![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
There's an old saying: amateurs study strategy, professionals study logistics. In that vein, a good article from the Captain's Journal blog titled "How Many Troops Can We Logistically Support in Afghanistan?". Of especially cautionary note:
Afghanistan is land-locked, and transportation of supplies and ordnance to U.S. and NATO troops occurs basically in three ways. Ten percent comes into Afghanistan via air supply. The other ninety percent comes in through the port city of Karachi, of which the vast majority goes to the Torkham Crossing (and then to Kabul) via the Khyber pass, with some minor portion going to Kandahar through Chaman.So the NATO/Coalition presence in Afghanistan is dependent on supply routes going through Pakistan. Something to keep in mind if the Indian-Pakistani cold war turns hot again, and also a limit as to exactly how far we can push the Pakistani government without endangering our Afghanistan mission as well. Furthermore, the Taliban doesn't need to defeat the Coalition in battle: if they can just control the passes into Afghanistan and block the supply convoys, they can win via attrition as the NATO position becomes untenable.
Surge in Afghanistan
Date: 2008-12-01 08:45 pm (UTC)EXCERPT: "With deadly frequency, the Taliban and affiliated militant groups are using [the Wardak province] to launch attacks on the capital and the national highway that is an economic lifeline to the south. Given its location in between more populous urban centers, insurgents have made alarming gains in Wardak. A shadow government collects taxes and runs roadside checkpoints, according to intelligence reports and residents, while fighters - many of them foreign - are largely free to train, stash arms and kidnap victims without interference. In recent months, the increased level of Taliban activity, the weakness of Afghan security forces, and the prospect of mass voter intimidation ahead of next year's national elections have forced the U.S.-led coalition to pay closer attention to the province and, in particular, Jalrez."To continue reading the article, click here.
See also:
Taliban commander, district chief killed in Afghanistan', China View, 1 December 2008
Karzai accused of killing former Taliban spokesman',The News, 1 December 2008
Female UN employee shot dead in eastern Afghanistan',China View, 30 November 2008
Related posts:'Taliban regains power, influence in Afghanistan',20 November 2008
Afghan insurgency stronger than ever', 12 November 2008
Taliban is now a threat to region: Afghan official',14 October 2008
'Weak states, state failure and terrorism', 30 October 2007
Sphere: Related Content Posted at 10:11 AM in Armed Conflict, Governance, Taliban, Wardak
~~~
Can this poor country ever survive all that the world has thrown at it? All Afghanistan, and Pakistan have become are pawns in the "WAR ON TERROR" For many nations. It's no longer just a Sovereign Country that is to be recognized for it's foundations and beliefs, more to the point of a way station.
NATO, UNITED NATIONS, TALIBAN.. nothing more than the kings of what wars will be fought were and how. Too much tension, "to many chiefs, and not enough Indians" to speak.I am appalled at how this whole situation has become the "biggest fish to fry". The supply routes that must be maintained, the Pakistani and Afghanistanians that tremble in fear, the Taliban that creates havoc withing the world, the suicide bombers that will "sacrifice" themselfs for nothing more than the creation of more chaos. To what end will all of these chess games achieve? The dead are still dead. Those that survive are never again the same, and the orphans still hunger and cry. Am I an activist who is an extremest? NO! I see what several peoples in the "higher ups" miss. The loss of humanity to the absolute idiocy of the "kings of the world". I am by no means an important person, who huffs and buffs their wills and ways. I am a simple woman who lives a simple life, watching in horror, the self destructions of life.
To what cost? No one will give a simple answer, because apparently there is none.(INSERT SARCASIM HERE)It's so complicated.
>>>Pakistan Shifts From Afghanistan To India<<<
Pakistan Shifts From Afghanistan To India',Press TV, 1 December 2008EXCERPT:"Pakistan may pull out nearly 100,000 troops from its western borders with Afghanistan and will deploy them on the eastern border with India. Media reports quoted Pakistan's defense ministry officials on Sunday that Islamabad had already stated the decision to the US and NATO forces in Afghanistan. The officials added that Pakistan's priority on the so-called 'war on terror' would shift and it would to take care of the more immediate threat to its security on the eastern border with India. Pakistan has deployed thousand of soldiers in its troubled northwestern tribal belt along the Pak-Afghan border to combat al-Qaeda and Taliban linked insurgency. The developments come after India's Foreign Minister Prefab said that initial evidence in the Mumbai terror attacks show that the militants who carried out the terror spree had links with Pakistan."<<
I for one, feel for this world. In the years of traditions, values, cultures, customs, protocols of all nations, both big and small. Will be nothing more than "who has the biggest and baddest toys" shall rule the roost.
.SHAME.
That is the word of this generation and the next.
Re: Surge in Afghanistan
Date: 2008-12-01 09:06 pm (UTC)Re: Surge in Afghanistan
Some of the biggest contributers to any problem are those who claim to "create change"
Change is created, but only for the benefit for themselfs.
no subject
Date: 2008-12-01 09:22 pm (UTC)