Posted By Thomas E. Ricks Share

"Frontline," the PBS documentary series, has consistently done great work on our post-9/11 wars. In a new one, they tackle the issue of whether counterinsurgency doctrine can work in Afghanistan. They've already posted the first part of the show, due to air as a whole on Oct. 13. One thing this segment made me think about was the danger of under-resourced COIN. The worst thing you can do is tell people you are going to protect them when you can't. All you are doing is putting them on the golf tee so Taliban can come by that night, or next week, with a big nine iron. 

This piece on Small Wars Journal is also worth reading. But I am not sure it really is an "alternative" to what McChrystal is proposing. Rather, I think it outlines the plan pretty well. McChrystal is not asking for enough to protect all the people of Afghanistan, and the proof of that is the plan to "triage" out of certain areas, like Nuristan.

Also check out Abu Mook getting Washington right, even at the expense of embarrassing his long-suffering mother. I read the same line in the Washington Post this morning and had a similar but more obscene thought about the administration official. 

LIU JIN/AFP/Getty Images

 

IDMAJ

11:04 AM ET

October 4, 2009

MAJ Khan & Regional Context

MAJ Khan's article is right on the money, but find it highly ironic that he's writing this from Leavenworth as opposed to Pakistan's Command and Staff College in Quetta, home of Mullah Omar and the Taliban senior shura council.

I think whether or not the Presiden commits 4 or 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan is a moot point. The Pashtuns and Pakistanis are looking to see if the U.S. is serious or ready to call it quits like we've done on them multiple times before.

I highly recommend Shuja Nawaz's book, "Crossed Swords, Pakistan, its Army, and the Wars Within." While this blog is focused on what to do about Afghanistan, Nawaz's work has provided excellent context for the region. I should finish it off on my flight to Khandahar on Tuesday.

 

JASON SIGGER

8:36 AM ET

October 5, 2009

Abu M is off base

As I remarked in his post, Andrew is off-base with his colorful remark.

"You mean the white paper that describes the need for an enemy-centric COIN strategy? it states:

"Conclusion

There are no quick fixes to achieve U.S. national security interests in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The danger of failure is real and the implications are grave. In 2009-2010 the Taliban's momentum must be reversed in Afghanistan and the international community must work with Pakistan to disrupt the threats to security along Pakistan's western border.

This new strategy of focusing on our core goal - to disrupt, dismantle, and eventually destroy extremists and their safe havens within both nations, although with different tactics - will require immediate action, sustained commitment, and substantial resources. The United States is committed to working with our partners in the region and the international community to address this challenging but essential security goal."

Be careful, Andrew. Those "jackasses" to whom you refer are your sponsors. I'm sure they might not appreciate the fact that you see things so black and white, largely because they're not, especially in the Pentagon, let alone the White House. And if you haven't realized it, Washington DC isn't for "normal Americans," you know, the ones who look forward to watching "American Idol" every night, who confuse Faux News Channel with honest journalism, who don't know where Afghanistan is on a map."

 

BILL KELLER

12:24 PM ET

October 5, 2009

Good cold slap...

Jason, your point on the cognitive shear across the nation is very accurate; however, the panderers, sideshow barkers, ministers, snake oilers, thieves and members of the Murdock family understand this also - much to their financial benefit and without any perceived consequences.

 

Thomas E. Ricks covered the U.S. military for the Washington Post from 2000 through 2008.

Read More