CIA Report: just 10% of Afghan fighters are with Taliban or Al Qaeda

[Sol Invictus]

A series of new reports cast doubt on all the key arguments for war in Afghanistan.

By Ole Damkjær, Jesper Dahl Caruso and Karl Erik Stougaard, Berlingske.dk
Wednesday 25 November 2009, 22:30

Denmark lost soldier number 30 yesterday in Afghanistan. The sad number 30 was rounded just as new reports cast serious doubt on all the familiar arguments for continuing the war: democracy, terrorism and women's and children's rights.

U.S. intelligence now estimates that the main enemy is no longer the Taliban and al-Qaeda. They represent only 10 percent of the fighters, as the international force fighting against. The rest are resistance fighters who are fighting against the occupying power - as well as local tribal militias and the criminals who fight over money and power.

"Many of the tribesmen who take up arms do so only when the foreign forces and the Afghan army intervene in their lives. This raises a crucial question: Should we use Danish and foreign forces to change the traditional local power structures?" says Afghanistan expert at the Danish Defense Academy, Peter Dahl Truelsen.

The widespread fraud in the recent elections was very damaging to the legitimacy of both the Afghan government and international forces. Without democratic legitimacy, the rebellion can't be quashed, says think tank International Crisis Group (ICC) in a new report.

"It has given the Taliban a huge public relations victory," said analyst Candace Rondeaux from the ICC.

Relief organization Oxfam concludes in a large study, although several Afghan children come to school and women can work, it is women and children who suffer most from the war. The study also shows that Western relief is not effective in alleviating the suffering of the people.

Original story in Danish: http://www.berlingske.dk/krigen/rapporter-krigen-er-slaaet-fejl

[Thulsa Doom]

They can´t win a war in Afghanistan, because the Afghans have nothing more to lose. They should just get out of there and leave a strike force behind. Put up some ground rules, no poppy growing and no terrorist camps, and then let the Afghans fight it out.

[Sol Invictus]

They can´t win a war in Afghanistan, because the Afghans have nothing more to lose. They should just get out of there and leave a strike force behind. Put up some ground rules, no poppy growing and no terrorist camps, and then let the Afghans fight it out.

It's not a war that is meant to be won.

Just prolonged.

[Thulsa Doom]

It's not a war that is meant to be won.

Just prolonged.

Why? There is no oil, it doesn´t have any strategic value, it´s just a failed state. The US has achieved what they wanted already, which was to beat somebody in the face after 9/11.

[Sol Invictus]

Why? There is no oil, it doesn´t have any strategic value, it´s just a failed state. The US has achieved what they wanted already, which was to beat somebody in the face after 9/11.

It has all kinds of strategic value for sure, and it's only a failed state because the NATO forces rolled through there and destroyed an sort of infrastructure there was in place.

They were never unified anyway, but a collection of warlords where the Taliban did *not* have full control over. The invasion has put an end to that, since it is now a war of national resistance.

They now have a unifying cause. If anything, they have strengthened the Taliban and their efforts. And that 9/11 bit makes no sense.

If someone hits you in the face and runs off, would it make sense to walk up to some stranger and punch him in the face to get revenge? No. Funny yes. But unfortunately we aren't dealing with fists in this case, but with bullets, tanks, bombs, and *human* lives.

[Thulsa Doom]

It has all kinds of strategic value for sure, and it's only a failed state because the NATO forces rolled through there and destroyed an sort of infrastructure there was in place.

They were never unified anyway, but a collection of warlords where the Taliban did *not* have full control over. The invasion has put an end to that, since it is now a war of national resistance.

As I see it, it has been a warlord country for the last 1000 years, all it neighbors are fed up with them. And it will stay that way until someone chops it up into Nation States.


They now have a unifying cause. If anything, they have strengthened the Taliban and their efforts. And that 9/11 bit makes no sense.

If someone hits you in the face and runs off, would it make sense to walk up to some stranger and punch him in the face to get revenge? No. Funny yes. But unfortunately we aren't dealing with fists in this case, but with bullets, tanks, bombs, and *human* lives.

My point was that after 9/11 the US was going to put the blame on somebody and show who is the boss. Ordinary power politics. Since nobody, not even the muslims, liked the Talibans or cared about Afghanistan, that solution went down well around the world. But the question is why should the US and its minions (NATO) stay? Afghanistan will never be a democratic state or anything well working.

[Sol Invictus]

As I see it, it has been a warlord country for the last 1000 years, all it neighbors are fed up with them. And it will stay that way until someone chops it up into Nation States.

Well we should leave it to them to descide that. We have no right to chop any country that isn't ours into Nation States or impose any law that isn't their own. America is intended to be a just Republic, not a ruthless, money hungry Empire who bullies their allies into fighting a war that isn't theirs.




My point was that after 9/11 the US was going to put the blame on somebody and show who is the boss.

That doesn't justify a damn thing. My government isn't my boss, so what right do they have to boss someone who doesn't even fall under their constitution?


Ordinary power politics.

To bully someone who had nothing to do with anything is not ordinary nothing. What is ordinary, however, is to get your ass handed to you when you invade a tough determined foe on their own soil with their backs against the wall.


Since nobody, not even the muslims, liked the Talibans or cared about Afghanistan, that solution went down well around the world.

The Taliban *are* Muslims, no matter what way you slice it. And because of the fallout after 9/11 in which the feds portrayed the Muslim world as a unifyingly sadistic evil people who want to kill you because of your 'freedoms' (crude propaganda for a crude public), and the already present racial tension between native people of the west and immigrants, people really didn't give a shit if a couple thousand, even a couple million of them were slaughtered in cold blood, *in their own homes*, mind you.


But the question is why should the US and its minions (NATO) stay? Afghanistan will never be a democratic state or anything well working.

Exactly, they shouldn't even be there. Those evil people don't give two shits about democracy in Afghanistan, even if those well-meaning, gentle hearted people who joined up with NATO forces did. There is a pipeline that is to be laid, and it must be funneled through Taliban holdings. Whatever phoney cause we can make up to get the people on board doesn't matter. Freedom, liberty, democracy, 9/11, blah blah blah, whatever. Even if it *is* a bullshit story. The public are stupid as fuck, and we need to get paid!

[Rusalka]

Why? There is no oil, it doesn´t have any strategic value, it´s just a failed state. The US has achieved what they wanted already, which was to beat somebody in the face after 9/11.

If we were to look for a reason for this continuing war, I'd say that war in itself is the reason. The case of Iraq exemplifies this: they've spent $3 Trillion to get, what, billions worth in oil? Many a bureaucrat must've pocketed a share of the budget and, besides, constant conflict keeps the arms industry going. And you can bet your bottom dollar American companies will be in charge of the rebuilding of some areas after the war. This whole ME peace process by Obama is probably just a farce, since, if anything, America benefits from a constant state of tension. Part of the business is pumping Israel full of weaponry that will problably sit in storage to rust, so why would they want peace?

[Sol Invictus]

Oil is just the tip of the iceberg, really. That's such a sell out by people who oppose the war holding up their signs "no war for oil" and all that non-sense, when they don't factor in defense contracts to private armies like Xi aka Blackwater, arms sales, and the geo-political defense of Israel. Iraq is for sale, it's been divided up into shares, and is open for business. It's an enormous investment, and the oil won't stop flowing anytime soon. 10 - 20 years from now, Iraq's invasion cost will taper off and will far outweigh it's expenses.