Pakistan & the War On Terror: Conflicted Goals, Compromised Performance

[S-2]

Pakistan and the War on Terror: Conflicted Goals, Compromised Performance

New from the Carnegie Endowment for Peace, Ashley J. Tellis' latest monograph. Well-credentialed and a long-time observer of south asia. Fairly long in PDF at 3mgs but appears worth reading with a 2008 copyright. I've not yet read this so I'll refrain comment until then.

Look forward to reading your thoughts.

Enjoy.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

It is a long article and an interesting commentary.

It requires more than one reading to understand the contents and it takes time.

Prima facie, it does not appear to be favourable towards the Pakistani effort.

More comments once I read it again and more deliberately.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

The bottomline is that the u s has done nothing to resolve the issues pertaining to the bone in contention. Israel---there is nothing happening on that front---there have been too many atrocities committed in iraq---too many killings in afghanistan---this thing is not going to end. America will have to walk out of afghanistan empty handed.

Pakistan got into the war on terror to subdue the al qaeda---pakistan didnot join the war to kill the taliban. America may not like the way taliban rule---it may not like the way they treat their women---it may not like their laws and the way they enforce justice---. This was not the reason pakistan joined this war.

Pakistan has neutralized al qaeda. Pakistan has done the job that it was asked to perform---it is purely due to the incompetence of the americans forces, their managers, their strategists and analysts that Bin Laden and his crony is still alive---they have intentionally missed him many a times either due to incompetense or on purpose.

As I stated in another post that pakistan has very poor marketing strategy, game plan, selling their ideology, selling themselves ( I am talking about salesmanship over here not of traitors selling their country ) in a better manner on foreign tv. Pakistan, when they signed on the dotted line at the start of the war on terror----had very poor bargaining skills. They just gave everything up front to the u s without asking for any thing in return except for promise that everything will be taken care of.

One of the guarantees would have been of landing 36 plus F 16's with maintenance package on the pakistani tarmac within 3 months of starting the hostilities,from american active service planes. You want a committment from us---let me hold onto your golden ballz. Whatever equipment that is trickling in now, if there was a huge influx right at that time---pakistani public would have a different attitude towards---. They should not have stopped there---taking a paragraph from their israeli counterparts, pakistan should have used the same techniques of marketing for changing the public image.

Only 36 F 16's in pakistan by 2002----and all pakistanis would have literally hacked off any al qaeda membersthey would have found on the street or hiding anywhere in the country---just to thank america for those planes---the problem is that when it comes to understanding the pulse of the people---america has no common sense in how to invade countries and what to do afterwards---it forgot its own basic principals---a mountain cannot be conquered when there is no blood on the slope of the mountain.

That is when they sent in the northern alliance to do their job in tora bora---I remember the statements coming from the mouths of the generals, the analysts and rummy----we try not to spill the blood of the american soldiers if we don't need to---and I was saying to myself---what have these guys been smoking---have the republicans lost all their common sense---have the american generals suddenly lost their cojones---is the american army suddenly become an army of weak sucks---what is happening here---you don't want to spill your blood---you don't want casualties---maybe you should go to a muslim house and put on a veil on your face and bangles on your arms---.

But this tragedy of war soon became evident in iraq---where once again--the u s armies were clueless as to what to do when you have suddenly captured a foreign country. Again they were caught with their pants down---banks are being looted in fron of the american troops, buildings, hospitals, musdeums, libraries, anything and everything is being looted in front the troops and nothing being done to stop the looters.

A show of total lack of knowledge in how to police the captive nation. The big thing came out of the americans was oh it is their nation, they need to take care of it---again their childish approach towards major events showed up front---even an idiot knows that of you conquer it, you own it. Even a squatter knows that he has to protect his surroundings. Law and order is your problem---you got to keep it under control---because once the law and order situation worsens---gets out of hand---there is no chance getting back in the saddle---. From loot and plunder things turned for the worst---now thye american boys need to do their things as well---rape of iraqi women and girls and children----and when the pictures started coming out---a new round of blood bath started.

Most of these problems are made in america---but all other nations have to take the blame for it. It used to be an old ploy amongst the afghans during the russian invasion---kill your enemy---give the russians wrong information---the americans claimed that they didnot know about it---well let me ask you---how many times do you want to be taught about the afghan tradition of neutralizing their enemies through a third party. Happened in afghanistan, happened in iraq---over and over---.

So, the goals are indeed conflicting---we are tired of killing our own---and you don't seem to know how to do your job right.

It is a myth how well trained an american soldier is---he is only as strong as the technology / supply line standing behind him. Without these two, they are just ordinary troops.

The problem over here is that who is going to tell the americans that they are the ones who have failed miserably in all fields of foreign conquest of foreign land.

Can you guys imagine---these great american generals---these superstars---none of them had the ballz to stand upto Rummy and tell him to s--ve it. Nobody could say not enough troops---need another 150k more---they all just waited for their retirement checks and benefits---now that they are eligible---some were speaking out. What a shame---what a tragedy---a great nation---speakers and protectors of the truth---started living a lie. what a tremendous loss for the humanity. When you needed a Schawrzkopff to lead---they found found wannabees who wanted to be a Shchawrzkopf---minus the testosterone.

 

[MrConcerned]

Quit daydreaming - the Americans lost only 5 men in Afghanistan the first month of 2008. They can probably stay in Afghanistan forever.

Iraq as well, only 27 men.

And your post is reminiscent of terrorists, blaming everybody except yourself. Nobody asked us to interfere by supporting the Taliban but there it is.

Musharaff keeps harping about arresting 700 Al Qaeda leaders in Pakistani cities as a sign of action, but nobody asked, what is 700 Al Qaeda leaders doing in our cities in the first place? Does that not make us a terrorist hotbed as the West claims?

 

[MastanKhan]

Mrconcerned,

How are you? If you were talking to me then I will respond---you see small minds see small things---it is not a matter of 5 kia in afghanistan and 27 kia in iraq---it becomes an issue of how many muslims are being killed by christian bullets and bombs in afghanistan and iraq.

Over a million muslims have been killed in this revenge war---would it suffice to say that this is a fair amount of collateral killings for 3000 americans killed in a despicable manner by the fanatics. Is that not a good enough reason to ask them to leave regardless of when they want to leave.

Just because we had a proxy war going on and these people were in pakistan doesnot make us guilty of any crime. Rather it is america who was at fault. They were america's boys----trained by the americans and left to rot on their own---u s had been informed many a times about the attack---it was their own failure that those lunatics got through. The u s short changed afghanistan and pakistan at the end of cold war---in the precarious condition that we and afghanistan were, that should have not been allowed. There are those who are saying the same thing now---why must the u s leave---the truth is that it has not much choice left---.

Any and every operation needs to be completed and wrapped up in a certain time frame----iraq and afghanistan have gone way beyond the date of conclusion---american millitary doctrine and foreign land conquest and management of assets have proven to be such a big failure that it is beynd comprehension---it is full of incompetence from one 4 star to the other 4 star. I never thought that I would see the day when a american 4 star would be cowed down in front of the sec def---just to keep his retirement and pension, one after the other a minimum of a three or four would lie about troop strength so that they may not confront the arrogance of Rummy---get fired and lose their benefits. Can you believe it. This is the ugly face of corporate america.

What was al qaeda doing in the cities---because you the muslim have a habbit of making everyone our muslim brother---that is what they were doing in pakistan when they got kicked out of afghanistan---where the u s army didnot do its job to round them up on the pak afghanborder---when the u s troops were more concerned about not laying down their lives in the early stages of the conflict---the generals were not ready to commit troops---when all the american planning was a fiasco---when the gungho attitude of the u s army met its final failure of mopping up the enemy combatants running from the combat zone---they were not a threat to pakistan before 9/11. When things changed and we found out what they were upto, we neutralized them, like any other nation would do. We could be blamed if we had done nothing to stop them after the fact.

So, you being a pakistan and blaming the country for arresting 700 of them---whose side are you on kid.

 

[MrConcerned]

I see you begin by insulting me, but there it is.

>>>How are you? If you were talking to me then I will respond---you see small minds see small things---it is not a matter of 5 kia in afghanistan and 27 kia in iraq---it becomes an issue of how many muslims are being killed by christian bullets and bombs in afghanistan and iraq.

To be honest, NATO or America have never called it a religious war, and I don't believe it as such. there are probably more atheists in the European armies than Christians for example. That's like saying the PA is all made up of ghulams, which is absurd considering the contribution of non-muslims to our security. Very juvenile way of seeing these wars.

Futhermore, Al Qaeda in Iraq was welcomed by the Sunnis in the guise of mujaheiddein. Then what happened? Their butchery and pure evilness even made the locals, a hundred thousand fighters of them, side with the Americans against Al Qaeda. This is the biggest example of actions speak louder than words, and that religion has been discredited as a facet of war in these two countries.


>>>Over a million muslims have been killed in this revenge war---would it suffice to say that this is a fair amount of collateral killings for 3000 americans killed in a despicable manner by the fanatics. Is that not a good enough reason to ask them to leave regardless of when they want to leave.

Where did you get the million from? Afghanistan saw 6000 dead last year, about 5000 of which are Taliban rebels. The UN says that 151,000 Iraqi civilians are dead in 5 years, most of them at the ends of the rebels and insurgents. When you have a case of the "holy warriors" slaughtering 80%, 90% of the people they've sworn to protect, blowing up car bombs and suicide bombs among civilians as in Pakistan, how is this directly America's fault?

We must look at our own problems first, why literacy and understanding of our deen is so low, why Muslim-majority countries are so weak, why there are so many fanatics amongst us, then we can derive progress. Do I support the wars? No I don't. But let's face it, the people who have gone there to fight the Americans are even worse.



>>>Just because we had a proxy war going on and these people were in pakistan doesnot make us guilty of any crime. Rather it is america who was at fault. They were america's boys----trained by the americans and left to rot on their own---u s had been informed many a times about the attack---it was their own failure that those lunatics got through. The u s short changed afghanistan and pakistan at the end of cold war---in the precarious condition that we and afghanistan were, that should have not been allowed. There are those who are saying the same thing now---why must the u s leave---the truth is that it has not much choice left---.

I think you need to be more aware of reality. Fact is the Americans are on an unstoppable path to victory in Iraq. Kurds are their complete allies. The Shia are in vast numbers in the army and police, most units of which are assisted and even led by American advisors, and Hakim and Sistani are quiet allies. The Sunnis in their hundred thousand army are now paid $300 a month each and clothed and equipped by Americans. The insurgents may kill civilians left and right to convey the image of chaos but that only pushes the tide against them. Fact is, America could pull out 2/3 of their army from Iraq over this year and the government of Iraq will still survive and move on. Oil production rose 9% last year and the economy grew by 13%, I think. All the trend lines are moving in the right direction. There is only one city left that is partly occupied by AQ and that is Mosul, and already a hundred thousand Iraqi troops and 30,000 Americans have ringed the city.

the fact is - the Iraqi rebels have lost the hearts and minds of the people, and that means defeat in any insurgency. It also means the Americans do not treat the population as bad as most people think.

stop believing propaganda and read the world wires, the fact is inescapable, the Americans with their ingenuity and capacity for change have pulled victory out of the jaws of defeat.

Afghanistan is more precarious due to the lack of troops, but as Musharaff said in UK recently, the fates of Afghanistan and Pakistan are tied.



>>>Any and every operation needs to be completed and wrapped up in a certain time frame----iraq and afghanistan have gone way beyond the date of conclusion---american millitary doctrine and foreign land conquest and management of assets have proven to be such a big failure that it is beynd comprehension---it is full of incompetence from one 4 star to the other 4 star. I never thought that I would see the day when a american 4 star would be cowed down in front of the sec def---just to keep his retirement and pension, one after the other a minimum of a three or four would lie about troop strength so that they may not confront the arrogance of Rummy---get fired and lose their benefits. Can you believe it. This is the ugly face of corporate america.

Petreaus is a genius and probably one of the top military thinkers in the world today. He's the one who's led the Americans to be the top counterinsurgency force in the world within a decade, which is incredible considering that military's historical focus on heavy tempo operations.

The normal course of insurgency runs about 7 years. Iraq is ahead of schedule actually. And consider what they've done. With 130,000 troops of so, they have actually pacified a 25 million pop country and won all three major sectarian groups to their side. I would say they've done well.

Violence has dropped 60%, American troop losses dropped 80% in six months. The Iraqi security forces, their allies, are on course to become a 600,000 strong force in a year. How is this not a victory and how did Petreaus lie?


>>>What was al qaeda doing in the cities---because you the muslim have a habbit of making everyone our muslim brother---that is what they were doing in pakistan when they got kicked out of afghanistan---where the u s army didnot do its job to round them up on the pak afghanborder---when the u s troops were more concerned about not laying down their lives in the early stages of the conflict---the generals were not ready to commit troops---when all the american planning was a fiasco---when the gungho attitude of the u s army met its final failure of mopping up the enemy combatants running from the combat zone---they were not a threat to pakistan before 9/11. When things changed and we found out what they were upto, we neutralized them, like any other nation would do. We could be blamed if we had done nothing to stop them after the fact.


How can you say AQ was not a threat?? Even Turkey is busting AQ cells in their country just a few days ago, even though they were a long way of conducting operations. It is absurd you think that harbouring these fanatics and butchers in your midst is actually a sound thing to do.

We didn't do anything because we thought they were a tool to be used and if they're stupid enough to blow themselves up, they're stupid enough to be manipulated. Recent events have proved that the religious monster cannot be be tamed and as long as its not attacking somebody else it will turn on us.

And American troops have come a long way from Somalia, when 18 soldiers died stopped them in their tracks? The fact that they're willing to send troops in Waziristan if asked shows they're willing to take casualties to kill their enemies today.

That's what fearsome about Americans. Even with their great lifestyles and wealth, they're still willing to sacrifice and they're still bloodthirsty. Quite unlike any other country in the world. I wonder if AQ sometimes regret tangling with the Americans when Europe and Central Asia would have been a softer target.


>>So, you being a pakistan and blaming the country for arresting 700 of them---whose side are you on kid.

I'm on Pakistan's side, but I'm just pointing out that for too long our security apparatuses have laid in bed with these people, simply because we were sanctioned and we thought we needed this trump card for our security. But we lied to them too long that Islamic Pakistan was planning to rebuild the Caliphate (something which is completely out of our capabilities) and now their fury has rebounded on us.

And it's not like we can ignore the fact that Taliban from their sanctuaries here are crossing into Afghanistan to fight NATO either. If another country did this to us, we'll be going to war.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Mastan,

In any conflict there will be casualties. That is axiomatic. One should not equate it as “Christian bullets” vs “Moslem lives”. It is just that OBL and the Taliban are Moslems and the West happens to be Christians. But then, the soldiers of the West are not really an all Christian lot. In fact, there are many Moslems in their army too and they have received gallantry award too!

The conflict is not on the lines of religion, but on political and strategical beliefs. It is not a “revenge” war. If it were so, then so many Moslem countries would not have supported the WoT, directly or indirectly.

To be frank, the AQ and Taliban may claim that they are the sole defenders of the Islamic faith, but in reality, they are coming out as the sole defender of their right to usurp the Islamic world as also dominate the world.

Obviously, such a dangerous thought is neither beneficial to the Islamic world, nor for the world.

For discussion’s sake, supposing the AQ and the Taliban were allowed a free hand, do you think Pakistan would not have been affected? Inspite of it being taken head on, they are causing chaos in Afghanistan, Iraq, the Middle East and Pakistan, apart from the rest of the world too!

Should such a menace be allowed to break loose?

You have claimed that that is not the reason why Pakistan joined the WoT. If not, then why?

One can criticise American for many omissions, but without the US, many of our countries would have not had the boom that we are experiencing and which is benefiting our people. If we remained insular, we would have still been in the bullock cart age since we do not have their technological expertise or the financial clout and wealth to fire our own indigenous mechanism. Of course, the US benefits from it, but it does not mean that we don’t. We do benefit and it is quite substantial.

It is all an issue of give and take and when one is on the wrong end of the situation, one does get frustrated and give vent to thoughts that are a trifle short on reality.

America, as I see it, is there in Afghanistan and Iraq, for quite sometime to come to ensure that her strategic goals are firmed.

Pakistan did not just sign the dotted line and caved in. She has benefited by doing so. The military might of Pakistan has grown many folds. Its economy is seeing unprecedented boom that has never been there before. She is now being accepted as a responsible partner in the comity of nations, unlike the time when she was sidelined and isolated. Musharraf can be blamed for many things, but he is not a fool. He is a sharp chap with great negotiating skills.

If indeed Americans do not want to spill their own blood, then why blame the US if they have others to do it for them? If the others did not oblige, then America would sure do it themselves, whatever be the cost, that is, if their strategic interest were that binding. They did it in WW II, Korea, Vietnam and elsewhere. They have realised that it is wiser not to directly get involved. One should read Kissinger on the benefits of proxy war. In Iraq, inspite of global interplay, they did not go it alone and instead had the Coalition of the Willing, in Afghanistan, it was the ISAF, in Lebanon, it was the UN and France and so on.

The US Army, I believe was honed on principles of Marshal’s “Men Against Fire”.
Apparently, this was the mode that was initially guiding the US forces in Iraq since they did not have the experience in fighting in the CI environment. Now, with so many years of experience backing them in such an environment, they have changed tack and are doing rather well. That is why we do not have the headlines of yore. If indeed, the Sunnis are being paid $300, then that is also a step in the right direction since the bottomline is to curb the insurgency. Gainful employment of the unemployed is indeed what the aim is.

It is not that the US generals who are subservient to the civil govt alone. Generals and Armies of all democracies are! Militaries are instruments of the govt and not the other way around! The ethos of Pakistan is different, as was enunciated in the article that I had posted elsewhere and for good reasons too! Comparisons will not help since the historical perspectives of countries are different.

In so far as Generals of the US being subservient because of post retirement benefits, I presume it is universal and what is more, Pakistan leads the way. No other armies have so many given plush and sinecure appointments as is done in Pakistan. Musharraf made it a point in BBC’s Hard Talk wherein he treated with disdain the Generals who have stated that he should go (reported I believe in the Daily Times, amongst others) by stating that these are the chaps he either sacked or who were not given post retirement plum jobs by him!

It is true that the US should have “seen through” the Afghan war against the Soviets to its logical conclusion. But then, the world situation was different and Zia was taken to be a person firmly in his seat and capable of handling the situation. Too much of monitoring by the US could again be taken amiss that a “Christian nation” was dictating terms to the Moslems. They possibly went wrong in assessing Zia as their proxy in this region. But then, that is life. Nothing is perfect!

 

[MastanKhan]

Salim,

You have completely missed where my post was directed. My post goes into some different issues that you are not looking at.

 

[MastanKhan]

Mark Thomas,

Please be clear in what you want to say. Second post and already a derogatory name calling in the post.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Mastan,

Your posts have always had logic and no emotional claptrap.

To the point they were.

I have not understood what you are conveying if what I replied is not correct.

 

[fatman17]

It is a long article and an interesting commentary.

It requires more than one reading to understand the contents and it takes time.

Prima facie, it does not appear to be favourable towards the Pakistani effort.

More comments once I read it again and more deliberately.

without reading the article, which i will, it dosnt surprise me that the article will not be in favour of the pakistani effort - this is what the US congress wants to read and hear so that the ****-bashing continues.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

"Americans did not tell Mujahideens to turn into talibunnies."

They may not have "told" them to turn into the Taliban - but events don't occur in a vacuum, and the Taliban did not pop out of thin air, nor were they created by some snap of the fingers of ISI. There were deep undercurrents of rage at the state of Afghanistan, the breakdown of the country, the instability and warmongering - much of which the leadership of the NA that you have eulogized elsewhere was involved in.

Afghanistan was left to fend for itself after the Soviets - the responsibility for the state of affairs that led to the creation of the Taliban and the subsequent chaos lies with a lot of different parties, including the US.

But this is taking the thread on a tangent so I'll leave it there. I have to finish reading the article before I can comment.

 

[MastanKhan]

Salim,

Invasion of iraq was based on lies. Invasion of iraq was based upon deception and hype. Invasion of iraq was based on putting fear in the minds of americans---invasion of iraq was based upon the idea that anyone who spoke up against it was a traitor. Invasion of iraq happened when hundreds of million of americans lied to themselves and decieved their conscience. This invasion happened because the citizens and champions of human rights, civil liberties and democracy of the free world, in their anger and fury lost their soul and conscience as well and allowed the state to do whatever it wanted to regardless of consequences. saddam and the iraqis were made to look like a pariah. Invasion of iraq was the conception of sick minds---close to a million muslims have ben killed in this war---regardless of the individual groups, the guilt falls upon the american troops and the generals for the murder of the iraqi civilians. It happened on their watch---it happened when they were holding the guns---it happened when they were in charge of the law and order situation---it happened when they were the masters of the destiny of iraq.

The muslim countries who supported it or other countries who supported the war, did so on threat of death and destruction to their nations if they didnot heaveto.

The current generals had in front of them had the example of Norman Schwarzkopff---less than 15 years ago---the man would not cross the border with less than 1/2 million troops. What made them so invincible that they could go in with 100k troops. In GW1, the iraqis wanted freedom, they would have cherished their freedom from saddam----but the reign of terror that they had to face for the years they were left by themselves had left nothing but hate for the american troops---Salim---can you believe that the americans really believed that the iraqis would put garlands of flowers around the neck of their liberators.

In the eraly stages of afghan assault american heads were up in the air---their command and control had totally lost common sense and reality. Common sense says that you cannot force others to do your battles. Reality was that they forgot how tough the taliban and AQ were and northern alliance was no match. Yes the taliban were no match for daisy cutters and air assaults---but the afghan treachery was deep rooted and deeply imbeded in the psyche of the warlord---Hazrat Ali was the NA warlord in charge at tora bora---it is believed that him and another one of them pocketed some $30 million for the 48 hours truce whence the AQ would surrender---. Didn't the americans know of the treachery---the aghans had done it many a times when russians were chasing the mujahideen---russians learnt that truce call was when the culprits would escape after making a hefty payment.

Americans have only themselves to blame to fall into that trap. It is a firm american belief and part of the american corporate doctrine---how to do the job right first time everytime if your life depended on it---do the job yourself.

Salim, I don't know if you livce in america or not---just before the presidential election got heated up---the CNN and all other news media was onto the generals who had kept their mouths shut when they were in charge---after their retirement they were talking and the media was mad at them---and I never thought that I would see Peter pace begging to extend his service tenure---one of the most disgusting personalities in this scenario. A yes man, a kiss ar-e, when he puts his lips on the behinds, he doesnot want to let go---suck it hard---suck it deep---that is what his motto was---what a shame for america---when america needed men of action and honour---when america needed men who could lead from the front---they got Peter pace---Tommy Franks---John Abizaid and one other I forget his name---maybe Ramirez or !!!

Look at the pride of performance of Norman Schwarzkopff and his team---the guy was known as an absolute bully---who would tear up other generals in front of everyone---a lunatic maybe when it came to completing a job---the first gulf war was planned by the american milltary and millitary advisors---tragically the second gulf war was planned by corporate america and the generals were given a back seat---the sad part is that they let it happen.

Salim, it is stated there came a time that Scharzkopf was so foul mouthed and outrageous with subordinates that the army had to find him a middleman to communicate with other officers. Nobody could stand in front of him.

At least one of them had the courage to say it as he saw it---Petraeus---need more troops.

The sunnis are being paid $300 a piece---who stopped them from paying $100 to each of the iraqi soldiers after winning the war and keeping them in the barracks to build the nation. That was the idea of the first american who was made incharge to rebuild iraq---but he was immediately fired---after this staement was made---and then a corporate manager was made incharge---he let the iraqi army go---.

I saw the tv interview on cnn between Ehud Barak the ex isralie general and prime minister and Larry King---where Barak stated that the israelis were surprised at letting the iraqi army walk home---they could not believe what was happening---they shared their concerns with the americans and told them of the consequences---but they were shunned. The war in iraq was planned by the neo cons and right wing christians---the american public knows it now. Everybody knows it.

 

[mujahideen]

Salim,

Invasion of iraq was based on lies. Invasion of iraq was based upon deception and hype. Invasion of iraq was based on putting fear in the minds of americans---invasion of iraq was based upon the idea that anyone who spoke up against it was a traitor. Invasion of iraq happened when hundreds of million of americans lied to themselves and decieved their conscience. This invasion happened because the citizens and champions of human rights, civil liberties and democracy of the free world, in their anger and fury lost their soul and conscience as well and allowed the state to do whatever it wanted to regardless of consequences. saddam and the iraqis were made to look like a pariah. Invasion of iraq was the conception of sick minds---close to a million muslims have ben killed in this war---regardless of the individual groups, the guilt falls upon the american troops and the generals for the murder of the iraqi civilians. It happened on their watch---it happened when they were holding the guns---it happened when they were in charge of the law and order situation---it happened when they were the masters of the destiny of iraq.

The muslim countries who supported it or other countries who supported the war, did so on threat of death and destruction to their nations if they didnot heaveto.

The current generals had in front of them had the example of Norman Schwarzkopff---less than 15 years ago---the man would not cross the border with less than 1/2 million troops. What made them so invincible that they could go in with 100k troops. In GW1, the iraqis wanted freedom, they would have cherished their freedom from saddam----but the reign of terror that they had to face for the years they were left by themselves had left nothing but hate for the american troops---Salim---can you believe that the americans really believed that the iraqis would put garlands of flowers around the neck of their liberators.

In the eraly stages of afghan assault american heads were up in the air---their command and control had totally lost common sense and reality. Common sense says that you cannot force others to do your battles. Reality was that they forgot how tough the taliban and AQ were and northern alliance was no match. Yes the taliban were no match for daisy cutters and air assaults---but the afghan treachery was deep rooted and deeply imbeded in the psyche of the warlord---Hazrat Ali was the NA warlord in charge at tora bora---it is believed that him and another one of them pocketed some $30 million for the 48 hours truce whence the AQ would surrender---. Didn't the americans know of the treachery---the aghans had done it many a times when russians were chasing the mujahideen---russians learnt that truce call was when the culprits would escape after making a hefty payment.

Americans have only themselves to blame to fall into that trap. It is a firm american belief and part of the american corporate doctrine---how to do the job right first time everytime if your life depended on it---do the job yourself.

Salim, I don't know if you livce in america or not---just before the presidential election got heated up---the CNN and all other news media was onto the generals who had kept their mouths shut when they were in charge---after their retirement they were talking and the media was mad at them---and I never thought that I would see Peter pace begging to extend his service tenure---one of the most disgusting personalities in this scenario. A yes man, a kiss ar-e, when he puts his lips on the behinds, he doesnot want to let go---suck it hard---suck it deep---that is what his motto was---what a shame for america---when america needed men of action and honour---when america needed men who could lead from the front---they got Peter pace---Tommy Franks---John Abizaid and one other I forget his name---maybe Ramirez or !!!

Look at the pride of performance of Norman Schwarzkopff and his team---the guy was known as an absolute bully---who would tear up other generals in front of everyone---a lunatic maybe when it came to completing a job---the first gulf war was planned by the american milltary and millitary advisors---tragically the second gulf war was planned by corporate america and the generals were given a back seat---the sad part is that they let it happen.

At least one of them had the courage to say it as he saw it---Petraeus---need more troops.

The sunnis are being paid $300 a piece---who stopped them from paying $100 to each of the iraqi soldiers after winning the war and keeping them in the barracks to build the nation. That was the idea of the first american who was made incharge to rebuild iraq---but he was immediately fired---after this staement was made---and then a corporate manager was made incharge---he let the iraqi army go---.

I saw the tv interview on cnn between Ehud Barak the ex isralie general and prime minister and Larry King---where Barak stated that the israelis were surprised at letting the iraqi army walk home---they could not believe what was happening---they shared their concerns with the americans and told them of the consequences---but they were shunned. The war in iraq was planned by the neo cons and right wing christians---the american public knows it now. Everybody knows it.

Well said, you have really given a good detailed response.. But I would just like to add one thing as to why the invasion of Iraq occured. This war was a bit personal for Bush. Saddam tried to assassinate his father in 1990. so it was easy for him to support a war against Saddam because he wanted to get revenge.

 

[MrConcerned]

MastanKhan's latest 'masterpiece' is the biggest load of insane, rambling jibber jabber I have had the misfortune of reading on here.