This blog explores the contemporary political and cultural trends from a distinct perspective
The documents reveal a faltering strategy
Published on July 27, 2010 By Bahu Virupaksha In Current Events

The Af-Pak War has finally found a dubious notoriety, in the same manner as the Vietnam War found its in New York Times  publication of the Pentagon Papers.  The founder of WikiLeaks Jackie Assange, the Australian founder of this web site, has declared that the documents revealed on his site make a strong case for war crimes. This statement is sheer hype and the real story lies in the sordid nexus between the Government of Pakistan and its Army under Genaral Kayani and the Taliban. During the recent Donor's Conference in Kabul the US Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton made a pointed reference to the involvement of the Pakistan establishment in fomenting taliban insurgency in the Pashtun areas of Afghanistan. In fact one senior US official has even state that the Pakistanis are aware of the hideout of Osama bin Laden. The documents expose the fact that the official denials not withstanding, the civilian and military establishment of Pakistan is running circles round USA by publically endorsing US positions and coverly supporting the insurgency.

WikiLeaks has exposed literally thousands of documents that very clearly establish the enduring links between the Taliban insurgents and the Pakistani Military establishment. A retired general named Hamid Gul seems to have set up the interface between the Taliban and the Pakistani Army. The US has confronted the pakistani officials over the involvement of the Army Intelligence in planning and attacking the Indian Embassy in Kabul in 2008. In fact the treasure trove published in WikiLeaks reveals that the NATO forces had advance information of the attack on the Indian Embassy. General Gul needs to be treated as a terrorist and thr Pakistani Government must hand him over to the US for trial.

WikiLeaks has also published material regarding the training and recruitment of suicide bombers. The documents show without a shadow of doubt that the US has built a very good human intelligence network in the region. This may be now compromised due to the publication of reports. In fact the interrogation of the US terorist David Headley has shown that the Pakistani Army was involved in training the attackers who carried out the strikes in Mumbai, India, on 26th November 2008.

The US administration is incensed at the expose. However, I must add that there is hardly anything in the 92,000 pages that was not known earlier. Except for minor details much of the happening in Afghanistan is known to the rest of the world.

 


Comments (Page 1)
on Jul 27, 2010

The US administration is incensed at the expose.

That is the only thing you got wrong.  it is "feigning" outrage, but it is quietly applauding the release.  Just another example of the slime of this administration.

The most damaging thing is the exposure to the human network.  Not who they are, but that they exist is enough to get the bad guys to start sniffing around and as you indicate, put many of them in danger.

You also did not mention the intel on Iran (showing their covert activities) that was exposed.  For the most part, the documents are a big "we already know" revelation.  I heard one analyst say that they were "Secret" not "top Secret", so very little damage (outside of the spy network) will probably occur from this (except to perhaps some relations with other countries).

I just wonder when people are going to stop excusing this administration for their gross incompetence in everything and start holding THEM accountable to the level they did Bush.  Stupid is as stupid does, and the most apparent revelation of this episode is how stupids can (and did) vote for this regime.

on Jul 27, 2010

I just wonder when people are going to stop excusing this administration for their gross incompetence in everything and start holding THEM accountable to the level they did Bush. Stupid is as stupid does, and the most apparent revelation of this episode is how stupids can (and did) vote for this regime.

You're seriously going with "it's obama's fault" on this one? 

 

 

on Jul 27, 2010



I just wonder when people are going to stop excusing this administration for their gross incompetence in everything and start holding THEM accountable to the level they did Bush. Stupid is as stupid does, and the most apparent revelation of this episode is how stupids can (and did) vote for this regime.
You're seriously going with "it's obama's fault" on this one? 
 

I forgot who is the current President?

on Jul 27, 2010

the_Peoples_Party
I forgot who is the current President?

Bush, isn't it?  that is all I hear out of congress, the White House and the MSM.  Must be true, if Dan Blather says it is so.

Just remember the difference between ignorance and stupidity.  Ignorance means you can learn.  Stupidity means you refuse to.

on Jul 27, 2010

Once again DG, you miss the point. 

 

The wikileaks incident isn't any president's fault.  Really, just blame the guy who leaked the documents and be done with it.  Instead your insightful commentary is: "Americans are stupid for not voting for an 85 year old man and a governor from Alaska". 

 

Just remember the difference between ignorance and stupidity. Ignorance means you can learn. Stupidity means you refuse to.

Thanks Forest.  Is life still like a box of chocolates? 

on Jul 27, 2010

Pakistan is supporting the Taliban? No, say it isn't so. Didn't need a leak to know this. Bet he found a boatload of war crimes committed by the US and zero by the Taliban. Does this mean the left will cry that Obama is a war criminal, just like they did for Bush? Crikets... Execute the leaker (although I'm sure he'll get a cell like John Walker did), imprison those involved at wikileaks (for passing classified material) and be done, the MSM needs to get back to main task deflecting criticism of this administration.

on Jul 27, 2010

Thanks Forest. Is life still like a box of chocolates?

You tell me.

The wikileaks incident isn't any president's fault.

Not fault - responsibility!  Remember - The Buck Stops here?

You miss the point.  I am not accusing Obama of handing over the documents.  I am accusing him of gross incompetence in handling the situation (like that is new - oil Spill anyone???).  The least kept secret of this is that it was coming.  That was known months ago.  And they are just now being shocked?

Don't be stupid.  I believe you can learn.  Do not refuse to.

on Jul 28, 2010

I just wonder when people are going to stop excusing this administration for their gross incompetence in everything and start holding THEM accountable to the level they did Bush. Stupid is as stupid does, and the most apparent revelation of this episode is how stupids can (and did) vote for this regime.

I cannot blame President Obama for the War or the present uncertain course it is taking. I feel that the uS shopuld shift from territoriAL INTEGRITY of Afghanista to its partion into 3 or 4 units with a Pashtun state firmly under the "good " Taliban. I believe some influentioal members of the Obama ADMINISTRATION LIKE mULLEN ARE in favor of this solution.

on Jul 28, 2010

The least kept secret of this is that it was coming. That was known months ago. And they are just now being shocked?

Out of sheer curiosity---I don't expect rational---what did you really expect him to do? 

 

 

on Jul 28, 2010

I feel that the uS shopuld shift from territoriAL INTEGRITY of Afghanista to its partion into 3 or 4 units with a Pashtun state firmly under the "good " Taliban. I believe some influentioal members of the Obama ADMINISTRATION LIKE mULLEN ARE in favor of this solution.

Famous last words from the head dunce himself - Biden, on Iraq.  The answer is always divide.  Why?  Apparently because no one wants to work for anything any longer.  They want to sit in eden and be spoon fed.

on Jul 29, 2010

You must give credit where it is due. Barack Obama and his Administration have the right political objectives in Afgahinstan. They however have inherited the ISI backed double dealing Thugs in the form of the Pakistan Government aNd its games. I feel that partion of Afgahistan together with the merger of the Pshtun territories of Pakistyan into a neutral land locked state under international safeguards like Switerland is the only solution that seems feasible.

on Jul 29, 2010

Famous last words from the head dunce himself - Biden, on Iraq. The answer is always divide. Why? Apparently because no one wants to work for anything any longer. They want to sit in eden and be spoon fed.

What are you talking about?

 

 

 

 

on Jul 29, 2010

You must give credit where it is due. Barack Obama and his Administration have the right political objectives in Afgahinstan.

No, that is giving credit where it is not due.  Obama's Afghan war is a disaster.  He is doing a Johnson on them (in more ways than one).  Instead of allowing the generals to fight it, he first picks a political one to fight it, undercuts his own pick, fires him for nothing, and then replaces him with the Bush General.  The last move is the first right one he has made.  But then that has just begun, and I fully expect him to undercut Petraeus as well.

I feel that partion of Afgahistan together with the merger of the Pshtun territories of Pakistyan into a neutral land locked state under international safeguards like Switerland is the only solution that seems feasible.

And that is a cop out answer.  Divide and conquer is as old as history itself and that is what you are advocating.  A division would just be throwing in the towel, but it would not solve anything.  And that is not hypothesis, but history.  They could have done it themselves after the USSR left - as the Northern Alliance was firmly entrenched in 1/3 of the country, and the Taliban in another 3rd.  They basically fought a 10 year war for the whole country, which is what would happen if someone arbitrarily divides it up and then throws in the towel.

And Pakistan would never go for giving up any of its territories, period.  And I do not blame them.

on Jul 29, 2010

Ohhhhhh man. 

 

It seems like Obama Derangement Syndrome is getting stronger and stronger in DG every day. 

 

Instead of allowing the generals to fight it, he first picks a political one to fight it, undercuts his own pick, fires him for nothing, and then replaces him with the Bush General. The last move is the first right one he has made. But then that has just begun, and I fully expect him to undercut Petraeus as well.

Just to make sure we all get this: 

-Stan McChrystal wanted out.  You can't just 'up and quit' when most of your staff has a contractual obligation to hang around and get shot at by Tommy Taliban.  So he opened his mouth and got himself canned.  You can't hold the president responsible because of that.  I mean you can----you'd be totally wrong and totally disconnected from the reality of the stiatuion.  

-As an aside, what planet are you from?  Obama went along with McChrystal's request for additional troops.  That's not exactly a popular idea, even for a relative hawk like myself.  How does that represent a leader who's 'playing politics' instead of 'letting the general's fight'  As a matter of fact, do you think anybody in the executive branch is giggly over sending predators to blow up guys in Pakistan?  Do you really believe that's a 'political' concept?  Or might you be inclined to believe that's an idea from the military? 

So again, what are are you watching?  Or are you not watching and instead just pot shotting a president because you hate him? 

-So wait:  In your opinion, he shouldn't have replaced McChrystal but you're happy that he replaced McChrystal with a 'bush general'?  

 

Honest to god man, relax.  Obama isn't destroying the country.  The world isn't ending.   

 

on Jul 29, 2010

Dan, you are a good DNC parrot, but you do not know anything beyond what they tell  you apparently.

1. Obama gave less than the requested troops and waited 6 months to do it.  I guess you forgot that.

2. Show me where McChrystal requested an out?  Or is that just another one of your DNC talking points?

3. I am on earth and from earth.  I heard that DNC parrots are from Uranus, but that is just speculation I suspect.

4. Please show me where I said the world was ending.  As for destroying the country, that is a matter of opinion is it not?  My opinion is that any president that nationalizes 60% of the economy is destroying the country since we know that government cannot run business.  Want to see the biggest bust since the Edsel?  Buy a Volt.  That is going to be the destruction of Government Motors and that is ALL the Obama administration.

But I guess the talking points did not cover those subjects, did they?

Meta
Views
» 822
Comments
» 22
Category
Sponsored Links