| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Afghanistan | |
| Thirsty to fight, hard to wake up | |
| 2007-05-04 | |
There have been four attempts to forge a strong central army in Afghanistan since the 18th century. Each has failed, frustrated by war, invasions or the stubborn ways of conservative tribesmen. Now the west is making the fifth try, and the task is no less urgent, or complicated, than in the past. On paper 46,000 recruits have joined the Afghan national army (ANA); President Hamid Karzai's government hopes to hit 70,000 by the end of 2008. America, anxious to ensure an exit strategy for its own troops, is footing the bill - $2bn (£1bn) so far with another $2bn promised for new M-16 guns, Ford trucks and bulletproof jackets. | |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #17 This is all for naught. Until we shut down the terrorist factories in Pakistan (madrassas) and decimate their logistics centers (tribal areas in Waziristan), it will not matter a damn bit how well trained the ANA is. You cannot give your enemy ANY sanctuary or respite. Even if it means blowing the hell out of parts of Pakistan (because the Pakis refuse to handle it themselves). |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2007-05-04 22:28 |
| #16 Also, on the degree of success in modernizing Muslims living (second generation) in Europe/USA. Yup, funny how that "success" keeps ending up with more Westerners getting killed. Civilizing Muslims is like teaching a pig to sing. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-05-04 22:20 |
| #15 Whenever people talk about "modernizing" Muslims, I think of the effects of the British Raj on India vs Pakistan/Bangladesh. Also, on the degree of success in modernizing Muslims living (second generation) in Europe/USA. |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2007-05-04 20:25 |
| #14 Until the clerics are dragged out of their mosques, shot and hung on a pole, not much good is going to take root. Bingo, rm. Islam is totally toxic to all other modes of thought. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-05-04 19:38 |
| #13 The Vietnamese weren't muzzies. That means that logic could take root. I share Zenster's concern about much positive being able to take root. Moose's idea is a good one, but I think the clerics would have the baby throttled in its crib as they would see the threat. We would need no less than 10 years of uninterrupted training to get an adequate number where they could protect themselves (hopefully by killing the clerics). Until the clerics are dragged out of their mosques, shot and hung on a pole, not much good is going to take root. |
| Posted by: remoteman 2007-05-04 18:43 |
| #12 Anything we do in the way of training and education helps. A person with military training (and a bit of discipline) is better not only at his military job, but at just about everything he tries to do, because he's learned that he CAN do things. Personally, I'd like Karzai to institute a draft, where every able-bodied Afghan male citizen is given 90 days of military training and returned to his home to help the standing army and the police maintain order. Give THEM the outdated AK-47s and ammo. Training should consist of small unit weapons and tactics, how to set up an ambush, how to RESPOND to an ambush, defensive and offensive capabilities, setting up checkposts and strong points, constructing defenses, cleanliness and hygiene, weapons maintenance, etc. Try to teach all of them that can't to read and write. For those that will volunteer for it, give them additional training in vehicle maintenance, sanitation, basic construction, infrastructure maintenance, and logistics. Pay everybody during training. Allow those who choose to go into the Army after their 90 days. We may not be able to count on more than 1% of those that go through the training to actually fight, but even those that don't will have learned something they can take home to their local village, and use to make everyone's life better. If we can get the villagers to understand that live WILL be better, then they may decide to defend themselves, and make our job easier. We taught Vietnamese villagers to defend their villages, and it made life more miserable for the Viet Cong. I think the same tactic could prove highly beneficial in Afghanistan (and Iraq). |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2007-05-04 15:51 |
| #11 I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world. That's why they gotta be educated, Zenster. The more education they get, the more they will call BS on Khomeini. I think that's getting to be a big quandary for the mad mullahs in Iran now. They need educated people to be a nuclear power but educated people will see how phony they are. You have to be really ignorant to swallow all that crap about 72 virgins. |
| Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305 2007-05-04 15:37 |
| #10 More on this subject here: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b51_1177774678 |
| Posted by: Drive By Lurker 2007-05-04 13:29 |
| #9 The idea is to create a new social class, an "instant" respectable class of professional soldier of some means, that disdains the old ways and has secular nationalism as their sole prerogative. Thank you for responding on this, 'moose. I agree that your above strategy is one of the few that holds any promise of deconstructing existing societal norms. There still remains doubt in my mind as to whether this is possible without Islam's prior elimination. Islamic traditions, and the clannish tribal mentality they perpetuate, thwart so many of the above objectives that they may not be otherwise obtainable. Secular nationalism is viewed as being in direct conflict with Islamic doctrine. I refer you to Khomeini's 1980 speech in Qom: "We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah; For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land [Iran] burn. I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world."It is hard to believe that newfound professional status or even career potential can overcome such an ironclad rejection of secular nationalism. Islamic doctrine is simply too pervasive in this situation. As with so many Muslim majority countries, it is also difficult to imagine that even promises of economic success will overcome the inertia of religious tradition. Especially when Islam's clerical class reject material success and its comforts as being distinctly detrimental to the pursuit of personal jihad. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-05-04 11:48 |
| #8 Zenster: There is a major difference between these people and typical peasants. These are warrior peoples. As such, they are much more likely to succeed if given some attention and exposure to a better way of doing business. Certainly they have some atrocious habits and bad tribal customs; which is why I suggested taking boys who are societies outcasts and raise them on a completely new way of doing business. The idea is to create a new social class, an "instant" respectable class of professional soldier of some means, that disdains the old ways and has secular nationalism as their sole prerogative. Once such a class exists, then it becomes self-perpetuating, a magnet for ambitious young men willing to follow its rules to make good money and social status as a career. It breaks up the existing social order, as a poor orphan can attain a higher status than the son of a wealthy and powerful family. I also suggested that the training is by US Marine training personnel, but DIs more on the Jack Webb model than the real American training model. That they don't hold back. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-05-04 11:18 |
| #7 Desertion rates, estimated at 20%, remain unacceptably high. Afghans refuse western military rations in favour of fresh lamb and rice. Others are more serious, such as a refusal to clean weapons or stores. Many overstay their leave by weeks, facing no punishment on their return, or never come back. So, no one else gets any sort of ominous feeling about the serious defeciencies cited above? For how much longer are we supposed to stick around pumping billions of dollars into these lackluster cretins in the hope that they'll finally grow a brain? Nothing of the sort has happened for many centuries, why is that suddenly going to change? While I continue to support the Global War on Terrorism, I have increasing doubts that funneling untold billions of dollars into the Islamic shitholes is going to make much difference in the long run. The one single direct strategic advantage derived from this is making them dependent upon our military hardware. It can be argued that there is additional benefit from inculcating Western military thinking, but from what I cited above, not much seems to be trickling down in the form of soldierly conduct. America and the West really need to reconsider their overall strategy. A policy of neutralization and containment may prove to be far more cost efficient and productive than squandering some projected trillions of dollars on attempts to install democracy throughout the MME (Muslim Middle East). I think it was worth trying, as we have in Afghanistan and Iraq, but there is little promise that the lessons we are attempting to teach will actually take root. As noted in the article, plunking down 20th century military facilities in no way guarantees that a 16th mentality will rise to the challenge. From all indications to date, far from it. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-05-04 10:43 |
| #6 Bobby, it depends what I'm trying to do. If I want to extricate myself from an ambush behind a curtain of projectiles I'll take the M-16. If I want to establish the ambush and inflict the maximum damage in the minimum time, with aimed shots I'll take the M-14. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2007-05-04 07:59 |
| #5 The M-16 and 430 rounds of ammunition weigh the same as the M-14 and 100 rounds. Which would you rather have on your back? |
| Posted by: Bobby 2007-05-04 06:45 |
| #4 This is an Al-Guardian article, replete with upper-class British snark and lacking in basic military reality. The Soviets/Russians were already replacing the AKM series of rifles with the AK-74 during the Afghan War : 5.45mm caliber, based on what they saw as the inherent values of the 5.56mm caliber of the West. The ChiComs now have a 5.8mm caliber of their own for their latest series of bullpup assault rifle. Everyone is moving to lighter caliber assault rifles since the ammo load is greatly increased when moving from 7.62mm to below 6.0mm. The Afghani AKs are getting rather long in the tooth and the ANA wants to upgrade to Western equipment, especially after seeing the damage the Alliance has been inflicting on the Taliban with said equipment. |
| Posted by: Shieldwolf 2007-05-04 03:51 |
| #3 "21st-century barracks for a 16th-century army" > for some reason, this article reminds me of that infamous, post-9-11 JESSE JACKSON MSM cartoon, the one where heavily armed but befuddled Islamist Radics threatened to kill themselves unless Jesse stopped talking in riddles. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2007-05-04 01:29 |
| #2 Extra added benefit, Moose: not all the young men, having been trained, will be lifers in the brigade. A fair number of them will eventually make their way into civilian life, where they'll be merchants, traders, politicans, teachers, etc. In short: your plan not only builds an army, it helps build a country and a couple generations of leaders. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2007-05-04 01:22 |
| #1 In one of the quieter areas, I would set up a camp full of US Marine trainers. Take only the poorest and greenest of young Afghans in it, especially orphans, and give them intense, almost cult-like training and discipline. The idea is to create enlisted, NCOs and officers from the ground up as the nucleus of an elite force, trained and cross trained, literate and educated, and completely patriotic. No connection to religion, tribe, or any other affiliation other than their unit. Their mission is to become a training brigade for their entire military. A brigade that will continue to only recruit the poorest, greenest young loners in their country. And once they are trained and become NCOs and officers, to spin them off into new military units as their new commands. The idea is to create a secular military culture in the country that will slowly change civilian attitudes towards the military, until young men enter the military out of choice, with the expectation of performing up to their standards. Eventually, hopefully, it will supplant their national differences, so that even after leaving the military, loyalty to the old unit and country will remain, above other affiliations. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-05-04 00:52 |