declaring himself to be Acting CO.
Simple question on some of the comments above, where the idea that American and NATO troops will have to retreat out of Afghanistan – who the hell is going to force them to do that? Sure, it could get a lot more expensive to stay there, but no one is going to run them out. And we’re not going to let them starve. It’s not Napoleon’s retreat from Moscow, the Nazis at Stalingrad, it’s not even Khe Sanh let alone the Alamo. Whether it’s worth it, that’s the question, imvho.
“Hey, you said I had six months, Joe!”
~~~~
no, no, no. I said withIN six months. ‘bama, you gotta’ learn to listen. well, just read the TOTUS.
gaff-a-day Joe
I am approaching 60. I have watched, time and time again, the fall of American allies and client states [there is a difference] as America abandoned them. It is an ingrained pattern in our policy when Democrats are in power. The return of the hostages on Inauguration day in 1981 was the first victory our country had had in a generation, because we had a president who the enemy knew would rather fight than surrender. After Grenada,I made up a t-shirt that day celebrating the first land ever reclaimed from the Communists since 1917. We have had, since, moments of holding back the night; always at times when the desire of the Democrats to destroy western civilization was suppressed. But overall, our civilization has been in decline for generations. The barbarians do eventually win.
There is a pattern to these collapses. A decline in resistence by the forces of our allies, generally in reaction to evidence of abandonment by the US government, and then a sudden and complete collapse within a day or so. I see that pattern repeating.
I do not think that there is a “wheels within wheels” master plan by the Pak military to take out the Taliban and rationalize Pakistan. The Pakistani government and military is retreating and refusing to engage. The hardest military maneouver to pull off is a controlled withdrawal under enemy attack. The sight of the enemies’ backs encourages the attacker, and retrograde movement breaks the moral of the defenders. Unless the defenders are highly disciplined and motivated, have the uttermost faith in their fellow soldiers and command, and dedication to their cause; it becomes a rout. I don’t think that the Pakistani military meets any of these conditions.
This is not a devious master plan. This is the first stages of a complete collapse. In other threads it was pointed out that the diplomatic community is being moved to a protected zone, and the members and families of some political parties are looking for ways out. That is not a resistance, nor is there the stomach for one.
Those in BC who are of any particular faith group may wish to pray, burn joss sticks, or whatever your faith practices for the American forces in Afghanistan and Pakistan. I hope that they are on high alert, and ready to defend themselves from all threat axis’. And I hope that they are ready to move in whatever direction is needed and that the National Command Authority will not interfere with what needs to be done.
I’ll close with something that I’m pretty sure that the military has thought of, but the Leftist ideologues that are pleased to call themselves our government may not have conceived. To the government, all of our opponents are rational and amenable to reason and concessions.
It has been a blatant fact for some time that the intelligence organs, the military, and the government of Pakistan has been thoroughly infiltrated at all levels by Taliban/Al Quada. Those who are not deliberately blind to our enemies understand that the Taliban/Al Quada cultural, intellectual, and theological outlook on life is not the same as the Western European or American equivalents. They are not adherents of the concept of nuclear deterrence, or of MAD [Mutual Assured Destruction]. To them, weapons are to be used against the enemy as effectively and immediately as possible, and death for their cause means eternal paradise. These are fundamentalist Muslims, not devotees of St. Thomas Aquinas.
Given the level of infiltration of the Pakistani military and government by the Taliban/Al Quada, what basis is there to believe that the strategic nuclear forces of Pakistan have not been so infiltrated also? We have also had discussion here about the existence or lack of Permissive Action Links [PAL's] that would prevent unauthorized use of Pakistan’s nukes. The consensus, I believe, was that they were refused by the Pakistanis. So far, we have discussed, or rather hoped for, actions to prevent Pakistan’s nukes from falling into enemy hands. Short of our own use of nuclear weapons, it is a daunting task, just dealing with the Pakistani government forces.
Posit this: As the Democrats’ wet dream is in progress, and there is an Islamabad reprise of Saigon, 1975; what happens if it turns out that some or all of the Pakistani nuclear deterrent is already in the hands of Taliban/Al Quada controlled Pakistani forces….. and they use one or more against American or allied forces in Pakistan and/or Afghanistan?
As I said, this is probably totally outside the Weltanschauung of ‘Teh Lightworker’. I assume the initial reaction will be stunned disbelief. I am uncharitable enough to believe that in at least part of the administration, the second reaction will be silent celebration, but I also admit to being more than passing cynical.
But we would then be left with a fait accompli that would require reaction from a number of levels and directions, all in the absence of complete information:
a) What would our surviving forces in Afghanistan and Pakistan be capable of doing and what would they do?
b) What would our government allow our forces both within Afghanistan/Pakistan and in the theater to do?
c) What would the Indian government do, having more than a passing interest in the detonation of any part of the Pakistani nuclear stockpile?
d) What would the Russians do, keeping in mind that the sudden appearance of one or more mushroom clouds may be interpreted in the context of their soon to commence invasion of Georgia? In the possible absence of advance knowledge of the detonations [the GRU, or current equivalent knows quite a bit, too much to be completely innocent of involvement] about the activities of our enemies; could they interpret it as part of some arcane American response to Georgia, and what would their counterstroke be?
e) The Israelis also have a vested interest in any regional mushrooms. Taliban/Al Quada control and use of nukes, in addition to the threat from Iran, pose an existential threat to the State of Israel. They will have a reaction, and it will be within their conception of their own best interests, not ours.
f) Iran will note this too, albeit they may have advance knowledge, and their own attack plans are already in train.
g) China has a strong military relationship with Pakistan and is one of the foreign sponsors of its nuclear forces [Chinese missiles and nuclear capable aircraft]. They have technicians maintaining parts of the Pakistani nuclear forces. What will they do, in that any direct US response is going to have a deleterious effect on both the missiles and the technicians.
h) The Europeans will both soil themselves and insist that it is all our fault and demand that we give first priority to protecting their forces.
i) All the above factors will interact in unforeseen ways in relation to each other and us. We will have to do something. Deliberate inaction, however obfuscated, is a policy choice.
I throw this out for comment, especially by the more knowledgable of our group.
Subotai Bahadur
Well,,,Libertyship, that mostly says it all. Nice work. When the thermonuclear device goes off somewhere in the West sometime in the next three years or so, at least we can feel confident that the U.N. and the E.U. and now it looks like the U.S. can sit back and posture and say, Well ‘We addressed the problem, but they just didn’t listen very well”.
Until recently I would have thought that the first bomb would be set off somewhere in Europe, but now with O on the stage and bowing to one and all, I am not so certain.
I guess I just hope that Garofalo (sp), Bill Maher, Nancy P. and friends are somewhere on assignment in the immediate area of the firecracker that they think can’t happen.
Bless them. Fortunately I live in the middle of nowhere, so if the T.V isn’t blown out I can at least watch the apologists rise again.
Thanks,
S.B.,
Excellent comment, and very interesting, and terrifying, speculation.
Your thoughts about the patterns while Democrats are in power mesh nicely with my own (we are contemporaries).
This is somewhat OT but while hiking this morning in the coast ranges of northern California, on what I like to think of as “my” mountain, I had the following thought about what is often said in discussions about “torture” and torture: that if we allow ourselves to, exempli gratia, waterboard our enemies to extract information, then we are “no better than the enemy.”
It occurred to me that we should map that (to me erroneous) thought into another, better and clearer one:
Henceforth we intend to be no worse than the enemy, and to be infinitely better at it.
Jamie Irons
#89 Tony,
Our forces are not going to be suddenly overwhelmed by the “Taliban hordes”. We have local superiority wherever we are so long as we have supplies. We win because of overwhelming firepower, mobility, and C4I; combined with far superior officers and men at all levels. These require huge amounts of supplies, much of which is bulk. Without POL, we are going to be re-enacting Xenophon, one step at a time. Without enough ammunition, we can be overwhelmed by numbers. Think Isandlwana. And our forces are not all gathered in one neat group. We have bases all over Afghanistan, and all along the single supply line. Airlift, in the absence of opposition, may be able to move enough food and ammunition for a while. No way they can deliver enough POL. There is no guarantee that the airlift will remain unopposed, and to be honest our airlift capabilities are pretty worn out. They have been rode hard and put up wet since the First Gulf War.
The Logistician draws the line that the Tactician dare not cross.
#78 & 81 Tom Holsinger
Sir,
With all due respect, now I really am uncomfortable [No. I am NOT being sarcastic, I'm serious.], being in disagreement with you. If there is some sort of grand manipulation in progress, I cannot see it succeeding in the face of conditions on the ground. I may be wrong. Hell, I hope that I am wrong, for the sake of our forces who will be at the pointy end of things if they go south. But I still respectfully disagree.
#66 Tamquam
If we do not evacuate, it will not be a matter of the NCA ordering our forces to surrender. However, they will be left hanging on the vine unsupported until they are unable to resist. A direct order to surrender places the responsibility on the NCA. With the unanimous support of the media, the official line will be that the NCA did everything he could, but the fault was with the military command. That would further the desired political narrative. If events allow, expect show trials.
Subotai Bahadur
81.Tom Holsinger
“I.e., what is going on now is the Pakistani army trying to get something from their own government, or from the U.S. government, or money, and the Japan Times article is pretty good evidence that it’s money from generous and gullible foreigners.”
Is it possible that segments of the Pakistani government are perhaps trying to induce the US to behave/speak with greater strength?
How do you think the things that have been playing out re the CIA in the last 10 days are affecting Leon Panetta’s intentions for the CIA? Is a weakened CIA (with career men opting out, for fear of ending up in court someday) going to weaken the Pak government’s ability/willingness to respond?
Mr. Holsinger, haven’t seen your posts for awhile. Glad to see you back. Back a bit you had recommended a couple of books to me regard the origins/foundations of the CIA, etc. (at the time Leon Panetta’s confirmation was pending)
I found those books helpful in understanding some of the inbred limitations and dilemmas. I didn’t find them particularly encouraging! They confirmed some suspicions I hadn’t yet even fully developed.
Thank you for your comments here and elsewhere. They are appreciated.
Thinking about some of the comments above re potential for mushroom clouds over various points in central Asia and Russia’s opportunitistic designs toward Georgia (which is the path southward)…
….it occurs to me that ANYTHING that seriously “tips the pot over” and grabs the world stage will create a free-for-all situation that could have a side effect of all of Israel’s enemies (not otherwise occupied) to head south and west–by land, by sea and air.
This administration gives absolutely no evidence of taking any of this seriously, so we really have no reason to “assume” that deep and thoughtful planning is going on behind closed doors.
#33 Ravi T: I agree, those from India that I have spoken with say Pakistan is always a trouble maker in their history, but they probably don’t want to vaporise them either.
But then gain, “Paki”stan has always had this suicide-by-my-own-nukes tatoo-on-my-backside sort of zeitgeist.
Lets compromise, and secure the nukes, give them to India, or set timers on them to detonate after we leave.
Set up by the bloody British, to be, like so many of the parts of the world with which they have meddled about, forever condemned to a state of ungovernability, Pakistan will shortly once again shrug off its lying looting thieving Cli’ton-esque civilian “government” and will either look to former president Musharraf to once again save its sorry arse — or to another of its many competent military men.
Brian Richard Allen
Los Angeles CalifUBAMBIcated 90028
And the Far Abroad
What is the experience of a community organizer?
What is Obama’s experience as a community organizer, and what can we learn about him from that experience?
Over my lifetime I’ve come across plenty of news articles which described at least in passing the role of the community organizer, and some that focus on their activities in particular.
I found a blog article that gives a very brief bit of information about what Obama was doing for a while in the Southern precincts of Chicago. The blogger provides quotes and information from what is described as a press release distributed by Catholic Democrats. This excerpt purports to explain what Obama was doing:
Obama was working for a group of churches that were concerned about their parishioners, many of whom had been laid off when the steel mills closed on the south side of Chicago. They hired Obama to help those stunned people recover and get the services they needed–job training, help with housing and so forth–from the local government.
I don’t know anything about the organization’s legitimacy (catholicdemocrats.org) other than my one visit. However, it offers a toplofty quote from the Honorable Senator Edward M. Kennedy on its main page. Readers familiar with my rants will know that to my mind anyone who regards Teddy Kennedy as a source of moral, ethical, or intellectual authority has drop-kicked their claim to my respect out the front window.
Byron York wrote a very helpful article originally published by National Review describing the situation of communities of laid-off steel workers in the Calumet region of the far South Side of Chicago. 24-year-old Barack Obama responded to an add appealing for a community organizer, and began interviewing residents to sort out what their experiences had been, what problems they were having, and what they hoped for.
The article, published in September 2008 during the campaign, relates several of Obama’s most successful efforts of the three years he spent there, and by itself depicts him as a reasonable and constructive liberal. But what he learned – what was the upshot of his three years of social advocacy, reasonable, patient, or otherwise – was that the accomplishments simply didn’t seem worth all the effort, and he calculated he might achieve more spectacular results by getting himself into a position of power in the government than by stimulating folks to organize themselves at the grassroots level.
But the point of all this is that even if Obama were the best community organizer of all history – a shoo-in Nobel Community Organizer Laureate – that doesn’t provide any detectible support for his task as Leader of the Free World.
Ditto his time as a member of the Illinois legislature, or a single year as a United States Senator.
But Mr. York offers an observation that serves as a disheartening distilled comprehension summing up what we can learn about Obama from that period:
“…Obama’s time in Chicago also revealed the conventionality of his approach to the underlying problems of the South Side. Is the area crippled by a culture of dysfunction? Demand summer jobs. Push for an after-school program. Convince the city to spend more on this or that. It was the same old stuff; Obama could think outside the box on ways to organize people, but not on what he was organizing them for.”
Simply, in the few short months of his presidency Barack Hussein Obama has already shown himself utterly at sea in navigating the waters of international affairs. It is the domain of thugs, beasts, murderers, fanatics, tyrants and butchers unconstrained by the laws and niceties governing the struggles between community organizers and municipal bureaucrats.
Mr. York pins Obama like an entomologist mounting a bug:
“Obama applied his considerable organizational skills to perpetuating the old, failed way of doing things.”
Habu @ 18,
By now most of us have seen the polling on the “right” direction the country has now embarked.
I’m guessing you’re referring to the recent AP poll, which showed that 48% of Americans believe we’re headed in the right direction (up from 40% in February) versus 44% think we’re headed in the wrong direction.
The sample is 36% Democrats and 18% Republicans (46%D and 28%R if you include leaners). It way over-samples Democrats. Given that there is an 18-point sampling difference, it’s amazing that there is only a 4% difference between right and wrong direction.
FWIW. Cheers,
L3
And in just the same way when things don’t work and the country grows steadily poorer the question is not whether the ideology/religion should be discarded but how it’s hold should be strengthened.
Since Islam has no flaws, the solution to the problems created by Islam is more (and more fervent) Islam. If Allah is not showing you favor, it must be because you aren’t strict enough in practicing Islam. And if that doesn’t work, blame everybody but yourself, since no Muslim can admit to being at fault for anything.
104. Leo Linbeck III:
Thanks for the nuts and bolts. It makes me feel a bit better. Appreciate you and all the BC folks staying on top of things
Best
Habu
#105-Bob Smith
You do make a very valid point regarding Islam and its adherents. Please excuse me though–I have taken the liberty of substituting:
(1) “socialism” for Islam
(2) “the populace” for Allah
(3) “progressive” for Muslim
Once substituted it reads:
Since socialism has no flaws, the solution to the problems created by socialism is more (and more fervent) socialism. If the populace is not showing you favor, it must be because you aren’t strict enough in practicing socialism. And if that doesn’t work, blame everybody but yourself, since no “progressive” can admit to being at fault for anything.
People have wondered why so many of the Leftist persuasion seem to have more sympathy for Islamic terrorists than they do for third parties who don’t subscribe to the belief sets of either. This simple substitution shows that not only do great minds think alike, so do the Dim. “Progressives” and Islamists employ the same Alice in Wonderland type of thinking. Its no wonder that they are natural allies.
Tom Holsinger, I think you are correct in thinking that it is the groundwork for another military coup. Not sure that will fix the problem. A large part of the Paki Army IS ‘Taliban’ to one degree or another.
I would also like to point out the 800 Lb gorilla in the corner that most postrs are ignoring. India.
India and Pakistan have fought before. Every time India has won. Like Israel, the Indians haven’t administered the coup de’ gra to their enemy. That could change this time, although I doubt it.
India is more then capable of holding down Pakistan long enough to empty their pockets of any loose change as well as a few dozen nuclear weapons. We will only find out if they miss any the hard way.
As far as the blame game goes, if the left can blame Bush for something Clinton created, then the Right can blame the Usurper for something Bush created.
And make no mistake, Bush created this when he sent Musharraf off stage. The next General might be better, but I doubt it.
Jamie/78; i think you do have an idea of what to make of it. Please fess up; shortform will do, no jargon puhleeze.
I think when the world stage begins exploding, combined with the economic disasters still to bear fruit on the domestic scene (think collapse of entitlement programs, or commercial distribution/trucking systems, or interstate commerce….or whatever), that will become The Won’s excuse to declare martial law.
This is why he doesn’t care how badly things go. The worse things go domestically and internationally, the better for his ultimate goals. Apparently there is no one willing or no one able to stop him.
(And we thought that our Congress-persons swore to uphold the Constitution. Oh, well.)
OBAMA’S “ENGAGEMENT” MYTHOLOGY
Apparently being friends with Hugo Chavez is not making America more popular in Pakistan.
http://greensrealworld.blogspot.com/2009/04/diplomacy-myths-left-likes-to-tell.html
Regardless of your position on matters of faith, if you want to get additional facts on how Islamists attack and kill Christians, burn houses, etc. in Pakistan and India, check out the Voice of the Martyrs site.
90. AThinkingPerson,
Speaking of the Swine Flu:
http://news.scotsman.com/health/Pandemic-alert-over-deadly-swine.5206576.jp
This particular part of the article stood out to me:
“The flu combines genetic material from pigs, birds and humans in a way scientists have not seen before.”
‘Terrorism’ can come in many forms.
Meryl – I don’t believe he sounds like an ESL person.
That’s not fair to most of the ESL people I encounter virtually every day!
( http://tesol.payap.org/MA.html )
The moronic mobbed-up murtadd Muslim Mussolini-moulded modified Marxist, Mister Michelle Reverend Wright Bernadine Bill Dorhn Ayres Frank Marshall Davis-Alinsky-Ubambi, sounds like a brain-damaged, retarded, stoned, ESL person!
Brian Richard Allen
Los Angeles CalifUBAMBIcated 90028
And the Far Abroad
#73 Davod, Musharraf signed the Waziristan Accord in 2006. That was the agreement that ceded control of Waziristan to the terrorists. It was signed after plenty of failures of the Pak military in attempting to control Waziristan. That was the beginning of this, regardless of what Bhutto did afterward.
Imaging that this is some kind of charade is exactly that, imagining. Sometimes a spade is a spade and sometimes a terrorist takeover is a terrorist takeover.
i didn’t read what subothai said (sorry, drunk after dinner) but i was thinking about the holsinger deception thesis and i think i’ll stick to my impending implosion of pakistan – in a form rather like when they took out one of those At-Ats in the beginning of Empire Strikes Back. you may be right. i’ll bet you some free porno.
While we keep wrestling with the moral delema of waterboarding, the Taliban has no such problems. This is how they handle their problems.
http://www.flurl.com/video/38192563_grafic_beheading_by_taliban.htm
jamie, ok ok go ahead n use jargon, i shouldn’t be so persnippy, i do have a dictionary. But, the joy-kill –it’s the dirigisme, isn’t it?
Only a dead Taliban is a “Moderate” Taliban. The rest of all living, breathing and plotting in one way or another to take, by force, whatever they want. Having the government of Pakistan hand over to the Taliban part of their country is no way to fight terrorism. Now the Obambi and his crew of acolytes are going to find out the hard way that walking and talking softly and not carrying any kind of stick at all only makes them look stupid and weak. We’re screwed.
Brian Richard Allen!
OK!:) Your expansion on my comment works!
It has just driven me a little batty listening to him over the many months–and the whole ESL thing is certainly not a significant issue. But something clicked in my thinking when I heard someone say that his attitude about the United States in general makes sense if you think of him as a person who didn’t grow up IN the United States as a native person.
And then it hit me, “Crap. That’s why so much of his speech is so stilted.”
Hey, Delia! Missed you and wondered if they had come for you!
Subotai at 98 sez:
There is no guarantee that the airlift will remain unopposed
O yes, there is.
US Navy and AF assets are barely engaged, beyond ISR these days. If we are talking about the next 10 – 20 years, our airlifts may be opposed here and there, but it won’t be for more than a couple of days. Not long enough to trap our troops in Afghanistan, that’s for 100% sure.
Who would do it? Combined air assets of the Russians, Chinese, Pakistanis, North Koreans, Iran and whoever else you want to mention don’t stand a chance right now.
There has been more than one remark here and elsewhere on the strange response of the left to their victory. They are not happy to put it mildly because I think they were/are motivated by revenge. We all know that revenge like anger is not satisfying but destroys the host.
#122 Tony,
I agree that we own the air, against other air forces. I was thinking rather of man portable surface to air missiles. Kind of like the Stingers we gave the Afghans to use against the Soviets. Air supply to fixed bases means that there are a limited number of access routes and they are low and slow. Air supply to moving columns requires coming in close enough to make sure that we are not supplying the Taliban instead of our own forces. There will be attrition, and once again our airlift assets are awful tired and there are not enough of them. The attrition will hurt us badly. And air supply cannot deliver the bulk that we need, especially POL.
As far as the next 10-20 years; I am thinking of more of time enough to get our forces to embarkation points.
Subotai Bahadur
120. Meryl:
“Hey, Delia! Missed you and wondered if they had come for you!”
~
Hey right back atchya, Precious! *waves*
I’ve been a beezy leetle bee so I haven’t had my chance to give much to PJM in the last few days but I enjoy reading you and the ‘gang’ when I get a moment.
I wish I had something constructive to add on this thread today but everyone has pretty much made many of the points I was thinking.
-But, here’s my paranoid fear for ya’ll anyhow [ha-ha]…
My fear is that just like 9/11 with the strikes against our Pentagon/World Trade Center/the failed attempt at Washington D.C. [because of the brave passengers and crew], that the nukes aimed at us will first aim to the ‘powers that be’ including the WH. Then, when all higher ups have been destroyed and there is nobody to take charge of the military to give commands, then the nukes will aim at our cities and the carnage will be unlike anything in the history of our WORLD.
Hopefully my fears are just a nightmarish meandering into my own psyche. *gulp*
O/T: PJM finally gave us an ‘edit’ mode? WOO-HOO! And even ‘Notify me of followup comments via email’ too? Freakin’ awesome! YaY PJM! *does happy dance*
#124 Subotai,
Thank you for your clarification.
If things got as bad as you suggest, I can’t imagine it would be another Pusan Perimeter / Inchon Landing or any other land-based strategy. Even under Obama, I have to believe we’d quit “fighting with all but one pinky tied behind our back” as Wretchard has put it in the past.
Hmmmm. “Swine” flu. Pandemic. Does that mean it will kill Muslims faster and better because it’s something to do with forbidden pigs?
Didn’t the Arabs accuse Israel of killing Arafat with some newly-invented undetectable poison since it was impossible for him to have died of AIDS despite all his AIDS-like behavior and symptoms?
I like it.
Subotai & Tony – re:Airlift capacity. Also, remember that The Won Who Is The One We Have Been Waiting For is getting ready to strip future military capability from strike fighter (F-22), tanker and airlift (C-17). The Regime seems to be bent on making sure that it gets broke and stays that way.
I read whiskey saying stuff that seems too paranoid and cannot find ANY thing wrong with the arguments. His thoughts merge with mine. I am constantly wondering what the heck the current regime in DC could possibly be thinking.
Should Pakistan go south and it will, what can we do? We cannot fight another war front. A friend from Madras said that as far as he could see that American policy and Americans were stupid concerning Pakistan. He said that it was obvious to any from the region that the Pakistanis were the locus and source of most of the terrorist instigation in the world. As a state, the Pakistanis are bad actors and always have been.
There are so many balls in the air politically right now that when the bills start coming due we may be in for a very tough ride.
#128 Robohobo
I look at it this way. Pakistan is a deadly threat to us, and much of the rest of the world. Our forces in Afghanistan are sitting on the far end of a supply line that is totally dependent on Pakistan. Pakistan is no longer dependable, and in fact whatever group ends up in charge is going to plant its ass right on that supply line. We do not, repeat do not, have the forces or political will to occupy and clear enough of Pakistan to secure our supply line to Afghanistan. Therefore, we need to fall back before we are cut off. The only way to continue the war in Afghanistan is going to require that we occupy, hold, and pacify Pakistan, and that is impossible.
Our troops have not been defeated. Our politicians have, or have willingly surrendered. Our troops should not pay the price for a war that we cannot win.
If the option of occupation of Pakistan is impossible, then the only other option that remains is WMD to take out their nukes before they are redeployed in Al Quada hands. This, also is not possible under the new dispensation. Therefore, we will locate them later, one flaming datum at a time in the ZI.
If we do not leave, we will be trapped and nibbled to death by ants. Too many parallels with Stalingrad.
Once we leave, if we do not destroy Pakistan on the way out, then we will be dealing with them again later, at a much greater disadvantage. This administration would not dream of such, so we are doomed to face the disadvantage.
This is only one of numerous crises that we face, and we lack the means to prevail in all of them, and we lack the political will to prevail in any of them.
This is not ending, and will not end well. I agree with your points, and our ability to keep all those balls in the air is limited and being degraded, by our own side. I have not given up, but I realize that we are going to lose much and may lose all.
Be Thou then truly Resolved; that Duty is as heavy as a Mountain, and Death is as light as a Feather.
Subotai Bahadur
Will Obama act to disarm Pakistan, preventing Islamic crazies from getting their hands on atomic weapons? Don’t bet on it.
Our new Jimmy the dhimmi Carter Obama is just like Neville Chamberlain.
Remember, “Peace in our time.” – Neville Chamberlain’s famous words after returning from his meeting with Hitler in 1938?
He’s doing the same thing with Iran, his support for the “two-state solution” is more of the same. We’re in big trouble, having elected a wimp & an appeaser to be Commander & Chief.
what was the pakistani want for their government or to U.S government? They really annoying..
Westhawk’s take is interesting:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/dfm67c
Jamie Irons
Canid Vulgaris: brings up a factor that should be considered when postulating on Afghanistan and Pakistan and that is the war that is yet to be won in Iraq. The tremendous job done by U.S. forces (and some of her allies) and the sacrifice in blood will surely be undone. … “BAGHDAD — Vice is making a comeback in this city once famous for 1,001 varieties of it. … Liquor stores, once shut down by fundamentalist militiamen, have proliferated.” (NYT 18 Apr 09) If this is not an open ticket for the resumption of hostilities against an elected government, then I will bare my ass in Abu Nawas Park and then run for my life. Discounting this scenario, the mere fact that the place is and forever will be, a religiously fragmented dustbowl destined to remain split asunder and with no time for western ideology, including Obama/Hilary/Holbrooke speak. All that remains is for the Coalition to lower their flags, pack their bongos, point their rear ends toward Mecca and fluck off like a flock of flidgeons. Next stop Kabul!
As put forward by CV … Sunni extremist groups will never peacefully live under a Shiite dominated government and within 2 years (probably sooner) of U.S. troop withdrawal, the place will revert to one big shitfight, hopefully engulfing all European and Russian business interest therein.
Afghanistan! “You do have to think about how things will play out in a place like Afghanistan,” … “No superpower has been able to [conquer] it. Afghanistan is not a ‘nation’ in the sense we’re used to, with its four major regions centered around cities that are closer to other countries than they are to each other.” … “Afghanistan is a land-locked knot of mountains prone to droughts, blizzards and floods. It was Alexander’s toughest challenge, and he never subdued its citizens completely. The British in the 1800s and the Soviets in the 1900s met similar fates. Will the United States’ experience in the 21st century be any different?
Without getting involved in all the points for and against U.S. “overseas contingency operations” centred around Afghanistan and Pakistan, it would be suffice to say that the ’Free World’ has a major problem on it’s hands and seeing that most of the ‘Free World’ is afraid to fight, it will be up to the U.S and a few allies to try make sense of winning a war against a people who most likely have no idea about, or sense of belonging to a ‘nation’ called Afghanistan. Loyalty is more likely afforded to their tribal leaders and/or warlords, not exactly blood brothers, but if you are being offered a slice of the ‘opium-pie money’ then best become as thick as thieves. In a loose chain of command, if the orders emanating from the present highest bidder for the people’s soles ripples down to their little plot of dust/slush/snow and identifies foreign troops as the enemy, then the day’s entertainment/activity becomes that enemy’s termination with extreme prejudice. Hardly a war worth winning. Even if the coalition troops endure and one day, finally triumphs, then to whom do you hand over the reins of power? Most of our lads are thrashing about on rocky outcrops with more military hardware per soldier than an entire Roman Legion, moving ever so slowly over exposed ground, relying on modern fire support to defeat the few Taliban/farmer Browns they do corner, or to extricate themselves with as few casualties as possible depending on how well the clothheads perform on the day.
So, again, a modern, well equipped army will be shown the error in fighting an elusive, mobile, not so sophisticated and yet determined enemy, operating in the environment in which he was raised. And yet! In the U.S. army’s arsenal there already exists weapons to win the battle within a week, but because of the political correctness of the current and previous administrations and the over-awareness of what a critical world would say, they will never be used. Doesn’t every person involved in a fight want to win? Whether the players are fully involved in the blood and guts end of it or simply sitting back in plush Washington offices, sipping pink champagne and figuring out how to make the teleprompter speeches appear more seamless – Don’t they want to win?
I would like to remind Washington that there are such weapons as Neutron Bombs – that kill the enemy, but leave all man-made structures in place. There are bio-weapons that can target the opium poppy and yet have no effect on other plant life. Too risky? But then, what is the price for one U.S or allied soldier’s life? In the late 60s, I instructed black-ops groups on the use and effects of a gas that was in service in the U.S. army, that when released, was odourless, tasteless, could not be seen and those being targeted, could not sense that they were under it’s effect. Those targeted were under the impression that all was normal and went about their duties as if nothing untoward was in play. The volunteers (guinea pigs) were from a U.S. Artillery unit and the attacking force simply moved in, secured all weapons, safely collected all personnel and it was all over within half-an-hour. I wonder what superior technology has found it’s way into U.S. weapons systems and for reasons already known and stated, will never be used, but still worth a thought when contemplating putting our soldiers into harm’s way.
Can you imagine the predicament that General David Petraeus will find himself in, what with the perfumed warriors Obama/Clinton/Holbrooke descending on him to preach on things other than retaining the military initiative. Its about time our General got out of there and threw his hat in the ring with Gingrich and Palin
Do, as many have suggested here and use whatever means it takes to secure Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, not just disable them, which can be done electronically, but physically secure them or even rip them out of their launch rigs.
So many things to consider and with each passing day of inactivity, the expected success of any task decreases exponentially.
God Bless Us All
Put the cover back on the panic button. Pakistan is not now and never will be a serious, direct threat to America. If the Taliban or some other fundi group takes over, they still will be ignorant turd worlders.
The most (worst?) they can do is arm terrorists with nuclear weapons. If the terrs get lucky, they can smuggle one in and set it off in an American city. Lots of people will die, but America has more then 1 city and a population of over 300 million.
I saw a Rand study back in the day that figured the Soviets would need almost 800 nukes to ‘destroy’ America. I laughed and pointed out that America is an idea, and ideas cannot be destroyed. They can only be replaced with better ideas.
AS far as resupply goes, the upper limit on logistics to Afghanistan AS THINGS ARE NOW is about 100,000 troops, on a low scale warfare schedule. That calculation is based on the current airlift capacity. That airlift is a matter of choice, not necessity. If the USA ( this administration) chooses to airlift can be increased 10 fold within a week. They just ‘draft ‘ all those commercial aircraft and pilots. The plans to do that have been gathering dust in a cabinet at the Pentagon for decades.
Clearing an air corridor of ManPADS isn’t that tough.
ManPADS have a small engagement envelop.
The Usurper might actually be looking forward to a taliban victory in Pakistan. So far his economic plan is a carbon copy of FDR’s. FDR’s didn’t fix the economy. It did keep enough people off the street to forestall a revolution and keep protests at a minimum ( Major riots in a few cities, but nothing the military couldn’t put down). What fixed the economy was WW2, which FDR didn’t go out of his way to avoid.
No, the Usurper would gain a lot from a war against Pakistan. Wars ALWAYS boost the economy. It would make re-election a surefire thing. Selling a war against Pakistan will be a LOT easier then selling a war against terrorism. As the left has been saying since ’02, ‘You don’t make war on verbs’. Although I have been accused of waging war on the English language.
133…I have no doubt there are more where that one came from, but the phrase “perfumed warriors” (as applied to Obama/Clinton/ Holbrooke)…..APPLIES………….good grief.
There won’t be a Stalingrad because the Russians, or maybe even Iran, will suddenly offer exit routes, which this administration will gratefully take. Exactly how gratefully will emerge later when we learn what the price tag was. At the very least, Russia would get acceptance of the old borders of the USSR. Iran would get its nukes without further hindrance along with all the possibilities for expansion in the mid-east that come with possessing them.
Of course, this new reality would be obscured under the hosannas and praise of Obama’s extraordinary diplomatic gifts in so bloodlessly extricating our army from its predicament.
The hue and cry of old was “who lost China”? The next will be “who lost Pakistan”?
I picked weeds yesterday, noting the consequences of not staying on top of it – they consume the yard if you don’t. Every “leader” should have a plot of land to be reminded of the realities of just hoping the weeds will go away.
Lightning raid to secure Pakistans Nukes? With Professor Hope as President? Does the name ‘Desert One’ ring any bells? There is no military operation that can’t be turned into a fiasco, given enough micromanagement.
1. Power abhors a vacuum.
2. Jimmy Carter is the very personification of a vacuum.
3. The Dreamer-in-Chief is the Platonic ideal of a vacuum.
4. We are utterly lost.
Pakistan has always been a failed state, founded on hate, since the beginning. It owes it existence to the shortcomings and appeasement of “Mahatma” Gandhi and Nehru, who thought that cajoling to the Muslim League and Mohammend Jinnah was the way to go, instead of fighting the Muslims, as Sri Aurobindo, the only clear head at that time, advocated.
Gandhi’s appeasement policy of non-injury finally created over a million innocent casualties during the partition of India.
If one thing Gandhi said where he was right was: “The Muslim is a bully, the Hindu is a coward.” This has been proven right time and time again, all the way to the last massacre in Mumbai.
The best solution to the world is Pakistan returning to India as a federation. Paki come home!
If the USA ( this administration) chooses to airlift can be increased 10 fold within a week.
Wrong.
Where are you going to land them?
What are you going to refuel them with?
Looking at the strategic position of our forces in Afghanistan, we are left with logistics, not combat capability. Part of what Sec. State Clinton was to work on, was to get Russia to allow the US to use its infrastructure to supply our forces via Turkmenistan. The reason for that is, 90% of our material comes via sea-lift and then overland through Pakistan. Really, more like 91-92%. When we see President Obama take so many people with him on his recent European tour, and hear the USAF is out of heavy lift capacity, that tells you what you need to know about aerial resupply without those overland roads going to the sea. This administration could have tried another tack and undercut Russia via seeking to cut deals with Georgia, Azerbaijan, and then across the Caspian to Turkmenistan.
Logistics is king of warfare: if you want a conventional victory, it must be done with logistics and sustainable ones at that. Our troop size is limited in Afghanistan not by deployable troops but by terrain, logistics and fighting at altitude. Low land Pakistani troops have problems in rugged terrain, and they (after the Gurkhas and Afghanis) are some of the best in the business, but have extremely limited numbers of those troops. The al Qaeda network have formed a cross association with the Taliban, Red Mosque Haqqani, and they all must utilize the central asian infrastructure developed by Hekmatyar. These have made inroads in the last year that have never been done before, mostly with Saudi money. You can actually *buy* suicide bombers in some cities for simply taking out a commercial rival, no religion involved its just a cash deal. Also this cross-network has been training children from ages 11 on upwards to do their bidding in many areas, which should be abhorrent to all concerned.
At this point it would only take an uprising by the Baluchs and Pakistan would tip over… and if the Baluchs got their hands on anything nasty, the equation turns against Iran as the Baluchs have been the most effective anti-regime terror organization *there*. Yet if they were promised a share of the goodies from a fallen Pakistan, the emergence of Balochistan would be in the agenda as well as a war with Iran enmeshed in that fight. There is no love lost amongst these ethnic groups. An Iran distracted on the East will allow Kurds, Azeris, and ethnic Arabs to start getting effective demonstrations on the West.
If you are guessing this is a house of cards stretching into the ethnic Uighars in China and then across central asia to Georgia, you are correct.
We have given peace a chance.
It has failed.
We have given representative democracy a chance.
It has failed.
Pakistan is failing, and has from the moment it was set up after the British left. They have been funneling money and arms to terrorists in the region since the 1950′s. The ISI has funded Hekmatyar and the Mehsuds. We chose poorly back in the ’70s to write off India, a representative democracy, and support Pakistan… we could have competed with Russia for ‘hearts and minds’. It would have upset China, but so what? We have chosen, Democrat and Republican administrations since that time to not do the right thing and support liberty, freedom and representative democracy in republics.
Now we will pay for that. And we don’t get to call the price, any more.
Perhaps it is now time to give war a chance as all else has failed.
The question is, is Afghanistan worth it? Once the war moves into a larger strategic sphere, Pakistan, Aghanistan will be a sideshow. And, our troops didn’t walk into Afghanistan, they won’t be marching out, through Iran, Russia or anywhere else. When they leave, they’ll fly out.
As Typos points out, a perimeter of a couple of miles is plenty to keep Bagram safe from MANPADS. We CAN stay in Afghanistan as long as we like. Hell, Khe Sanh was surrounded by multiple divisions of a powerful, real land army, the NV Regulars, and we protected and supplied that hell-hill in the middle of Indian Country with the simple brute force expedient of using B-52′s for close air support, called Arclight. There is no threat force in the region comparable to NV Regular Army.
The question is, why would we bother with Afghanistan? Why are we there – if it is to suppress the Taliban and Al Qaeda, and we all admit they have taken up shop in Pakistan – bye bye Afghanistan.
Those who are saying that there is no other way to supply Afghanistan except through Pakistan should look at a map.
Afghanistan is bordered on the north by Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. We still have access to an air base in Kyrgyzstan. All three of those former Soviet republics have railroads that were built as part of the railroad system of the Soviet Union. Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan have railroads that run up to the Afghan border.
One interesting bit of information is that China has recently completed a railroad all the way to its western border with Kazakhstan and is in the process of linking that railroad into the Kazakh rail system. What that means is that there is one alternative means of supply and evacuation if we want to play nice with China and if we can bribe the Kazakhs, Uzbeks and Turkomen more than the Russians. We also have the alternative of playing nice with the Russians. It also means that if the US were to bankroll a railroad through Afghanistan to either the Khyber Pass (now in Talibanistan) or Quetta in the Baluchistan region of Pakistan, the Chinese would be able to ship their goods to a sea port a couple of thousand miles closer to the Suez Canal. It also means that the Chinese could ship their goods by rail directly to Europe if they use go through Russia.
If there were facilities to handle containerized goods in Kazakhstan and/or Turkmenistan and in Baku in Azerbaizan, as well as container ships on the Caspian Sea, China could ship their goods by rail to Europe without going through Russia or Iran. Oops! The Russians cut off the route through Georgia. Dang! What a coincidence. I guess those trains full of Chinese goods will just have to go through Russia after all.
what happens if it turns out that some or all of the Pakistani nuclear deterrent is already in the hands of Taliban/Al Quada controlled Pakistani forces….. and they use one or more against American or allied forces in Pakistan and/or Afghanistan?
a) What would our surviving forces in Afghanistan and Pakistan be capable of doing and what would they do?
Nuke BAF and KAF and you’ve killed between a quarter and a third of all the Western troops in Afghanistan, decapitated three quarters of the C4ISR, destroyed two thirds of the aerial ports of debarkation, wrecked the supply distribution system, and forced the survivors not immediately affected by the blast to retrograde to Termez, Uzbekistan as best they can with organic transportation and whatever Class III they can get.
A motorized Anabasis, until the fuel tanks run dry.
Many bad spots on the road between Salerno and Termez.
I have not seen a lot on the once shocking statement by candidate Obama to bomb Pakistan. A lot was written and pointed statement made that it would not work and would cause didasterus results. Well we will now see how ws right; Obama or the Professionals.
Remember having said it, he backed it up with “I won!”
‘Because I won!’A war in Afganistan and Pakistan will bbe easy. We told Bush he was fighting the wrong war. Now we won, you will do it my way!
“If central authority broke down in Pakistan then either the United States, India or NATO could launch lightning raids on Pakistan’s nuclear weapons infrastructure, nab all of their existing nuclear bomb pits and spike what’s left of their nuclear weapons production capability.”
Ha ha. Thanks for the good joke. It helps relieve the tension of the morning.
Especially the NATO part. That’s really rich!
“From handshakes to worries about nukes. From “peace in our time” to the Battle of Britain. Once the overall design margin of a system has been eroded, failure when it comes manifests itself in a rapid cascade of events. The hidden stresses suddenly pile on each other and the structure, raddled with hundreds of weaknesses each minor in itself, collapses under their simultaneous impact.”
Well said. Money quote.
It’s hard to blame O for this.
The Left needs to get over its blame game, quit projecting. Its not about blaming anyone, its concern that our current AA-elected leadership is incapable of handling a tier 1 shcool’s course load without getting us all killed. Because we can’t afford to wait around while they retake remedial math.
150.Fen
“The Left needs to get over its blame game, quit projecting”
As long as their primary motivation is to “be right about everything even when they’re wrong”, how can that happen?
There’s a question that’s always good to pose to such: “How much are you willing to have it cost for you to be right?”
It’s my sense that the left is willing to have it cost the country EVERYTHING, present and future, to sustain their haughty insistence on being the all-knowing ones.
The only evidence we ever see that they are actually becoming self-aware and embarrassed is an occasional period of silence.
But their self-awareness never turns to competence and by definition, can’t, because their utter lack of competence is what was driving their projections and blame games to begin with.
Tamquam @ 69
Good points, I agree completely. The logistics of retreat will be a nightmare because I’ll bet Obama, Gates and Holder will genuflect before the international law crowd and order a “peaceful” withdrawal respecting all international borders-an impossibility in this case. There will be no orders from our hallowed Dear Leader allowing a fight to the sea, that’s for sure.
94. Subotai Bahadur:
Well said.
WHEN HILLARY SPEAKS, DUCK & RUN
If you are a concerned Iraqi, it is time to worry.
http://greensrealworld.blogspot.com/2009/04/what-follows-below-is-news-announcement.html
Even though you have a variety of perspectives on both causes and solutions, it’s my opinion that those of you who have experience and insight who are posting various options on this board today could come up with workable plans for both AfPak and Iraq in 90 minutes that would make more sense than anything than Bo’s owner is supporting.
These are not good days for the United States of America. I sure hope you guys are also talking to each other OFF these threads. Whether active duty or retired, our future is going to rest as such as you. Thank you.
Certainly the Pakistani government could turn this situation around if they really wanted to. Obama has claimed that he is trying to defend the Pakistani state, and certainly the United States could do that if it really wanted to. So why worry?
Here’s why: Obama’s stated willingness to negotiate with the “moderate Taliban”. Given that the likely result of a coup d’etat would be turning the “moderate Taliban” into the new rulers of Pakistan, Obama’s statement in hindsight looks like a signal that US intervention in Pakistani is doomed to failure.
Pakistan is irrelevant, as long as we can get the nukes. No nukes, Pakistan is just somalia, who cares?
The current administation appears to understand this and have a sense of priorities. This is unlike Mr Bush who was both incompetent and easily fooled.
Nukes are complex machines. We can hope the people in charge of nukes in Pakistan will choose to take a deal and live in the west, rather than the 7th century. Trying to seize them without internal help is difficult as the Paks are expecting it.
Mr Obama may turn out to be Jimmy Two but there is no evidence yet to support that idea.
@147 Cannoneer #4
A motorized Anabasis, until the fuel tanks run dry.
Let’s assume the US Navy and USAF still exist after this nuke decimation of US/NATO force structure in Afghanistan:
STIP: I have to assume that even Great Leader Obama couldn’t restrain America in this circumstance;
D+1 – If there were any identifiable authors of above destruction they would be subject to SLCM, and if necessary Trident and Minuteman;
D+2 – B-2, F-22 and other strategic resources comprising the Mother of all SEAD would arrive over the battlefield from North America, Guam, Diego Garcia
D+3 – B1, B-52 and other ground attack forces begin basing at emergency locations in India
D+4 – if there ever were enemy concentrations, they contine to be reduced
D+5 – surviving American/NATO force, while continuing to annihilate any and all indigenous threats, is reinforced and massively re-supplied, including entire wings of heliborne assault.
D+6 – air bridge flights into Afghanistan reach 500 per day
QUESTION: In this Anabasis, whoever the enemies barring our way, how are they going to cut off our passage through the sky? Can’t be done.
(just theory – in the real world, is it worth it?)
#158 Tony,
With all due respect, I do not think that your scenario will work out that way in real life.
YMMV of course.
1) Your stipulation is not a given. The problem would be more accurately stated, how would how would you force Obama to react? Consider that in lieu of a formal announcement claiming credit, we would not have proof positive for some time [isotope analysis] of exactly the source of the weapons [Iranian or Pakistani, or other?] which would bear on who gets hit, and if they were Pakistani, who launched. Wipe out Pakistan in toto if it was “renegade” Paks working for the Taliban? If it was the Pak government, of course the entire country should be a free fire zone, but one can hear the Left and the media crying that the poor Pakistani people should not suffer for the actions of their evil government. There are plenty of reasons that they can cite for inaction. Barring mass uprisings and politicians hanging from lamp-posts [be still my beating heart], if Obama wants to avoid retaliation, he can, at least until there is a second strike.
2) D + 1 there are the problems cited above, plus the problems of making sure that Russia and China do not read the launch as a threat to them. It could be done, if we had a leader who was a) forceful, b) had credibility with them, and c) who could assure them that it was only aimed at targets in Pakistan. Factors a) & b) above have not been demonstrated as yet in any forum, but especially in matters of foreign affairs. And I would assume that Russia and China would love to forestall any American reaction for their own reasons.
3) D+3, makes the assumption that India will join in on us. Keeping in mind that India did not retaliate after Mumbai, their involvement is not a given.
4) D+5 and D+6,
According to the Air Force, we have 111 C-5′s, 170 C-17′s, and 435 cargo versions of the C-130. This includes active, reserve, and air national guard inventory. The C-130′s would be primarily for in theater distribution, based on range, speed, and short field characteristics. The deliveries to the distribution points [although if we hold suitable airfields in Afghanistan some could land there] would be handled by the 281 large transports.
A 500 sortie a day mission rate implies a continuous average rate of 1.78 sorties per aircraft per day. This would only be theoretically possible if we are able to ship supplies to Europe and fly from there. If we have to make sorties each way to and from the ZI, there ain’t gonna be 500 sorties a day.
There is absolutely no way that our “allies” will so allow, if only because they are going to be scared gormless at the prospect of a) being nuked by various Muslims, and b) ongoing riots by their Muslim populations if they help us.
It takes a C-17 18 hours to fly from Virginia to Djibouti. Add a few hours to get to Afghanistan. Functionally one round trip every 2 days assuming no real down time for maintenance [oops, kind of required] and enough crews trained to fly them and get enough rest to be safe.
140 flights per day max.
A single Infantry division [roughly 9-10,000 men] on offense requires 1290 tons of ammunition, 660 tons of fuel, 51 tons of food, and 55 tons of spares. Total 2056 tons per day. We have about 32,000 troops in Afghanistan before the 17,000 additional that Obama promised [after cutting it from the 30,000 additional he promised between November 2008 and January 2009]. I realize that not all are organized in a division format because not all are Army, but this will do for an approximation. Say 3 1/2 divisions. Actually it will be more for Air Force units due to fuel requirements and ordnance, plus supplies to maintain and operate.
Thus 4515 tons of ammunition, 2310 tons of fuel, 178.5 tons of food, and 192.5 tons of spares. Total= 7196 tons per day.
The kicker is going to be moving the fuel by air. You cannot just caulk the seams of the cargo compartment of a C-5, turn on the tap, and fill the thing up. Fuel can only be moved efficiently by sea or pipeline and somewhat less so by tanker truck.
This is before the reinforcements mentioned. Wings of helicopters are fuel hogs. With a sortie rate of 3 per aircraft per day, each helicopter uses 6 tons of supplies per day, mostly fuel.
POL is, as always, the key. Even if we commit our entire airlift capability, we would soon find ourselves with a force that has only the firepower and mobility of an infantryman on foot. And that restricted to near our airhead, because it takes fuel to run the vehicles to get the supplies to the troops outside the perimeter. In addition, if we land the aircraft inside Afghanistan, each base will have to have a stockpile of fuel and aircraft spares for the transport force that lands there. Kind of like the logistics problems of the XX Bomber Command of the 20th Air Force having to ferry supplies to China to bring Japan within B-29 range in the absence of a land route over the Hump.
And we cannot afford to commit our entire airlift capability.
I wish, I really wish, we had the capabilities to do this. If we cannot supply a force in combat, it is criminal to put them in harms way.
#157 Andy
You are assuming a competence and mindset that is not, as far as I can tell, in evidence. Can you cite anything he has done in his life that would support the concept of such decisiveness, or skill in such matters.
Consider that the group that is pleased to call itself the government of Pakistan is less than thrilled with him, as his expressed desire to negotiate with “moderate Taliban” undercut their position. The same thing applies to the real Taliban, because they themselves are upset at the concept of there being “moderate Taliban”. Between the two groups, those are ones controlling the nukes, who would have to be bought off.
Any such attempt to subvert and perhaps cut a deal for either possession or sabotage of the nukes would have to be done through our intelligence community. The same group which is demoralized, fearful of being made scapegoats, and which has just been taught that it is better to play CYA while this administration is in power.
Finally, given that his attitude and actions indicate that Iranian nukes floating around the terrorist world are not a threat, what indication is there that there is a different attitude towards Pakistani nukes?
Is there anything to indicate that he would do this, or even be competent at doing something like that, other than hope?
Subotai Bahadur
Carter II
USA 0 …and negative infinity is a long way down
SB 159
If the Iranians are to be denied Nukes the Israelis will have to do that. Mr Bush has already let that ship sail and even blocked weapons transfers to Our friends to accomplish a task Bush should have done years ago. Will Mr Obama do better? I do not know, but he cannot do worse with Iran.
As to the CIA, it has been mostly worthless for 30 years, that will not change now. The days of Colby and grumbles are gone, today the CIA is mostly liberals from land grant universities who only speak english and read ( and contribute to ) the NYT.
Mr Obama has expanded the marines and army, focused on the weapons we need and seems capable of distinguishing important from unimportant. These are all major improvements over Mr “all hat no cattle”. Will it be enough ? We shall find out but is unfair to assume Mr Obama will fail based on the current evidence of his action. His words are for his base, his actions are all that matters. Look past the advertising , just as you should ignore Mr Bush’s empty bluster. Only actions matter. Taking over pak nukes depends far more on the Paks and our special ops than it does the CIA.
As for the suppy lines to afpak , you speak like a former logistics officer and clearly know where of you speak. The key is a new line of suppy, which we can buy if we have to.
For all you harping on about securing the nukes have no idea what that means.
An attack on a country’s nuclear weapons is met with only one response: using them.
What would the US, Russia, or any other state do in a situation where its chief deterrent was being attacked?
For those that think the US could do so w/o anything going wrong, do you really want to take that risk? And those that think the Indians, or even a competent Eeuropean military/govt. could do something similar with even a TENTH the skill of the United States are living in an alternate universe.
Not to mention you guys are all blowing this entire situation out of proportion. Pakistan is a long way from falling to the Taliban and each step they take hurts their image with the average Pakistani. Only problem is each US drone strike and the crazy rhetoric emanating from Obama’s “expert” foreign policy team also drives the average Pakistani away from support for the US and their own govt. Unfortunately, these two things are on a continuum and its a lot easier to get angry a foreign actor than one you consider ethnically part of your country. We will have to be very careful with the image we project and the action we take over the next few months if we don’t want things to get out of control
The best way forward is a temporary halt to the drone strikes with strong, private pressure put on the Pakistani govt. and military to act and the threat of cutting off aid (and doing it if they don’t act) if they don’t do so.
Anyways, it look like the recent Taliban encroachment into Buner as well at continued bombings, floggings, and beheadings, as well as their breaking of the Swat peace deal (which I think was a smart tactical ploy by the govt./military to show how dishonest the Taliban really are if it failed..or to bring peace if it worked) is sapping the small amount of popular support the Taliban has in Pakistan, and the military finally has the support to step up their attacks w/o being repelled by poor morale, mutiny, or a civilian uprising (yes “step up” – thousands of Pakistani soldiers have already died and thousands more injured in addition to the thousands of civilians who have died – Pakistanis are facing this war in the fact more than ANY single one of us).
Thank God you guys just live on the internet. I’m positive you guys would be the extremist segment of the Pashtun tribes and Taliban if you had grown up in Pashtun territory b/w the 80′s to today.
Tony
With BAF and KAF both glowing in the dark, you have no place to land 500 flights a day. Kabul International is all you have left. Shindand, Jalalabad, Camp Bastion are pretty much limited to C-130 and smaller. Bastion is gravel.
Without fuel, everything comes in with reduced payload because they have to carry their own return trip fuel. Long ways to go back to Kuwait or Qatar or Dubai. We lose Manas in two months, which seriously affects our aerial refueling capability.
Your entire wings of heliborne assault won’t have any go juice, either. Nearly all the JP-8 lit up when BAF did.
#161 Andy
You have cited no specifics, just generalities. And a plea to look beyond the words to his base, because apparently he is lying to them according to your formulation. It comes down to who he is lying to, his base, or us. Either way, he is not to be trusted.
If our SpecOps forces are going to go in and snatch or destroy the Pakistani nuclear deterrent, it will imply having the way prepared for them. Contacts have to have been made, deals cut, and detailed information as to what is where will have to be gathered as close to real time as possible. Key people will have to be “turned” or neutralized. THAT is the role of our intel folk. Who have just been told that their aft orifi are out hanging in the wind if they do anything.
Do you have any concept of exactly how large, and how dispersed the Pakistani nuclear inventory is? It is NOT necessarily all in one place, albeit there is a central depot. We are dealing with …. a non-trivial number of nuclear devices.
Here is some data, open source, that I published for a project I was involved with about 3 years ago. Neither the data, nor the project was classified. I will, however, redact certain portions. Believe it or not as you will:
————————————–
The majority of Pakistan’s nuclear deterrent is still carried in aircraft. #’s 16 and 25 Squadrons are equipped with Chinese
A-5 strike aircraft in the nuclear role. They are based at PAFB Peshawar. …[section redacted]
#’s 5, 7,8, and 22 Squadrons are equipped with variants of Mirage which may be nuclear capable.
7, 8, and 22 are based at PAFB Masroor near Karachi. There is also a major reactor complex near Karachi …. [redacted]
5 is based at PAFB Rafiqui near Shorkot. …[redacted]
#’s 9 and 11 Squadrons are equipped with F-16′s, which can be used in a nuclear strike role. They are based at PAFB
Sargodha, near the city of Sargodha. The base is also home to the Central Ammunition Depot, which has a major role in
storage of Pakistani nuclear weapons and missiles. The missiles may be stored:
Indian intelligence agencies are reported to believe that the missiles are stored in a sub-depot near the Central Ammunition
Depot at Sargodha on Kirana Hills [at 31°57'N 72°43'E] near Lahore. The Pakistani military has constructed storage sheds
for the missiles and mobile launchers, as well as related maintenance facilities and housing for launch crews. Reportedly
soldiers have also been sighted practicing simulated launches with advice from visiting Chinese experts.
….[redacted]
——————————
If the Paks have placed their nuclear deterrent on alert, there is an excellent chance that it will be at least in part dispersed, and the majority will be out of reach. Our people are good. They are not supermen, and there are not that many of them.
In addition, there are more than a few facilities that produce their weapons. They would have to be taken out too. Neither their nuclear operations forces, nor their production facilities are hardened. I assure you that a number of people in a number of places have contemplated means of dealing with them both. It is a non-trivial problem, and the means are extremely non-trivial to have any hope of an acceptable effectiveness.
I will believe that our forces will be allowed to deal with them, when I see it. NOTHING in the background or known actions of the NCA would indicate that such would occur.
As far as the matter of alternate routes that “we can buy”, for all practical purposes it will involve either Iran or the FSU “stans”. The latter would in all but one case involve revocable-at-will Russian permission. The strategic price for either would be more than we could afford.
The one case that would not involve Russia directly, would have started at a place called Poti, in Georgia. As we speak, it is under threat of Russian attack. In fact, statements by Russian officials seem to vindicate this explanation of how the Russians view the “Reset”/”Overcharge” button and the stated desire by Obama to change US/Russian relations. From the Jamestown Foundation:
The announced desire by the U.S. and NATO to “reset” relations seems to have been interpreted in Moscow as a vindication of the invasion of Georgia last August and a tacit recognition of Russia’s special rights and interests within the South Caucasus.
http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=34891&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=7&cHash=10cee5a7b3
Anybody remember April Glasbie? They seem to think they have been given US permission to attack Georgia, and incidentally to block the last supply route to Afghanistan not subject to enemy denial.
Subotai Bahadur
162. Bob:
Did some loco weed happen to get mixed in with your morning feed?
Your arguments are illogical and borders on the Democrat’s defeatist ideology.
This sort of drivel is usually the preserve of Joe Biden.
“private pressure put on …” sounds like something out of Slick Willy’s play book when trolling for interns.
@159 Subotai, thank you for your very interesting analysis, sir. In a DEFCON 1 situation that we are war-gaming here, we would entrain civilian and allied transport, beyond our own existing capabilities.
@163 Cannoneer #4, sorry if I was confusing, sir, I don’t suggest we’re going to stay in Afghanistan. In the events we are imagining, we will be de-assing that place faster than Peachy Carnehan out of Kafiristan.
@161 Andy re: “Bush’s empty bluster” – tell it to Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, tell it to Saddam and Al Qaeda in Iraq, tell it to AQ Khan, Gaddafi and his former WMD programs, etc. Comparing President Bush to today’s American Idol? hah. Oh, and the build-back of our military began under Bush, not the American Idol. Remember just last year when we were going to send 30,000 troops to Afghanistan, for starters? And now we’re supposed to believe sending 2/3 that many is a bold new offensive. hah.
@162 Bob, many Belmont Clubbers have not always “lived on the Internet” y’know.
#166 Tony,
I agree that in such a condition we would mobilize the CRAF; however, that would not deal with the critical shortfall. As for our allies, I wish we still had any. At this point, the normal tendency of most of those we consider allies to oppose any actual effort by the US has been kicked into overdrive by “Teh Lightworker’s” deliberate snubs to our friends and fawning on our enemies have left us alone.
In point of fact, the only friends we can depend on implicitly are the Aussies. I love them, but they do not have the capability to help with this. The EU will be terrified, and will oppose us in self defense. The Brits are politically a dogs breakfast and paralysed. The Israelis will be subject to the normal restrictions, plus being concerned with their own survival.
Any planning assumption that posits allies in this, has sadly edged towards the realm of fantasy.
My own personal prescription, and it has been so for weeks here on BC, is that we prepare to haul ass because we cannot supply our forces. Classified materials and non-essential personnel should be on their way out. Equipment should be being drawn down. And preparations should be made to leave a wasteland where our bases were. The force should be optimizing for a fighting withdrawal.
When we lack both the will and ability to maintain a force surrounded by the enemy, the priority should be the withdrawal for that force intact unless it can only be done at too great a national cost. The problem of the Pakistani nukes is a separate matter, and I think only …… non-trivial means will suffice for that.
Subotai Bahadur.
Tony 166
Actually Bush refused for 6 years to expand the Army and the marines. He also refused to increase pay or improve condition. Bush wrecked our army. Look at the % of Non HS grad today vs 8 years ago ( 30 % vs 5% ). Look at the felons waivers in the army. All the while Bush kept the f/35 progam and building new ships. The truck fleet is shot. The Army training camps are filled with people who have no business in the armed forces, and the DIs are no longer allowed to get rid of them. A willingness to misuse the Army is not the same thing as supporting the Army. As for his attack on Afganistan, are you aware Mr Bush allowed virtually all of the al Queda Leadership to escape, using tribemen to attack OBL while Mattais and 5,000 marines sat parked 80 miles away? Mr Bush stood by and did nothing while the locals looted Iraq and destroyed any possible political basis for winning the Iraq war.Mr Bush also destroyed the Unity of our country .It was his job to make it work, he failed. Bush was the worst war President since Madison. By the way aq Khan is healthy wealthy and free, just like most of the people who have crossed us in the last 8 years. Talk is cheap, whiskey costs money. Mr Bush thought torture proved he was tough, actually increasing the amount of GDP dedicated to the army is the real toughness. Bush did not do it.
Unless you are willing to acknowedge the catastrophe that is Bush, the serial incompetence that has led us to this pass you cannot see a way forward. Bush was not an evil person, he was just a fool.
SB : I would agree that taking the Pak nukes is hard. The Paks have hidden them and they expect an attempt. If you think it is up to the CIA to make this work I would suggest moving out of NYC or Washington. The key will be the Paks who help. The facilites to make bombs can be easily destroyed if it comes to that.
While a new logistics line is expensive and difficult ( both in $ and concessions to the Russians ) what choice do we have? Fortunatly the Russians are broke and going down hard, the price may be practical. Better than occuping Pakistan with 160 million semi literate fanatics. The Russians are not going to attck Ga. again, they simply cannot afford it. And no how limited the suppy line the idea that some here have suggested that our men in Afgan will be destroyed like a 19th century Britsh army is foolish.
Mr Obama may be as bad as you say. But remember FDR, whom many considered a soft rich kid with no qualifications. The job may make the man. The real decisions are yet to come. We shall see. Given Mr Obama’s decisions so far on the issues that matter, it has got to be better than the last 8 years. The ability to priortize and surround yourself with competent people who are actually selected for ability rather than asskissing is a major improvement. Perhaps it presages a man that can think ? We had better hope so.
Did your mother actually name you after Gengis Khan’s best General? That would be very cool.
I laughed and pointed out that America is an idea, and ideas cannot be destroyed. They can only be replaced with better ideas.
Ideas can easily be destroyed. Islam has been quite effective at doing so in areas it controls. Ideas can also be replaced with worse ideas. That’s the goal of jihad after all. It’s also Obama’s goal.
Re: # 168 Andy:
#166 Tony, please bear with me while I weigh in on the “points” Andy is trying to raise. I am not trying to usurp any reply you may wish to make yourself.
Andy,
While I, and most other analysts, strongly criticize Bush for failing to put our military on a war footing [I myself want to see 3 division colors brought out of retirement at Carlisle Barracks, 3 more CVBG's, and several more wings of air transport and aerial tankers.] Your statements are disingenuous at best. Let us look at your figures for high school dropouts. First, they date from 2005. Second, they include those who dropped out of high school and then went on to get GED’s as being the same as dropouts.
Current data [as of February] indicates that 70% of high school students go on to graduate. Last year, the Army recruited 83% new enlistees with diplomas. This year they plan to have 90% diploma holders. Of the remaining, the bulk have GED’s and the program to reach out to dropouts in fact creates GED holders.
To be accepted, you have to have left high school without a diploma at least 6 months before. You have to pass both the physical standards [most recruits who fail to complete the enlistment process fail for physical reasons], AND you have to take and pass the standard aptitude and psychological tests before joining the program. The Army will then help you prepare for and take the exam for a GED. You are listed as being on the Delayed Entry Program, and must have the GED within 6 months to be allowed to enlist. Not exactly the same as someone who is a true dropout and it indicates more than a bit of drive to improve one’s life.
Of the “waivers”, the Army has received permission to issue up to 6000 waivers on an individual basis for both physical and behavioural problems. That is out of an Army of about 1/2 million active duty. [1.2%]
The majority of the waivers are for physical problems, mostly eyesight. Most of the behavioural problems involve juvenile activity, and they include having had tattoos that portray things not tolerated by the military. I will note that they look at the overall record and life of the individual at a 10 level review process to see if the individual is in fact suitable to enlist. Each individual has to be approved in the end by a general officer. Not exactly the wholesale destruction of the military portrayed. Current recruiting is at 105% of goal and 112% of the goal for the Reserves without reducing standards.
http://www.army.mil/-news/2009/02/12/16846-army-recruiting-on-track-despite-challenges/
I find the concern for the quality of the military somewhat surprising, since it is a goal of the Democratic Party to reintroduce the 1960′s style draft. This gave us an Army of 40% actual dropouts, criminals sentenced to the military, and lowered combat effectiveness. In fact the chief sponsor of the legislation, Representative Rangel, intends to build in a permanent anti-military constituency thereby, and permanent opposition to any use of the military.
The remaining reply to Tony seems to reflect a combination of DailyKos and Democratic Underground “9/11 Truther” talking points. This does not enhance your credibility.
To return to your reply to me; IF there is any action by the Obama administration to secure Pakistan’s nukes [a point that is in extreme doubt] it will not be done exclusively by some Rambo-esque strike by a bunch of lone wolves. The preparation for any such effort will have to be done by our Intel folk operating to get the information the strike team would need, to turn or neutralize key people, and if as you have mentioned before some Pakistanis would deliver their materials to us in return for payoff and asylum, yes it is the CIA who would be doing that. Mind you, I do not have a great deal of trust in the CIA because of their history of leaking secret information for the benefit of the Democrats; but they are the ones who will have to do the job.
Your confidence that the Russians are not going to attack Georgia is … interesting.
The Russian Black Seas Fleet sortied en masse from Sevastopol some time ago. This is not a normal fleet evolution and was last done when Georgia was last attacked. Their amphibious vessels are fully loaded with Naval Landing Troops [the closest approximation they have to our Marines]. The Russians just completed a new rail line into South Ossetia, and Russian troops are massing just on the other side of the border. The Russian government has just warned/threatened NATO not to have scheduled troop exercises in Georgia, and there are instances of crew served weapons being fired from the Russian controlled area into Georgia. Yep. sounds prefectly peaceable. The conquest of Georgia would in fact enhance Russian finances by blocking the only route for Central Asian energy to get to Europe outside of Russian control. And, as noted, it would block the only alternative route for American supplies to get to Afghanistan. Your willingness to subordinate US interests to those of Russia and/or Iran is your right.
Your faith in the ability and intentions of the Lightworker seems genuine. No matter what we say here, events will unfold regardless. Can we say that the future credibility of your support for Obama would be measured in part by any reaction or lack thereof to the possible loss of control of the Pakistani nukes and any Russian attack on Georgia?
As far as the name. While I am an American of Asian ancestry, I am not Mongol. However, I adopted it as a “nom de blog/pen” for my non-official and non-commercial writing; out of admiration for one of the great military minds of all time.
Subotai Bahadur
Look at that flag. Is that the horns of the bull, with the star in the middle? Yep, it sure is.
Paganism from the Tower of Babel is with us still today. Google it.
Over.
Subotai Bahadur:
Great Name – Courageous People