Retired U.S. general on how to handle IS and why we lost in Iraq, Afg

Syed.Ali.Haider said:

Of course, let us discuss all we want, but fairly. After all, this whole area will look very different in the next few years.

Click to expand...

Sure it will, the idea is to ensure that the Middle YeasT(pun intended) remains manageable with smaller sectarian and ethnic states that present a greater threat to each other and hence are forever squabbling.. rather then thinking of actual progress or worse off nuclear weapons. It has less to do with any conspiracy ideals and more to do with interests in ensuring the safety of citizens. That is the most logical thing to do.. However, untamed application of such policy as its after effects.. such as IS.

Oscar said:

Idealism does not ensure that my family members dont get robbed, beaten, kidnapped, abused, killed.. and to add to that.. where I cant even seek justice for it.

Click to expand...

That is precisely why idealism is not a rationalistic pursuit where you weigh the pros and cons on a weighing scale to determine where you stand.

But I understand; different people have different opportunities, ambitions and above all challenges and inhibitions in life - Thats why I implied that I don't judge people who go to settle abroad. To each his own.

Oscar said:

Sure it will, the idea is to ensure that the Middle YeasT(pun intended) remains manageable with smaller sectarian and ethnic states that present a greater threat to each other and hence are forever squabbling.. rather then thinking of actual progress or worse off nuclear weapons. It has less to do with any conspiracy ideals and more to do with interests in ensuring the safety of citizens. That is the most logical thing to do.. However, untamed application of such policy as its after effects.. such as IS.

Click to expand...

Once the policy is implemented, of course there will be side effects, but they can be managed in dues course as well. There is no real rush, is there? Sometimes it is better to let some events and forces run out of steam first before mopping them up.

Syed.Ali.Haider said:

Once the policy is implemented, of course there will be side effects, but they can be managed in dues course as well. There is no real rush, is there? Sometimes it is better to let some events and forces run out of steam first before mopping them up.

Click to expand...

But is the policy implemented in the most efficient way? This brings us back to the original question. Are the cost/gains in the war against IS optimal or are the mistakes of Operation Allied force in its initial inability to protect Bosnians from massacre being repeated?

Sure the differences/advances in ISR since then are phenomenal,but at the same time this is an enemy that may or may not need actual US Troop presence on the ground? Will that further demotivate or motivate those that are fighting against the IS?
@gambit has a reason to be rather upset with this arrangement.. because he was stationed in Saudi Arabia to essentially protect the Saudis from Saddam.. only to find Saudis burning the American flag and protesting against his being there.

Will a similar effect play out with the IS? Or will it be a case of an ineffective Iraqi Army bowing to the IS.. and a threat to the middle east's oil supply?

Again, there are other narratives to the IS threat as it also acts a deterrent to the Iranians first. So the whole idea of airstrikes on Iran gets pushed under the rug and negotiations for Iran to tone down its nuclear ambitions actually succeed because Iran has a bigger headache of genocidal sectarian nutjobs at its door.

Oscar said:

But is the policy implemented in the most efficient way? This brings us back to the original question. Are the cost/gains in the war against IS optimal or are the mistakes of Operation Allied force in its initial inability to protect Bosnians from massacre being repeated?

Sure the differences/advances in ISR since then are phenomenal,but at the same time this is an enemy that may or may not need actual US Troop presence on the ground? Will that further demotivate or motivate those that are fighting against the IS?
@gambit has a reason to be rather upset with this arrangement.. because he was stationed in Saudi Arabia to essentially protect the Saudis from Saddam.. only to find Saudis burning the American flag and protesting against his being there.

Will a similar effect play out with the IS? Or will it be a case of an ineffective Iraqi Army bowing to the IS.. and a threat to the middle east's oil supply?

Again, there are other narratives to the IS threat as it also acts a deterrent to the Iranians first. So the whole idea of airstrikes on Iran gets pushed under the rug and negotiations for Iran to tone down its nuclear ambitions actually succeed because Iran has a bigger headache of genocidal sectarian nutjobs at its door.

Click to expand...

Good questions, but please keep in mind that there is no valid yardstick for judging the efficiency of such large scale and long term remaking of entire regions. The whole process is bound to be messy, and probably will take twice as long and cost an order of magnitude more than originally thought, but that is just the nature of such attempts.

I can easily see the whole region beating each other over years into a pulp that is more easily moldable. Sounds callous, but that is just the way it is. Please note that making such a blunt statement refers to the policy and has no adverse bearing on my own humanity.

Syed.Ali.Haider said:

Good questions, but please keep in mind that there is no valid yardstick for judging the efficiency of such large scale and long term remaking of entire regions. The whole process is bound to be messy, and probably will take twice as long and cost an order of magnitude more than originally thought, but that is just the nature of such attempts.

I can easily see the whole region beating each other over years into a pulp that is more easily moldable. Sounds callous, but that is just the way it is. Please note that making such a blunt statement refers to the policy and has no adverse bearing on my own humanity.

Click to expand...

But there are valid yardsticks for judging the small scale progress that is made. Essentially improving the process as it goes along. So far, these actions have had their effect in how the reshaping of Afghanistan is taking place but for Iraq it seems to be counter productive. The US military for all its power is a fighting force and can only do so much in effecting the attitude of the people on the ground. As such, the the idea of "hearts and minds" has very limited success even with genuine philanthropy. One could argue that it would still continue regardless but for now all roads lead to the Palestinian issue.

It would be interesting to note what possible background comes to support a future anti-America narrative if the issue is resolved amicably between the Palestinian authority(not Hamas) and Israel. I suppose the existence of Israel will continue to be the issue and as such.. any possible hope of a positive view of the United States is rather feeble from the middle east.
Regardless of the attempts at apologetic/evasive branding, this has a lot to do with the political history of religion then the ideals of the existence of a state; the inability to "move on" for the majority of the worlds second largest religion.


Also.. I dont think this statement will have a repeat of the Malaon accusation.. although I cannot guarantee otherwise either.

@gambit please let the Russian bear and the Chinese dragon test your stupidity and competence
But you only test yourself on the nations like Iraq,syria,Afghanistan and Libya with rusty military from WW2 era.
Seriously grow a pair .

Armstrong said:

If generations of Pakistanis hadn't been leaving Pakistan in search of greener pastures we wouldn't be in such a mess !

I understand the need to have a better life, a more secure life and above all a life of dignity; so I will never say that talking Dual Nationality or settling abroad is wrong....to each his own.

But a part of me thinks that Pakistan has to be worth more than just its ranking on the Social and Economic Development Indices; that the word 'Motherland' has to hold more significance than a mere rise and fall of a country's fortunes.

Maybe its just Idealism....but idealism is all Pakistan is about...init ?

Click to expand...

Idealism is fine, but it is the balance between the two that is missing, idea needs realistic checks and measurable, quantifiable tech to have it implemented.

A "concept" alone does not get sold, it is the net result of the concept, that is consumable service or a project that is qualified to be called "product" and has marketable worth.

Pakistanis abroad would love to come back and work 40-60 hrs a week for their own country, but reality is a reality, there is no infrastructure, no accountability, no process.....and topped up with security issues

Am aware of some idealistic Pakistanis who packed up here, went to Pakistan, tried hard to implement their cool Americanized ideas, shed investments, and then came back to USA after few years to start over, fallen behind from their peers, ideas didn't find root there

Reem said:

Idealism is fine, but it is the balance between the two that is missing, idea needs realistic checks and measurable, quantifiable tech to have it implemented.

A "concept" alone does not get sold, it is the net result of the concept, that is consumable service or a project that is qualified to be called "product" and has marketable worth.

Pakistanis abroad would love to come back and work 40-60 hrs a week for their own country, but reality is a reality, there is no infrastructure, no accountability, no process.....and topped up with security issues

Am aware of some idealistic Pakistanis who packed up here, went to Pakistan, tried hard to implement their cool Americanized ideas, shed investments, and then came back to USA after few years to start over, fallen behind from their peers, ideas didn't find root there

Click to expand...

No one said that Idealism is synonymous with stupidity where you throw all rational dos and don'ts out the window and plunge in heedless of obstacles, challenges and what would be required of you to overcome them.

Idealism is what envisioned the dream of Pakistan and the Quaid's tact, perseverance and intellect is what had that dream realized.

The two go hand in hand and aren't mutually exclusive of each other by any means.

Despite the lack of infrastructure, accountability and security issues nearly 200 million Pakistanis still live here and many of them have made a name for themselves in spite of these challenges.

But that is besides the point; the point was purely and solely that if one's country's worth and value is pegged with such materialism why did we go for a separate country to begin with ? God knows that the Gora Sahib - the Brits - were better rulers than what we've had.

Why then ? Because the very notion of calling a piece of land 'one's country' transcends these parochial, albeit extremely important, notions of a better life. Because one generation has to suffer....to give it their all, so that succeeding generations don't.

Had our previous and present generations looked beyond these mundane pursuits even for a moment, accepted the problems of living in a developing country and given their all for their country - We wouldn't be seeing this.

And the above applies to all Pakistanis....not just the expats but more so those of us who still live in Pakistan.

If someone who's been grossly mistreated in Pakistan, has been reduced to a much lower wage than what can be reasonably expected him to live on or has been battered and bruised seeking justice in Pakistan and then he chooses to leave Pakistan - I sympathize with him/her.

But if someone from a relatively affluent family or the upper middle class starts complaining of the ills of Pakistan because he can't get a warm bath because of gas outages or that this is the 3rd UPS in so many months to have worn out because of these power outages or that hes hand to stand in line when collecting his license or had to pay a bribe here and there to get something down and so hes so fed up with Pakistan hes gonna pack up and leave for another country than I have nothing but contempt for such a person. Because he had what millions of Pakistanis did not have and all he could think of was how unjust everything is for him instead of using an iota of what was given to him and wasn't to millions of his compatriots for bettering their lives and the lives of generations of Pakistanis yet to come he choose to consider things solely from what would be better for him.

Only failed nations complain endlessly about the woes that befall them; nations who want to become something....work through these challenges to create a greener pasture right in the midst of their own country instead of searching for it elsewhere.

And we're a failed nation not because of our leaders, nor the lack of infrastructure or the security issues but because of Us - the People; our self-pity and self-preservation overshadows everything for us.

There is logic in looking out for yourself, for your family and loved ones. There is logic in suggesting that to progress further in life you needs justice, fairness and impartiality from the system.

But there is also logic in saying that the Nations who've achieved something don't always cry about the lack of opportunities in front of them or how life isn't fair but that they work through these shortcomings and these grave....grave misgivings to achieve something.

Sadly we're not that Nation whether we're within or with-out Pakistan !

Armstrong said:

Despite the lack of infrastructure, accountability and security issues nearly 200 million Pakistanis still live here; many of them have made a name for themselves in spite of these challenges.

Click to expand...

And many of the 200 million Pakistanis are suffering, we can add ourselves to the list of sorry complainers and sufferers, or keep holding our jobs here and keep doing what we can in our current capacity for Pakistan and Pakistanis!!

On a side note, your belief in Pakistan ideology and manifestation is very beautiful, but inspite of my passion for Pakistan I yet have to grasp it I like that

But on my own end, instead of feeling sorry every day and waiting for the real dream to come true, I have decided to update my dreams a bit, and start doing what ever I can from where ever I can for the Motherland I belong to.

Reem said:

And many of the 200 million Pakistanis are suffering, we can add ourselves to the list of sorry complainers and sufferers, or keep holding our jobs here and keep doing what we can in our current capacity for Pakistan and Pakistanis!!

Click to expand...

I believe that bit is answered in the remainder of my previous post which I added some to.

Reem said:

On a side note, your belief in Pakistan ideology and manifestation is very beautiful, but inspite of my passion for Pakistan I yet have to grasp it I like that

But on my own end, instead of feeling sorry every day and waiting for the real dream to come true, I have decided to update my dreams a bit, and start doing what ever I can from where ever I can for the Motherland I belong to.

Click to expand...

Thats why I said on the previous page (I think) that I don't judge people who choose to settle abroad because everyone has their own ambitions, challenges and inhibitions in life so to each his own.

Oscar said:

Perhaps it can or cannot.

Click to expand...

A Pakistani version of the ACLU ? Perhaps you jest.

Oscar said:

The point is, WHY CANT AMERICANS critique the American system without having to bear the "guilt" of where they came from? Be it Pakistan or Vietnam.. your identity(and mine soon).. or that of @Syed.Ali.Haider or @MastanKhan is an American. Hence in that light regardless of how bad Pakistani standards or Vietnam or Indian or Timbuktu are.. you or they have the right to ask for a look at American policies, debate potential mistakes.. without the reaction that "look to where you came from first" as the all and final counter argument.

Click to expand...

I do not have dual loyalties. That is not the same thing as dual citizenship. There is nothing I can do if Viet Nam still considers me a citizen. But there is plenty I can do about myself regarding how I feel about the US and what I can do to/for the US, a country that earned my political and social allegiance.

From what I have seen so far, it is one thing to cast doubts about US immigration policies, for example, but it is another thing to say outright that the US immigration system is cruel, immoral, and stupid. For the former, criticisms about specific methods of allowing people into the US, border security, or how much paperwork are required, are legitimate because it points to the technicalities of the situation. It says nothing about the intelligence and moral foundation of the US immigration program and of the people administering it. Instead, what I am seeing here about Iraq is how stupid we are, as if anyone, regardless of where they came from, have all the answers for all the questions and concerns, in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that it was stupid of the US government not to consult these geniuses.

Then talk about the humiliation at abu ghraib----what kind of perversity the americans have with nudity of their prisoners

Source: Retired U.S. general on how to handle IS and why we lost in Iraq, Afg | Page 3

Click to expand...

This implies that keeping prisoners nude is somehow standard operating procedures, whether it is in Iraq or in the US. It completely ignores the fact that the people directly involved were punished and the American people, as a whole, felt embarrassed.

So yes, if there are dual loyalties, I will wonder if that 'other' country can do a better job, its leadership smarter, and better looking. And in the case of Pakistan, Pakistan was involved in Afghanistan for practically forever. Nothing good ever came out of that involvement. Nothing good except for the religious nutjobs at every strata of Pakistani society and government. But it is US who are majorly stupid at everything we do.

Oscar said:

its the opinion of a high ranking military officer. Hence, his word alone should justify the idea that this debate makes sense.

Click to expand...

Why we 'lost' in Iraq and Afghanistan depends on what we were there for in the first place. General Bolger based his arguments upon the ultimate ideal of transforming both countries under the Western model of what is a functional democracy. From that perspective, then of course we failed. Like it or not, the people of the ME are not ready for democracy. Perhaps they never will be. We 'lost' those countries because we were hopeless romantics, in a manner of speaking.

Oscar said:

If you really look at it, your previous arguments and those of others replying you.. are more or less emotional rhetoric rather than discussing why something is or was not a mistake or was.

Click to expand...

Then equally emotional was the quick dismissal of what Bremer explained about his decisions in Iraq.

Retired U.S. general on how to handle IS and why we lost in Iraq, Afg | Page 2

I challenge anyone, regardless of whether he have any military or foreign service experience or not, to exercise some degree of intellectual honesty and examine Bremer's arguments in a rational manner.

Probably I would sooner win the Idaho Powerball lottery before such a person on this forum would step forward.

gambit said:

............
Then equally emotional was the quick dismissal of what Bremer explained about his decisions in Iraq.

Retired U.S. general on how to handle IS and why we lost in Iraq, Afg | Page 2

I challenge anyone, regardless of whether he have any military or foreign service experience or not, to exercise some degree of intellectual honesty and examine Bremer's arguments in a rational manner.

Probably I would sooner win the Idaho Powerball lottery before such a person on this forum would step forward.

Click to expand...

Anybody who attempts to exercise said degree of intellectual honesty will be derided by most members here, top to bottom, most assuredly.

HeadHunter said:

@gambit please let the Russian bear and the Chinese dragon test your stupidity and competence
But you only test yourself on the nations like Iraq,syria,Afghanistan and Libya with rusty military from WW2 era.
Seriously grow a pair .

Click to expand...

We are still waiting for either the Russians or the Chinese to 'grow a pair' to take US on. After all, it was they who disagreed with US over Iraq. They could have sided with Saddam Hussein.

What...??? No pair ?

gambit said:

A Pakistani version of the ACLU ? Perhaps you jest.


Why we 'lost' in Iraq and Afghanistan depends on what we were there for in the first place. General Bolger based his arguments upon the ultimate ideal of transforming both countries under the Western model of what is a functional democracy. From that perspective, then of course we failed. Like it or not, the people of the ME are not ready for democracy. Perhaps they never will be. We 'lost' those countries because we were hopeless romantics, in a manner of speaking.


Then equally emotional was the quick dismissal of what Bremer explained about his decisions in Iraq.

Retired U.S. general on how to handle IS and why we lost in Iraq, Afg | Page 2

I challenge anyone, regardless of whether he have any military or foreign service experience or not, to exercise some degree of intellectual honesty and examine Bremer's arguments in a rational manner.

Probably I would sooner win the Idaho Powerball lottery before such a person on this forum would step forward.

Click to expand...

This is the bold part.. HRCP | Human Rights Commission of Pakistan

and what you imply I agree with regarding the General's ideals. But at the same time, when you talk of clueless people discussing US policies one also has to look to congress where elected representatives exist who genuinely believe that the earth is 10000 years old.. and these people help MAKE policy.

Your fixation with the idea that somehow Pakistans actions, Pakistani policies or any third world policies are some yardstick to judge the United States by.. or should always be kept in mind whenever US policies are discussed seems a rather defeatist ideal. What possible comparison does the United States have with any 3rd world country to offer it as a counter example just for the heck of avoiding a debate on its policies?

In either case, the General's contention is not incorrect, but there is no edict to take that as the final word and not discuss his conclusions further.