Posts Tagged ‘Taliban’

Mullah Omar: Why so quiet MSM..?

May 15, 2010

Here’s some news that may not have reached you: Mullah Omar has been captured. Omar is a Taliban founder and leader, and a top ally of Osama bin Laden, but based on the lack of national news coverage, you might think he was just a low-level grunt. The State Department had a bounty of up to $10 million on Omar for sheltering bin Laden before, during and after 9/11. As Jed Babbin, a former Air Force officer who served as a deputy undersecretary of defense in the George H. W. Bush administration, writes, “The reported Pakistani capture of Taliban founder and overall leader Mullah Omar is potentially a game changing event in the Afghanistan war, with profound implications for the stabilization of Pakistan.”

Not only could Omar provide information that would decimate — at least temporarily — the Taliban, but he also could reveal the extent to which Iran has supported it. However, as Babbin argues, “[W]e need to get the Pakistanis to delay giving him into US custody. That is contrary to our normal instincts, but this man — taken alive and brought to any US detention facility other than Guantanamo Bay — would be Mirandized and pushed into the civilian criminal justice system where he, and his ilk, manifestly don’t belong. We would be forfeiting months of probable success in interrogating him.” Actionable intelligence is key, so we have little time to lose.

SOURCE

Warfighting 101

February 21, 2010

Once again Mark Alexander nails it with an essay that combines insight, logic, and rational thinking. Which means of course that the left, muslim believers, and all the rest of the hate America first brigade will hate his words, again. Strong work Mark, keep it up!

Please follow the link at the end for more great work by great Americans.

Alexander’s Essay – February 18, 2010

Warfighting 101

“A universal peace … is in the catalogue of events, which will never exist but in the imaginations of visionary philosophers, or in the breasts of benevolent enthusiasts.” –James Madison

The Long Road Ahead

I spent much of the last week participating in a national security forum organized by the Air War College and hosted by the Twelfth Air Force and the 355th Fighter Wing at Davis-Monthan AFB.

Discussing the challenges of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and the surge for Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) in Afghanistan with command personnel makes for lively debate, but the best part of these forums is incidental — the opportunity to meet many enlisted airmen and those flying the planes they make ready.

I have been on military bases across the nation, and without fail I am most impressed by the young uniformed Patriots who are the foundation of our military might. Simply put, their dedication, talent and spirit are second to none.

In a nation where most young people are devoted, first and foremost, to themselves, our young airmen, sailors, soldiers, coast guardsmen and Marines serve a much higher calling, true to their oaths to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…” If only their civilian political leaders were true to the same.

Among other operations around the world, these young people, and those in their chain of command, have made enormous progress toward establishing a functional democracy in the heart of the Middle East, Iraq. And despite what Vice President Joe Biden may believe, this remarkable achievement is theirs, not his.

After launching military operations against Iraq in 2003, our enemies were greatly emboldened by traitors on the Left and their Leftmedia minions, especially those running cover stories such as Newsweek’s “We’re losing…” proclamation.

In a debate some years ago with a professor from MIT who had written many policy papers on why we should not have prosecuted OIF, I asked him how many papers he had written on the consequences had we not prosecuted OIF. That query returned a classic “deer in the headlights” gaze.

My point, of course, was that it’s easy to criticize anything past or under way. Hindsight can be 20/20, but military battle plans rarely withstand the first shots fired, which is to say that you start where your boots are, and fight on from there.

All those Leftist talking points notwithstanding, Iraq is now well on the way to restoring its once great Mesopotamian heritage.

To the east of Iraq, on the far side of another Islamic trouble spot, Iran, our military forces now face a daunting task in Afghanistan, a very different battlefront.

I was in the region shortly after the Soviets retreated in 1989, and I can tell you that this vast, desolate moonscape offers little more than a meager subsistence for even the most seasoned tribal people.

Consequently, Afghanistan has two — and only two — exports: heroin and terrorism, and not necessarily in that order.

Since we first launched strikes in Afghanistan shortly after 9/11, our objective has been to kill or capture al-Qa’ida terrorists and dislodge their Taliban hosts. That mission was, and remains, quite different from our mission in Iraq, which is a mix of war-fighting, peacekeeping and nation building.

Most recently, U.S. and Afghan warriors, supported by other allies, launched Operation Moshtarak (a Dari word meaning “together”) in the center of Afghanistan’s southern Helmand province and the town of Marjah.

There is very little chance that a functioning democracy, or much else, can be established in Afghanistan. The internal regional conflicts, with or without the Taliban mixing things up, preclude such establishment.

Our objective is to prevent the Taliban from occupying uncontrolled regions there long enough for us to support and build up the Afghan military to a sustainable level. Once this is accomplished, the Afghan military will endeavor to rid the countryside of Taliban extremists, and keep them out, even if it invites eradication efforts across the southeastern border with Pakistan. (Pakistan is much more concerned with its neighbor, India, than its border with Afghanistan.)

Why prosecute the Taliban?

Because their presence in Afghanistan serves as a launch pad for jihadi attacks around the world.

On 10 September 2001, after eight years of Clinton administration national security malfeasance, and eight months of the newly installed Bush administration’s efforts to reorder national security priorities, most Americans were unaware that a deadly enemy had set up shop on our turf.

On 11 September, that enemy attacked us, leaving a hole in a Pennsylvania field and collapsing not only our World Trade Center towers and one fifth of the Pentagon, but also the U.S. economy, which was its ultimate objective. That attack was organized by Sheik Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network, al-Qa’ida, from Taliban-occupied territory in Afghanistan.

Al-Qa’ida was, and remains, part of an increasingly unified and asymmetric Islamist terror network supported by nation states including Iran, Syria and extremist factions in Saudi Arabia, and previously by Iraq.

Unlike symmetric threats emanating from clearly defined nation states such as Russia and China — those with unambiguous political, economic and geographical interests — asymmetric enemies defy nation-state status, thus presenting new and daunting national-security challenges for the executive branch and U.S. military planners.

The strategy to-date in Afghanistan has been somewhat modeled after our strategy in Iraq. The operational blueprint has been “shape, clear, hold and build”: Shape the conditions to secure population centers; clear insurgents; hold the region so that insurgents can’t regain tactical advantage; and build, which includes the provision of humanitarian and reconstruction efforts until such control can be transferred to national authorities.

However, as noted, there remain serious questions about whether any such national authority can be established in Afghanistan, or if the best we can hope for is the development of a military authority, heavily underwritten by the U.S. and NATO, and sufficient to contain the Taliban and its terrorist campaigns against the West.

Afghanistan remains an ideal breeding ground for the active cadres of “Jihadistan,” a borderless nation of Islamic extremists comprising al-Qa’ida and other Muslim terrorist groups around the world.

A borderless nation, indeed. The “Islamic World” of the Quran recognizes no political borders. Though orthodox Muslims (those who subscribe to the teachings of the “pre-Medina” Quran) do not support acts of terrorism or mass murder, large, well-funded sects within the Islamic world subscribe to the “post-Mecca” Quran and Hadiths (Mohammed’s teachings). It is this latter group which calls for jihad, or “holy war,” against all “the enemies of God.”

For the record, these “enemies,” or infidels, are all non-Muslims.

Are you a non-Muslim?

Jihadists, then, are characterized by the toxic Wahhabism of Osama bin Laden and his heretical ilk — those who would remake the Muslim world in their own image of hatred, intolerance, death and destruction. In the words of bin Laden himself: “We love death. The U.S. loves life. That is the big difference between us.”

Does Barack Hussein Obama get the message?

Given his penchant for appeasement and for ill-advised withdrawal timelines from Iraq and Afghanistan, one would think not.

Moreover, the Obama administration’s newly released quadrennial outline for national and homeland defense makes no mention of “Islam,” “Islamic” or “Islamist,” preferring instead to reference “violent extremism.”

Obama’s “Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism,” John Brennan (a.k.a. “Terrorist Czar”), has deflected criticism of the quadrennial reports, and of Obama’s re-warming of the Clinton model for treating terrorists as “criminals” rather than “enemy combatants.”

“Politics should never get in the way of national security,” says Brennan, who insists that Obama’s detractors are “misrepresenting the facts to score political points, instead of coming together to keep us safe.” The thin-skinned Brennan has also charged that “politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qa’ida.”

Obama’s foreign policy is driven by nothing if not politics, and this includes his Afghanistan strategy. It’s a strategy necessitated by his phony bravado during the 2008 presidential campaign — a strategy with the ultimate aim of an easy political out.

Carnegie Endowment policy analyst Robert Kagan observes, “The new doctrine that seems to enjoy enormous cachet among the smart foreign policy set is: Fight wars until they get hard, then quit.”

I prefer John Stuart Mill’s assessment: “War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse. … A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.”

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander
Publisher, PatriotPost.US

Warfighter 101: The Taliban lamentations

October 6, 2009

“Information, the first principle of warfare. Know thine enemy, but first you must know yourself.” Was that Sun Tzu? A later strategist? Who cares really, it is fundamental knowledge, and GWB blew it. The other day I started reading a rather long article. One that should be required reading for every Officer and NCO in our entire Armed Forces as well as the Commander in Chief.

In war, it is, and has been for some time a well understood tactic that winning the brain game can ensure a victory. Sometimes even without bloodshed, or minimized actual violence. Destroy the enemy’s will to fight; demoralize him, make him believe in his heart and soul that he cannot be victorious. Target any leaders that will spring up among them, and destroy them, utterly. To drive the point home. Let them hear the lamentations of not only their women, as Conan would say, but of their fellow warriors as well. Make them believe that even their God has forsaken them… Victory will be assured.

We, as in the allied forces were about to make history. The Taliban were on the ropes and a real win, by outsiders, had never before been done in Afghanistan.

But then, we took our eye off the target. It was as if we were at a Trap Shoot and shifted from singles to doubles without taking out the first clay first…

Doubt my words? Read this, in it’s entirety. Yes, it is a long read. Nothing of true value is ever easy though. This is however invaluable , if you are to understand the psychology of warfare. Of victory, and war-fighting.

The Taliban in their own words

Score one for the good guys

August 8, 2009

Wimps of various stripes will not like the story that follows. Then again, they don’t give a hoot about the rude men that protect their right to be wimps…

Pakistani Taliban head’s death a blow to militants

ISLAMABAD—Pakistan’s Taliban chief was killed by a CIA missile strike, a militant commander confirmed Friday—a severe blow to extremists threatening the stability of this nuclear-armed nation and a possible boost to U.S.-Pakistani cooperation in fighting insurgents who wreak havoc along the Afghan border.Pakistani officials vowed to dismantle the rest of the network run by Baitullah Mehsud regardless of who takes over, a move seen as essential to crippling the violent Islamists behind dozens of suicide attacks and beheadings in the country.

Already, the Taliban were holding a “shura” council in the lawless, rugged South Waziristan tribal region to choose Mehsud’s successor, intelligence officials and militants told The Associated Press, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the information. It was unclear when they might reach a decision.

Full Story

Unconventional Warfare, winning hearts, minds, and…

January 12, 2009

Unconventional warfare comes in many flavors. But little blue pills? I read this in the Patriot Post, and just started laughing…

Talk about Sua Sponte!

With a resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan, U.S. intelligence officials have started looking for new ways to sway the hearts and minds of the various tribal chieftains who control large swaths of the country and whose assistance is needed to defeat the Taliban. U.S. operatives say that money or weapons are not necessarily the best choice. A variety of services or other items are used, too, including tools, medicinal treatment for family members, toys or school equipment for children, travel assistance, and, in a brilliant display of outside-the-box thinking, occasional pharmaceutical assistance for aging leaders whose spirit is willing but whose flesh, uh, can’t quite keep up. Enter Viagra, the famous little blue pill that has revolutionized “senior moments” and, now apparently, U.S. intelligence-gathering capabilities as well.

In a country where multiple wives are common, along with the implied but unspoken sexual prowess of tribal chieftains and associated tribal authority which that represents, Viagra is using medical technology in a way that the Taliban simply cannot match. Describing a recent encounter, a U.S. operative gave an Afghan chieftain four blue tablets, then returned a few days later to a grinning chief who gladly offered a treasure trove of information on nearby Taliban movements and supply routes, followed, naturally, by a request for more pills. Other operatives report that they are given free rein of controlled areas after making their delivery. As one operative said, “Whatever it takes to make friends and influence people — whether it’s building a school or handing out Viagra.” Indeed, “make love, not war” may be one of the more memorable catch phrases from the hedonistic, anti-war 1960s, but who would have thought that it could ever describe an effective new military tactic?

Profiles of valor: U.S. Army Sgt. James Brasher

November 23, 2008

United States Army Sgt. 1st Class James Brasher was serving as platoon sergeant for 2nd Platoon, Company A, 1st Battalion, 508th Parachute Infantry Regiment in December 2007. His company was part of Operation Mar Kararadad, a mission to clear the Taliban stronghold of Musa Qal’eh, Afghanistan. On the night of 7 December, the company flew by helicopter to a point just outside the city and occupied a hill overlooking it. At dawn, the company began taking enemy fire from a town at the bottom of the hill, so they moved to clear the town. At one point, Sgt. Brasher killed an attacking jihadi before he could injure or kill any U.S. soldiers, and Brasher also took out an enemy position with a fragmentation grenade.

Brasher then led his men against other enemy positions as they systematically cleared the town. Repeatedly exposing himself to enemy fire, Brasher continued to lead the Americans in pursuit of retreating insurgents, killing several more. The Taliban consolidated behind a defensible compound, but Brasher kept fighting even after he was hit in the right forearm and bicep by an enemy round. In fact, the medics had to force him to take medical care. On 9 October 2008, Brasher was presented the Silver Star for “daring acts of intrepidity and gallantry in the face of a numerically superior and determined force,” according to the citation. “SFC Brasher’s fearless actions and dedication to mission accomplishment enabled Second Platoon to destroy over 20 well trained Taliban fighters. His quick decisions and aggressive stance against the enemy saved the lives of his men.”

Taliban calls on Obama

November 5, 2008

Now why am I not suppried in the least about this…

Taliban calls on Obama to withdraw troops, thereby ushering in a new “era of peace”

“Peace” Taliban style: that is, stoning for adulterers, amputation for thieves, execution of homosexuals and apostates, closing of girls’ schools — the works. Of course, since Sharia is the highest law of the land according to the Afghan Constitution currently in effect, the present regime is not too far from this already, and is Taliban Lite at best.

“Obama can usher in ‘era of peace,’ Taliban says,” from AP, November 5:

ISLAMABAD, Nov. 5 (AP) – The Afghan Taliban on Wednesday called upon U.S. President-elect Barack Obama to withdraw troops from Afghanistan and usher in an “era of peace” in the world.”We want him (Obama) to change the policies of President (George W.) Bush. He could end the years-long war by withdrawing U.S. and allied troops from Afghanistan, ” Qari Mohammad Yusuf Ahmadi, spokesman for the Taliban, told the Pakistan-based Afghan Islamic press….

“Even if a soldier is tied to every stone in Afghanistan, the West would not be able to (bring into ) being a government of its choice in Afghanistan,” an earlier report by the Taliban spokesman as U.S. election results were still coming in said….

That seems to be a generally accurate statement.

source

Pakistani’s fight back

November 1, 2008

Pakistani’s are taking the war to the Taliban in a way that reminds me of the American Revolution. They are fed up with the strong arm tactics of those that know better than they do how to live their lives. Apparently, they are doing thios on their own. No help from the C.I.A. or anyone else.

Three cheers for these people! Freedom and liberty are all to often found on the edge of a sword, or from the muzzle of a gun. The time very well may come that Americans will need to do something along the same lines. Our very own government is becoming more, and more “Big Brother” as we enter this new century.

Full story here

They are still there Mister President…

October 20, 2008

A spokesman for the Taliban claimed responsibility for the death of a Christian aid worker in Kabul on Monday, and the militant group said it had attacked the woman because she was spreading her religion.

The woman, a British citizen, worked with handicapped Afghans and was killed in the western part of Kabul as she was walking to work around 8 a.m., the police said. Najib Samsoor, a district police chief, originally said the woman was from South Africa, but the British government later said she was British.

The gunmen, who were on a motorbike, shot the woman in the body and leg with a pistol, said Zemeri Bashary, an Interior Ministry spokesman. Officials did not release her name.

Zabiullah Mujahid, a Taliban spokesman, claimed responsibility for the slaying, saying the woman was killed because she was spreading Christianity. The group’s leaders had “issued a decree to kill this woman,” the spokesman said. “This morning our people killed her in Kabul.”

Calls to the woman’s organization Serving Emergency Relief and Vocational Enterprises, or Serve, were not answered Monday. The group calls itself a Christian charity registered in Britain.

source:

The Taliban are mad at us again…

October 5, 2008

So what else is new? We are still more than a little angry with them after all.

DERA ISMAIL KHAN, Pakistan – The Taliban are unusually angry about the latest suspected U.S. missile strike in Pakistan, a sign a top militant may have died in the attack, officials and residents said Sunday amid reports the death toll rose by two to 24.

source and story


%d bloggers like this: