Skip to main content

View Diary: Counter-Insurgency Counter-attacked? (16 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Afghanistan today is not Afghanistan 20 years (3+ / 0-)


    The former Northern Alliance is much, much better funded and equipped, and will serve as a substantial counter-balance.

    If we leave, Afghanistan will continue to be what it is now - a tragically corrupt Narco-State.

    Whether or not Al Queda establishes a base really doesn't matter much.  Have or not having one has little to do with their ability to launch attacks.

    They didn't need rifle ranges or monkey bars to carry out 9/11.  The plot was hatched in Germany and the perpetrators trained in the US.

    "Israel does not any longer occupy the West Bank or Gaza. They left." Rep. Weiner

    by JesseCW on Sat Jun 26, 2010 at 09:28:37 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Afghan army (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I hope you're right about the ability of the Afghan army to hold off the Taleban, but their performance to date hasn't inspired a lot of confidence.

      True, you don't need a base to plan terrorist attacks.  However, I imagine al-Qaeda found it much easier to fund raise, recruit and train with a safe haven to operate from.  If they had the opportunity to get a secure base in Afghanistan or anywhere else I'm sure they'd take it.  I would think the risks of terrorism would only increase in that case.  How much is anybody's guess.

      •  No, you're right, the ANA pretty much sucks. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        But the opium warlords have private militias that are more than able to go toe-to-toe with the Taliban, and they're a lot better outfitted today than they were 10 years ago.

        Of course, they're really not, overall, "better" than the Taliban.

        Taliban = more political repression and nasty spectacle (soccer stadium executions, banned kites).

        Warlords = more random rape and murder overall (Columbia style).

        They'd largely balance each other out.

        Al Queda isn't really a group now so much as an idea - an idea we can't kill.  Any kid with a hand-grenade and a bus ticket can "strike in the name of Al-Queda".  

        But in terms of having 'a base', well, there are multiple bases running now in Pakistan and Yemen.  Whether they have the most direct ties to Bin Laden doesn't really matter, but there are places people can go to learn how to wire up a detonator.

        I think the age of "big plots" is kind of over, at least for a while.  The Saudis and the Emirates have really clamped down on donations to groups that threaten to bring about strikes like 9/11.

        Afghanistan is a mess now, and it'll be a mess when we leave.  I don't see it as being a lot different from Vietnam in that regard.

        There will be a shitload of killings of "collaborators", which sucks.  Of course, they get killed now too.  

        There will be a hell of a lot of violence against women, and trade in child sex slaves, but then...well...kinda happening right now.

        "Israel does not any longer occupy the West Bank or Gaza. They left." Rep. Weiner

        by JesseCW on Sat Jun 26, 2010 at 11:12:07 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (126)
  • Community (53)
  • Republicans (35)
  • Environment (33)
  • 2016 (31)
  • Culture (30)
  • Memorial Day (30)
  • Elections (26)
  • Bernie Sanders (26)
  • Media (24)
  • GOP (21)
  • Spam (21)
  • Climate Change (21)
  • Education (20)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • Labor (20)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (18)
  • Economy (17)
  • Barack Obama (17)
  • Law (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site