Obama Wants to Kumbaya the Taliban to Death, I Guess…

Remind me again just who is it that we are fighting in Afghanistan?  I could have sworn it is al-Qaeda AND the Taliban—mostly the Taliban, right now.  Obama is a moron.  No wonder our Military men and women are getting so discouraged.  It isn’t that this is an un-winnable war, because it is certainly winnable, no, the problem is that Obama is tying our Military’s hands with all his “Team Delta Farce Kumbaya” crap.

Where are our Saudi friends?  Shouldn’t they be fighting alongside us in Afghanistan?  I mean, aren’t they the ones who exported al-Qaeda?:

AP source: Obama focusing on al-Qaida, not Taliban
Oct 8 01:47 PM US/Eastern
via Breitbart

WASHINGTON (AP) – A senior administration official says President Barack Obama is prepared to accept some Taliban involvement in Afghanistan’s political future and is inclined to send only as many more U.S. troops to Afghanistan as are needed to keep al-Qaida at bay.

The assessment comes from an official who has been involved in the president’s discussions with his war council about Afghanistan strategy. The official was authorized to speak to The Associated Press about the discussions but not to be identified by name because the talks are ongoing.

Aides say the president’s final decision on Afghanistan strategy and troop levels is still at least two weeks away, but the emerging thinking suggests he would be unlikely to favor a large military ramp-up of the kind being advocated by his top commander in Afghanistan [General McChrystal].

Explore posts in the same categories: Uncategorized

4 Comments on “Obama Wants to Kumbaya the Taliban to Death, I Guess…”

  1. AZ Nana Says:

    Win the war? I was listening to talk radio last week when a military mom called in.Seems her son in Afghanistan sent a message to her asking for socks.Also said they wern,t eating to well. How do we win a war if our goverment won.t feed our fighting men and women and put socks on their feet?

  2. Gramfan Says:

    “Manchurian Candidate” doesn’t do Obama justice any more.

    “Trojan horse”, “Fifth Columnist”,,,combination of all of them and more.

    We need to invent a new word.

    “Traitor” doesn’t cut it either.

  3. Solkhar Says:

    I have commented a number of times on this so sorry for those who think I am repeating myself.

    The doctrine to win a war requires the three elements (known as facets) that are:

    1) the Capacity to wage the war. (Military strenth, logistics, intel gathering etc.
    2) the Capacity to either gain support or control of the terrrain (the country you are waging the war). Thus either the people want you or you can subdue the people. The last is,
    3) the Support and collaboration of the people back home. That means, government, voters, industry etc.

    Vietnam failed for the second and third facets, proving this old and proven theory always works. The Generals know this, it is taught in every military college of value.

    The reality is, and The General in Afghanistan has supported it, that the population is not on-side at present. The Joint Chief actually said it clearly, the people will not support it if the US appears arrogant and does not care about civilian deaths etc.

    One argument of a sad but necessary reality is that the Taliban is popular. Al Qaeda is not, the growing of drugs is not, the existance of non-Afghan military is not.

    Though by nature the Taliban are ultra-conservatives with their own wacky tribal-version of Islam, there are those Taliban whom seek peace and relationships with the West and those that want war. The idea, and I have to say that the world must accept it, is that any terrorism-violence free independant Afghanistan is never going to be a secular or moderate Islamic state. It is going to be like Sudan and Saudi Arabia at best.

    For this reason, I support that the effort (to win and finish this f*cking war in Afghanistan based on the three facets and realities) that distinguishing and siding with the moderate-leaning and peaceful factions of the Taliban at the price of them joining and condemning the violent and terrorism supporting Taliban is essential. The other factor is as soon as control is guarenteed, the economy of Afghanistan must eliminate once and for all, the poppy plantations and replace them with viable businesses and protect it.

    Thus, facet 1 is almost there (with more soldiers than asked for), facet 2 if the above is done and 3) needs bipartisan support for at least the sake of the lives of the young men and women who are risking their lives for this task.

    No, Doc, I think dealing with the Taliban is in fact necessary.

    • “No, Doc, I think dealing with the Taliban is in fact necessary.”

      Absolutely, my friend.

      My thinking on this is, however, that making “deals” with an enemy while he is in the process of gaining the upper hand only leads to more concessions by the U.S. and Afghan diplomats. Best to strike him hard, fast, and furious. Put him in a position of submission; forcing him to the negotiating table with his tail between his legs, as it were. Then, and only then, is it time to make “deals.”

      George Schultz, the Secretary of State under President Ronald Reagan, put it this way: “Negotiations are a euphemism for capitulation if the shadow of power is not cast across the bargaining table.”

      Obama appears to be working not so much on a victory as he is a “capitulation.”

      As for the “moderate” Taliban, well, I can only go by what the spokesman for the Taliban, Qari Mohammad Yousuf, has said in the past when Obama first proposed talking to the “moderate” Taliban:

      “The Taliban are united, have one leader, one aim, one policy…I do not know why they are talking about moderate Taliban and what it means?”

      “If it means those who are not fighting and are sitting in their homes, then talking to them is meaningless. This really is surprising the Taliban.”

      The father of the Strategic Air Command, General Curtis Lemay, once famously said, “If you kill enough of them, they stop fighting.”

      Kill enough of the Taliban who, as you say, “want war,” they stop fighting and become “moderates.”

      I am sure you have heard of the tanker truck that was bombed in Afghanistan; back near the beginning of September in the Kunduz providence. Unfortunately, there were civilians amongst the Taliban who were killed.

      General McChrystal—having previously been beaten down by Karzai and other Afghan officials for collateral damages, and fearful that the civilian casualties would further alienate the Afghan public—was reportedly upset and determined to tighten the U.S. Military’s already-strict rules of engagement.

      McChrystal immediately set up a meeting with local leaders in Kunduz and met with them a few days after the bombing to apologize profusely for the civilian casualties and assure the local leaders that the U.S. Military would further tighten the rules of engagement. However, the earful he got from the locals leaders in return was probably not quite what he was expecting:

      In Kabul, McChrystal issued a taped message: “I take this possible loss of life or injury to innocent Afghans very seriously.”
      Unexpected Support

      At midday Saturday, after visiting the hospital and flying over the bombing site in a helicopter, the team met with two local officials. The NATO officers were expecting anger and calls for compensation. What they received was a totally unanticipated sort of criticism.

      “I don’t agree with the rumor that there were a lot of civilian casualties,” said one key local official, who said he did not want to be named because he fears Taliban retribution. “Who goes out at 2 in the morning for fuel? These were bad people, and this was a good operation.”

      A few hours later, McChrystal arrived at the reconstruction team’s base in Kunduz. A group of leaders from the area, including the chairman of the provincial council and the police chief, were there to meet him. So, too, were members of an investigative team dispatched by President Hamid Karzai.

      McChrystal began expressing sympathy “for anyone who has been hurt or killed.”

      The council chairman, Ahmadullah Wardak, cut him off. He wanted to talk about the deteriorating security situation in Kunduz, where Taliban activity has increased significantly in recent months. NATO forces in the area, he told the fact-finding team before McChrystal arrived, need to be acting “more strongly” in the area.

      His concern is shared by some officials at the NATO mission headquarters, who contend that German troops in Kunduz have not been confronting the rise in Taliban activity with enough ground patrols and comprehensive counterinsurgency tactics.

      “If we do three more operations like was done the other night, stability will come to Kunduz,” Wardak told McChrystal. “If people do not want to live in peace and harmony, that’s not our fault.”

      McChrystal seemed to be caught off guard.

      “We’ve been too nice to the thugs,” Wardak continued.

      As McChrystal drove to the bombing site — defying German suggestions that the area was too dangerous — one senior NATO official noted that the lack of opposition from local officials, despite relatively clear evidence that some civilians were killed, could help to de-escalate tensions.

      “We got real lucky here,” the official said.

      But McChrystal still had a message to deliver. Even if the Afghan officials were not angry, he certainly did not seem pleased.

      In my humble opinion, if you want to win their hearts and minds, then just concentrate on killing the enemy until he is completely and utterly defeated. You will never win the hearts and minds of the locals as long as you are still battling the enemy in their villages and homes. All that Kumbaya crap can come later—after the war is won.

      Anyway, as you know, I’m patriotically biased; That’s just my two-cents. Take it for what it’s worth.

      It’s always a pleasure to hear from you, Solkhar. You always make excellent points and keep me constantly thinking and re-evaluating my perceptions.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: