danalwyn: (Default)
One of the things you have to watch out for if you run email announcements for any sort of organization is to always make sure to put the list of recipients in the bcc column instead of the cc column when you want them to stay confidential. There's no better way to screw up an entire business deal then to let everyone know who's in on it. It's one of the most basic, and the most damaging, mistakes you can make on a computer on a day to day basis.

This goes double if you're doing this not for a corporation but for an international terrorist organization.

As they say, 'heads will roll', although in this case they may actually be doing so literally.
danalwyn: (Default)
Answering the question "Where is bin Laden" has given rise to three more questions:

  • Does the fact that OBL was hiding in a military town 75 miles from Islamabad imply that Pakistan's ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence) was hiding him, or were they just plain incompetent?

  • Did the Pakistanis give him up, or did the US do this all themselves because they were too worried that Pakistan would spill the beans and tip off a valuable ISI asset?

  • If the Pakistanis did participate, will they ever admit it, or will they simply keep their mouths shut out of fear of jeopardizing their relations with their carefully cultivated network of militant contacts and inviting even more bombings?

It's well known that the ISI is playing a double game with the United States as they try and juggle both the threat of terrorism and the opportunity it provides (especially vis-a-vis India and their own restive regions). The questions people are asking are trying to figure out whether this was another indecipherable chess move in the long game the ISI is playing, or whether they just got caught with their pants down. I expect answering each of those questions will only raise more which will go unanswered.
danalwyn: (Default)
It's been over a week since the Obama speech, and the bullets have mostly stopped flying. For now.

I've spent some time ruminating over various arguments, especially from the strategic minded, and I've come to three conclusions on Afghanistan, none of which I particularly like. I know that nobody bothers to read what I write when it comes to news and politics, but here they are anyway.

Three Things About Afghanistan )
danalwyn: (Default)
And so, after eight long years, we have come to this inglorious pass. When we first went to Afghanistan, that distant land where Empires go to find their limits, we were going for vengeance and protection, our own. It was easy to explain that we were going after those who had hurt us, to avenge our losses and ensure that they could never do so again (the word "never" is far too easy to use). Then, as time passed, we were going as liberators, to save the women forced to wear burkhas, the people trapped in an ideological prison so constrictive that it choked the life out of their ancient cultures. And now, at the end, we are going for Karzai. The President of Afghanistan has too much of a hold on the government and on the electoral process to be replaced, too much for him to be challenged in a fair election. Those elements that should be fighting him on the floor of Parliament are instead fighting him in the hills and mountains.

Karzai is not the leader Afghanistan needs. He has not demonstrated the ability to inspire his people, to weld them together. He has adamantly refused to fight the corruption that is slowly rotting away his country from within, and barely even stops to wipe up the occasional eruption of maggots from still-living skin. He is impotent, the leader of an army of a hundred thousand men, whom analysts believe will be swept out of office by less then ten thousand Taliban without the help of thousands of foreign troops.

We entered, as we are wont to do, into a civil war without realizing it. We blundered into the confused relations of the Pashtuns, the Tajiks, the Hazaras, and the thousands of other racial, religious, and historical groups whose intertwined cultures and patchwork lands make up the quilt that we attempt to quantify by calling it Afghanistan, and attempted to weave from it a cloth of a single color. Instead we have simply created a new tribe, the tribe of Karzai, for which we are sending men and women to fight and die for. We have grown better at fighting the enemy, but we are increasingly fighting for the benefit of a government that has shown no ability to serve the people who elected it, or even to hang on to the hard won gains.

The tribe of Karzai doesn't deserve wealth and triumph on the back of our soldiers. We need to either curb his excesses, get out, or prepare for a long, hard slog to a distant uncertain victory.


danalwyn: (Default)

August 2017

2728 293031  


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags