its insane. the us is funding the taliban in Afghanistan.

hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military funds are making their way to Afghan insurgents, including the Taliban. Roston reports that the U.S. is paying off insurgents to persuade them from attacking U.S. supply lines.

In this grotesque carnival, the US military's contractors are forced to pay suspected insurgents to protect American supply routes. It is an accepted fact of the military logistics operation in Afghanistan that the US government funds the very forces American troops are fighting. And it is a deadly irony, because these funds add up to a huge amount of money for the Taliban. "It's a big part of their income," one of the top Afghan government security officials told The Nation in an interview. In fact, US military officials in Kabul estimate that a minimum of 10 percent of the Pentagon's logistics contracts--hundreds of millions of dollars--consists of payments to insurgents.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/11/karl-eikenberry-dissents_n_354657.html
 
It is always cheaper to pay than to fight.

It is really not as crazy as you think. A lot of strife in this dirt poor region is caused by economics more than theology. A few hundred dollars per convoy trip may save a few American and coalition lives. It is estimated that 10% of the funding for contracted trucking may end up in the hands of the Taliban.

In addition, the Army Times reported that the US is also trying to turn some of the lower level Taliban towards a normalized relationship with the Afghan government and the US. And they are not doing the turning with just their good looks and charming personalities.

Allies turn Afghan insurgents into partners
ISAF seeks to reintegrate insurgents back into society

By Sean D. Naylor - Staff writer
Posted : Saturday Oct 31, 2009 10:00:12 EDT

KABUL — A new initiative to persuade low- and mid-level Afghan insurgents to lay down their weapons and rejoin society is already bearing fruit and holds great promise for the future, say senior officials in the NATO coalition here. A similar strategy is credited with decreasing the violence in Iraq.

Though the Afghanistan “reintegration” initiative is only now getting off the ground, hundreds of insurgents have taken advantage of it, and many others are waiting for the Afghan government and the coalition to announce the specifics of the reintegration plan, said Maj. Gen. Mike Flynn, the director of intelligence for the International Security Assistance Force.

Flynn and other ISAF officials emphasize that they do not view the reintegration effort as a “silver bullet” that will bring a quick victory over the insurgency. Nevertheless, said British Lt. Gen. Jim Dutton, the deputy ISAF commander, “There is lots and lots of potential in this.”

The initiative is based on the strong belief at ISAF headquarters that most insurgents are not ideologically committed to their leaders’ aims and would be willing to quit fighting under the right conditions.

“What we’re finding is the dissatisfied, disenfranchised, traumatized folks who are the ones who are the foot soldiers for the ideologues or the radical folks … often find themselves in a position where if they need to take care of their family, the only way to do that is to implant IEDs or to fire shots at the coalition,” said Col. John Agoglia, director of the counterinsurgency training center here. “A majority of these folks, if given the means to provide for themselves and their family, will very easily lay down their weapons.”

The Afghans call them the “upset brothers,” the low- and mid-level fighters who are fighting for money or to gain revenge for some perceived injustice, or because they are being coerced, rather than for ideological reasons or out of a lust for power. The phrase has caught on with ISAF.

It is these “upset brothers” at whom the reintegration initiative is targeted.

“The reasons why people fight will be different in different villages and different communities in different parts of the country, but a lot of the drivers of instability and a lot of the drivers for the reasons why these individuals fight are indeed rectifiable,” said Col. Chris Kolenda, a special adviser to ISAF commander Gen. Stanley McChrystal and director of strategy for reintegration.

Although persuading insurgents in Iraq to stop fighting the coalition — and in many cases to fight with the coalition against al-Qaida in Iraq — was crucial to lowering the violence levels there, Kolenda said there are important distinctions between the two countries.

“In Iraq you could talk to a tribal sheikh and that individual commands the loyalty of 10,000 individuals,” he said. “The tribal structure in Iraq had not atrophied.”

In contrast, over the past 30 years the Afghan tribal structures have broken down under the pressure of war and deliberate attempts to fracture them on the part of the Afghan communist government in the 1980s and the Taliban in the 1990s. “I cannot go to the head of the Ghilzai Pashtun confederation and say, ‘Hey, let’s have all the Ghilzais stop fighting,’” Kolenda said. “That individual doesn’t exist.”

In Afghanistan the key to persuading the “upset brothers” to put down their weapons is to give them a way to return safely to society with their heads held high, officials said. “People are looking for a way to change sides, to turn back to legitimacy, but they have to do it in a way that guarantees their safety, [allows them] to return with some honor, and there has to be a way to make a living,” said a senior ISAF official.

Doing this will require the Afghan government and the coalition to create localized solutions for every community where insurgents are interested in coming in from the cold, Kolenda said.

“If we can create dynamics within communities … where you have social, economic, political opportunity that is tailored to the needs of that local community, you’re going to create a significant amount of attraction for people to come back into that community and lead a peaceful and productive life as a part of it because they’ve got opportunities that are relevant to them,” he said, adding that creating these opportunities will also help persuade those Afghans who are sitting on the fence to support the government and coalition efforts.

more...

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/10/army_reintegration_102909w/
 
Quote from tmarket:

It is always cheaper to pay than to fight.

It is really not as crazy as you think. A lot of strife in this dirt poor region is caused by economics more than theology. A few hundred dollars per convoy trip may save a few American and coalition lives. It is estimated that 10% of the funding for contracted trucking may end up in the hands of the Taliban.

In addition, the Army Times reported that the US is also trying to turn some of the lower level Taliban towards a normalized relationship with the Afghan government and the US. And they are not doing the turning with just their good looks and charming personalities.



more...

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/10/army_reintegration_102909w/
what do you think they are doing with the money? buying weapons to kill more of our troops.
 
Quote from vhehn:

what do you think they are doing with the money? buying weapons to kill more of our troops.
Weapons are not the limiting factors toward coalition casualties in Iraq or Afghanistan, it never was and never will be.

What you should worry about is that money going towards improving the the lives of those being ruled by the Taliban - for it is then that you have lost the hearts and minds of the Afghans.
 
we could bribe off the whole country and be done with the war if we gave the people bribes instead of giving the money to military contractors.We could get that whole country to turn into flag waving yankees if we paid them off to turn against radical islam.Im glad obama has rejected all the stale,more of the same,stay the course options he was presented with.
 
Quote from tmarket:



What you should worry about is that money going towards improving the the lives of those being ruled by the Taliban - for it is then that you have lost the hearts and minds of the Afghans.
i am not one bit worried that the money will go to those who need it. did you miss this part?


"It is an accepted fact of the military logistics operation in Afghanistan that the US government funds the very forces American troops are fighting."
 
There was a documentary shown recently on Aus TV about the scale of corruption in Afghanistan. It was just mind boggling in it's scope.

US aid was supposed to have committed to building over 600 schools across the country. The journalist insisted on being shown one (just one) in Kabul. After a week of pestering, the US PR hack eventually sent him to the best they had. Construction had stopped two years ago and all there was to show was a very nice front wall and the toilet block. The money had run out, or rather been siphoned off. Oh, but there was a rather grand billboard proclaiming that all this was thanks to US AID.

It seems the only thing being built in Kabul are luxury apartments and villas some with price tags of over a million bucks. This in a country where the average income is what? Fraud and corruption on a massive scale.

How could US and NATO be unaware of this for years? It is not credible that they haven't at the very least been turning a bind eye. And it is not credible to be believe that most Afghans don't know what is going on. Hearts and Minds? Thats a laugh.

The whole war is rotten to the core. The US and NATO should get out immediately and let the Afghans sort out their problems.
 
Quote from vhehn:

i am not one bit worried that the money will go to those who need it. did you miss this part?


"It is an accepted fact of the military logistics operation in Afghanistan that the US government funds the very forces American troops are fighting."

Why is the current administration doing this?
 
Back
Top