[Closed] The Wikileaks about the Afghanistan War . Opinions ?

In some ways, the most interesting thing isn't what's actually been leaked - it's the way it has been given to three media companies based in the US, UK and Germany to avoid gagging and to help sift through it and corroborate and identify the information that really matters (though this does mean that it may be slanted to suit those companies' views..).

Much more organised and concerted than simply dumping it and making it available to all. It's likely to be highly damaging though really it depends what specifics are in there as to just what the long term effect will be.

highly damaging to who? the current US administration will just blame the previous one. and to be honest there's nothing in here that people havent suspected before. I suspect that most people dont actually want to know all the details and would prefer to be ignorant of all the facts of what is a really really shitty war and are probably happy that someone else is prepared to take tough decisions and make tough choices.

I'm not on top of this yet, but it's not as though there have been no journalists in Afghanistan while all this has been going on.

Depending on what's in there (and I'm nowhere close to being on top of this yet) the credibility of "embedded" reporters and most news outlets' reliance on such could easily take a pretty bad knock.

I suspect that most people dont actually want to know all the details

I think you're right on that actually - particularly in the US where they're very gung-ho about war and military action in general.

This information along with the often despised Afghan national Police force is starting to draw huge parallels with the US banking of the corrupt south Vietnam junta'.

It really must be about oil reserves though mustn't it? Why else would they stay there and keep pouring money and potential political careers in?

Hmmm. So far I have "learnt" from the Graun's analysis that:

- the civilian death toll is probably higher than is widely acknowledged;

- special forces units kill key taliban leaders without trying them in a court of law first;

- the use of armed UAVs is increasing;

- there has been an increase in roadside bomb attacks;

- ****stan's intelligence agency probably has something to do with the taliban.

Thus far my world has not been rocked.

At times like this I think we should all take a moment to consider the words of Colonel Trautman in Rambo III

'Colonel Trautman: You know there wont be a victory, every day your ‘war machines’ lose ground to bunch of poorly armed, poorly equipped freedom fighters. The fact is that you underestimated your competition. If you’d studied your history you’d know these people have never given up to anyone. They’d rather die than be slaves to an invading army. You can’t defeat a people like that. We tried. We already had our Vietnam! Now you’re gonna have yours.'

When does the precious metal mining start? I assume that they're not going to wait until "hostilities cease"...

also the taliban apparently have stinger surface to air misslies and have used them to destroy an RAF chinook and others

i think its stuff like '[i]Bloody errors at civilians' expense, as recorded in the logs, include the day French troops strafed a bus full of children in 2008, wounding eight. A US patrol similarly machine-gunned a bus, wounding or killing 15 of its passengers, and in 2007 Polish troops mortared a village, killing a wedding party including a pregnant woman, in an apparent revenge attack.'[/i]

that is going to do a lot of damage to reputaion of the military and possibly radicalise more terrorists both here and in afgahnistan- didnt the head of MI6 say thats all these wars had acheived

Its good that the stuff is leaked, but I suspect the war will go on and eventually when the pressure to get out gets greater and the cost more unsustainable we will do a 'Deal' with the Taliban.

We will pull out and then blame any further mess on the local government.

I don't think the leak will make a blind bit of difference to how the 'war' is progressing and its not likely to make the US army put their guns down and their hands up in the air to say sorry about any of what's been released.

I, for one, am not surprised that these files exist and don't think anything will change.

Wikileaks is a revolutionary website, the world will not be the same again.

when the pressure to get out gets greater and the cost more unsustainable we will do a 'Deal' with the Taliban.

Can't see that happening. The Taliban know that they don't need to come to the table - we don't have any leverage over them. The Afghans are used to the "long game". Why go for a compromised negotiated outcome when you can just sit tight and outlast your opponent??

Some people are seriously short on their history

You're forgetting money - the Taleban know full well that they'll eventually get paid off in some way. they can take that for a while and then when things are quiet (eg foreign troops have gone home) they can take over again...

A good book on the US' recent wars on terror is
[url= http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0330471929/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1?pf_rd_p=103612307&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=0330455737&pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_r=0FJM5J352G890CBJ747S ]The Circuit[/url].

Written by a "gung ho" special forces soldier, turned civilian military contractor, turned critical insider commentator. This gives a pretty good expose of how deeply in the mire "our" foreign and military policy is

"stinger surface to air missiles"

Worrying. Widespread use of these will ruin NATO's mobility. It's what did for the Russian I think.

Can't see that happening. The Taliban know that they don't need to come to the table - we don't have any leverage over them. The Afghans are used to the "long game". Why go for a compromised negotiated outcome when you can just sit tight and outlast your opponent?

Good point and pretty much exactly what happened every time before this latest effort. Obviously the “Taliban” have had different names in the past. Usually to try and give the people back home a group to focus on.

When all you are fighting is a belief, you would have to be a fool to think you could defeat it with a gun.

Some people are seriously short on their history

Unfortunately it’s usually the people making big decisions 😥

If it is true...

But U.S. using chemical weapons when they have been banned and now people suffering from tumors...

No wonder Scottish MP's told USA to **** off!

Obviously the “Taliban” have had different names in the past.

Yeah they used to be the 'brave mujahadeen freedom fighters'.

Yeah they used to be the 'brave mujahadeen freedom fighters'.

Ahh, but that was when Osama was on the CIA's payroll.....

From what I can see on the front of the Guardian (not going to wade through it), there's nothing there that's surprising.

Yeah they used to be the 'brave mujahadeen freedom fighters'.

ie - it's a war;
shit happens;
joe public doesn't get told about it...

Yep, nothing new, nothing surprising, nothing learnt.

OK. Who gave them ground-to-air heatseeking missiles?

During the Russian invasion it was the CIA. So in this Merkin invasion it is the ...?

people suffering from tumors...

I think you'll find that's from the depleted uranium in the cannon shells that they fire at fixed emplacements/enemy buildings/schools/mosques and the like.

A significant number of Stingers were unaccounted-for (despite enormous care being taken to avoid this) after the Soviets left the country. The ****stanis and Americans have tried on at least a couple of occasions to buy the remaining weapons back, with some success. Although missiles from the 80s are mostly thought to be beyond their useful life expectancy, the possibility that some are useable cannot be ruled out.

Iran is thought to have (non-current version) Stingers, although evidence of Iranian support for the Taliban is seriously thin unless I've missed a memo.

Fact of the matter is that we are not seeing the sort of aircraft losses that you would expect if sophisticated SAMs were widely available to the Taliban. The Soviets first realised they had a problem when they lost 3 Hind helicopters in 2 minutes, and went on to lose more than 200 planes shot down in a year.

In strategic terms it is hard to see who would want to supply the Taliban with serious weaponry. The US decision to supply mujahedeen groups with Stinger was prompted by 2 things, firstly, the fact that the soviets were winning, and secondly the realisation that Afghanistan could be used as a theatre in which to defeat the Soviets if the resources were put in. The decision to let the Afghans have really effective SAMs was a break with the previous policy of "preventing the pot boiling over" and just keeping up a low-level insurgency that sapped Soviet manpower, equipment, money and prestige but was ultimately containable.

It's very unclear which countries would imagine that their interests were well-served by an equivalent decision to drive out the US in a forceful way. ****stan benefits enormously from its current 2-faced game in the region. Chinese companies are active in Afghanistan using US security to benefit from the free market conditions. India enjoys much better relations with the Karzai government than it has with Afghan governments for decades.

Iran was initially hostile to the taliban, and supplied and reinforced Ismail Khan and Herat against the initial taliban incursion. Iran has no particular desire for a fundamentalist sunni regime on its doorstep, doesn't want to be eye-to-eye with a ****stani proxy and is de-sbtabilised both by refugee flows from Afghan fighting and by heroin trunk routes across its borders. Iran helped to broker the original US contacts in 2001 with Dostum and others in the NA. Whether they've now decided to apply some more pressure or not, their ultimate strategic interest isn't served by having US-sponsored government replaced with ****stani-sponsored government.

I'm with rkk01 - It's war.

The use of drones shouldn't be condemmed - they aren't autonomous killing machines [yet]. Every decision made in Nevada is made patiently in the presence of a big chunk of the chain of command, military lawyers, analyists etc all of whom have the footage in front of them. The margin for human error is decreased dramatically, preventing events like the 'Crazy Horse' apache killings.

There aren't that many stingers, for reasons BigDummy outlined [very informative post, thanks]. As for the supply, I feel it's more likely low level local dealings than secret national campaigns.

As for the civilian killings, I don't feel any of us are in a position to judge the men involved. There is no way I can begin to comprehend what is going through their minds.

I agree with a lot of the above, it is a war and mistakes will inevitably happen. I think the leaking of this info will if anything, do more damage to the guys on the ground now rather than the politicians, who as pointed out already will blame others (as is the basic poltico answer to shit rolling downhill, 'it wasn't me a big boy did it' 🙄 )
Ignorance is sometimes bliss

It's very unclear which countries would imagine that their interests were well-served by an equivalent decision to drive out the US in a forceful way. ****stan benefits enormously from its current 2-faced game in the region. Chinese companies are active in Afghanistan using US security to benefit from the free market conditions. India enjoys much better relations with the Karzai government than it has with Afghan governments for decades.

Isn't the answer in your own paragraph BD ? :

[i]" India enjoys much better relations with the Karzai government than it has with Afghan governments for decades"[/i]

So presumably some in ****stan's Inter-Services Intelligence might believe that the overthrow of the existing Kabul government would be desirable.

I reckon it is very plausible that the ISI is supporting the Taliban. The ISI did after all create the Taliban, and the ISI would have some control and leverage over a Taliban government - something which does not have over the present Afghan government.

So I'm sure that a disciplined and stable Taliban government, over which they have some control, would be preferable to the ISI than the present corrupt, undisciplined, and unstable government.

I find it extremely hard to believe though, that Iran would want to help the Taliban. Iran has always denounced the Taliban from the day they first came to power in Afghanistan. And neither do they have any time for the Taliban's Sunni Arab backers - Al Qaeda.

I suppose the only appeal for Iran to give some support to the Taliban might be, if they figure that as long as the Yanks are bogged down in Afghanistan, then it seriously reduces the risk of their country being attacked by the US.

I guess if that argument won in Tehran, then the Iranians might be tempted to support both sides. Specially if the Iranians enjoy a bit of irony, and they reckon it is now payback time for when the Yanks were supplying weapons to both sides during the Iraq-Iran war.

how is this is going on under the noses of all the coalition troops without them knowing?????

http://afghanistan.suite101.com/article.cfm/the-growth-of-the-heroin-trade-in-afghanistan

Of course they know, but its easier to let it happen.

or more Profitable to help it happen?

I'm fairly sure the "coalition troops" don't make any profit out of the heroin trade.

And btw, I doubt that it is happening "under the noses" of the coalition troops. That's the problem with Afghanistan - a lot of it is under the control of the Taliban and NATO forces cannot access it. Venturing into bandit country to check for opium cultivation isn't necessarily the number one priority.

i never ment the troops got a profit from it ......But,
im sure with all the technology they have now they could wipe out the majority of the crops within a few months, and the exporation could be stopped if they really wanted to ... IMHO ..... or they could at least break into the drug producing taliban bosses mansions and drag them out of their luxurious silk ladend beds or just pull them over in their rolls royces or bentleys and speedboats they no doubt have from their billions from ill gotten gains???
i proper turned the sarcasm up to 10 there did'nt i ;O) LMFAO

i proper turned the sarcasm up to 10 there did'nt i

Yes you did.

This however, is the real Afghanistan :

[img] [/img]

looks like a drawing to me ernie ;O)

Can you give that map to the Americans please ernie, I'm sure they'd like to know where the Taliban bases are so they can bomb them.

Thanks.

Good post BD

"as long as the Yanks are bogged down in Afghanistan, then it seriously reduces the risk of their country being attacked by the US."

That's what I was thinking. Leverage against American threats to Iran.

The International Council on Security and Development, which produced the map, briefs both military and civilian staff at NATO’s Headquarters concerning the security situation in southern Afghanistan. So I sure that isn't necessary samuri.

http://www.icosgroup.net/modules/team/Bio_Jorrit_Kamminga

The big mistake was probably going there thinking we could build a functioning state out of that crap hole. Better to leave them to it and let them sort themselves out when they're tired of living in a mediaeval war zone. At the moment, it seems they'd rather go on shooting each other.

Ernie - I'm absolutely happy with the conclusion that ****stan is behind the taliban insurgency. What I'm not clear about is that it makes sense for ****stan to back the taliban so that they can actually win. ****stan (and I'm indebted to Stephen Tanner for explaining this properly) has always sought what they call "strategic depth" in Afghanistan as insurance against an invasion of ****stani territory by India. Because ****stan is rather narrow, especially around Islamabad, and has its back up against the Suleiman range, and because India's conventional forces are both hugely larger and hugely superior, ****stani strategists covet the ability to retreat into/across the Suleimans through the Khyber and Bolan passes into reasonably friendly territory. The ideal situation is one in which the passes are permeable for a retreating ****stani force, but not for the Indians.

However, an Indian invasion of ****stan is vastly less likely (a) while there are substantial US forces in Afghanistan and (b) while ****stan is able to cosy up to the US as a key ally in the WoT. ****stan has benefitted massively from US support since 2001, in finanical and aid terms and also in military assistance. While I absolutely agree that ****stan wants their preferred regime in Kabul and has the creeping horrors of one sympathetic to India being in power, they don't have any immediate interest in getting massively on the wrong side of the US.

Is there anything to suggest that the IR SAMs are Stingers??

Surely, anything supplied to the mujahideen in the 80s would be seriously past shelf life by now? The extract I saw on the BBC link just reference MANPAD (man portable air defence).

Could equally be ex Soviet SA7 / SA14 / SA16 / SA18. SA14 has previously been reported as used in Baghdad by islamist insurgents, and SA16 / SA18 systems have been used by Chechen rebels.

Lots of interesting opions here, makes for some good reading.

Big Dummy, are you MI6 or something, you seem to know an awful lot. Is BD you codename ? 😉

Some more articles here for those with time on their hands.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/

well taking into account any guardian bias this kind of story makes for grim reading

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/26/afghanistan-war-logs-us-marines