Britain planned (plans?) to train Taliban

[Skybird]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...an-777671.html

Wowh. Obviously noone has learned from the American assistance for Pakistan, and the long history of quickly changing alliance between factions in Afghnaistan when fighting against the Russians. Idiots.

Stupidity and short-sighted opportunism like this is one of the reasons why on the one hand I have sympathy for the criticism of German generals on the politically wanted limited role of German forces in Afghanistan, and on the one hand want the germans pulled out of Afghanistan completely.

You might be surpised to learn that the strong majority of the german military and it's leaderships sees German policies damaging NATO ( http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutsc...533058,00.html ) . But the parties since years have raised a totally wrong, pink-and-rosy painted image of the situation in Afghanistan, and so would commit suicide when telling the public that Germany now should go into unlimited full-war combat action. And even the past efforts, which initially led to very good results (times hat are long since by), are opposed by what polls describe since years as robust majoriteis of 80+ % of the population being against any German military presence in Afghnaistan at all - even the current one. It all has turned into a political egg-dance since then. Meanwhile, the German troops remain to be heavily dependant on the US when it comes to rescue operation and emergcny logistics, and are in a position that sees them unable to provide botzh to their own troops even when taking over the rapid reaction force from the leaving Norwegians this summer. I think you should not send your army around the planet if you are not capable to support it by your own, and depend on the good will of others - it is against all military reason.

But when seeing that there is no realism in german policies, and when seing that despite the heavier combat engagement British policies in the hidden seem to not runnign short on studpidity, irresponsibility and short-sightendness as well, and when remebering that America still sees Pakistan as an ally, supports it by wasting enormous sums that to considerable degree end in weapons directed against Western soldiers in Afghnaistan, then I cannot accept the risk for german soldiers being ordered to risk their life in a mission that is about all this described above, and was helped and that detoriated by a premature pulling out of forces after the post-9'/11 war on Afghanistan in order to start another unneeded war of choice elsewhere. Not a single western soldier's life is worth to be risked with such insane policies in place, and that includes Germans as well as American and British and Candians and the others.

Politiical decision makers should be forced to share the risks themselves that they order others into. Themselves - or their family members.

With each yearly quarter passing, Afghanistan illustrates how stupid and unknowing the West in it's political planning really is, and that includes Washington as well as Berlin and London. Shame on all these dressed gentleman and fine people.

All this even ignoring the many problems deriving from the intricacies of internal tribe relations and Afghan society and history which I repeatedly have referred to in the past.

Trapped in the Afghan maze. China and Russia wacthes, and smile to see America and Europe weakening themselves and watching their ressources so headlessly. meanwhile Bush had brought in his budget plan wioth a new record deficit, cutting social projects, and in favour if the military. Oh happy days...

If he hopes to impress military voters for the next election and help the Republican candidate, it is not sure that the guy would get the military vote so automatically as it usually seems to be. On Sunday, I jumped into the middle of a TV docu from aboard an american carrier currently engaged in the Iraq operations. the correspondent, a veteran for US affairs who lives there since long time, took a snapshot of the mood amongst people. most said that they do not like or trust any of the candidates, no matter their olarty, and that many would vote for the smallest evil. It also seems that this time more than usual will not vote at all. More cautiously he got opinions indicated that while raising the military budget may be good for the military, but that they are somewhat tired of endless war and lost track of the reasons for it, means: do not find them convincing. This autumn, maybe a greater part of the miliuzary will not vote at all, and the Republican candiate may find it a bit more difficult to get the usual taken for granted military vote. He probably gets it, but not to that strength than usual. - Well, a snapshot from amongst the crew of an american carrier - not more , but also: not less.

[MothBalls]

I like turtles.

[Yahoshua]

Even a turtles' shell can be cracked Mothball.

[mrbeast]

Sounds like the UK government was trying to use some sort of carrot and stick policy, but I'm not sure if this was the correct tactic to use in such a strategy. Its true, however, that many of the Taliban fighters are not there because they are Islamic fanatics but simply because the Taliban pays them a regular wage to fight. If some of these could be bribed away from fighting, given an incentive; policies of this type might have some merit.

As to the involvement of NATO forces, up to now Its been UK, US and Canadian forces that have taken the brunt of the action and I think its time that some of the other NATO nations took a more active role. I think that if enough effort was made Afghanistan might, just might, be a success.

I think that everyone, UK, US etc, needs to remember the number one rule when formulating policies concerning Afghanistan (and anywhere else in the middle east for that matter)..................................'Beware of Blowback'!

[Skybird]

As I said, the current situation forming after the premature reduction of military presence in 2002 already is the blowback. and I still wait for the first responsible decision-maker defining realistic targets for Afgjhnaistan. what we have right now is wishful thinking and hoping for better times, and general an attitude that is already satsified with just managing the mess from one day to the other. that is true for Berlin, and in other colours and styles that is true for london and Washington as well.

I am strictly against that paying of Taliban to stop them from fighting. Simply because alliances in Afghanistan always have been and thus: will be an uncertain thing. you never know when they will start fighting again and turn against the hand that feeded them before. One really should look at the history of alliances and treaties between rivalling and cooperating Mujaheddin groups during the Soviet occupation. Alliances and betrayal chnaged sometimes extremely quickly. It is a tribal society, with tribes being the elemental social unit. Don't put too much trust in national identity forming up to solid, trustworthy standards in such a cultural climate. Accept alliances, if you are being offered them. but don't give them money or weapons, and keep your own weapon loaded and ready when dealing with your "partners". Also, opium is an export hit with Afghnaistan now. That creates additonal criminal energies and yearbning for wealth and power that interfwere with honest efforts to pacify the country. You will meet resistance when threatening local warlord's incomes from opium at the latest. I always wondered how that is covered by NATO's ideals, an if you can see the North Atlantic from the Hindukush.