""The international community now are showing more willingness, and they're more interested, and the countries in the region are more interested. These kinds of things will help the process," he said. "What I think is most important is building trust among each other."
Rabbani, who was ousted as president in the 1996 Taliban takeover, said President Hamid Karzai has told him he is committed to pushing for peace talks.
"He said: 'I'm ready for negotiations. I'm ready to find a political solution to the problem, not a military one..." Washpost
--------------------------------------------------
OK. This how it ends - the drones kill so many Taliban leaders (and assorted just plain folks) that the Talibs decide "what the hell, we can get the damned Americans out of here by making a deal with Karzai." At the same time (now) Karzai becomes profoundly tired of our moralizing nonsense and comes to the same conclusion. Even as we speak Saint David sees a way out of the maze by going along with this, and voila! We become history in Afghanistan, taking our place in legend alongside Doctor Briden, Kim and the men who wanted to be kings in Kaffiristan (Nuristan)
Ain't COIN grand? pl
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/15/AR2010101504874.html?wprss=rss_world
Yeah -- "choppered off the roof" was a ref to the Embassy. Another situation where the military left the diplomats holding the bag. Guess our military has never lost a war & never will -- as long as there are governments, civilians & other troublemakers to blame. How does my scenario differ from what you recall from VN?
Posted by: PirateLaddie | 17 October 2010 at 06:24 PM
Thank you for the illumination, I appreciate it. I will seek out the recommended work - the little time that I've spent with Luttwak to date has been rewarding.
Can't disagree with the fundamental premise, though I have to say that I'm not wildly enthused about where some of the implications of it may lead (e.g., necessity of a tidily managed withdrawal, enduring accomodation with Pakistan to ensure access so the "sigs" [etc. - much etc.] people can continue to generate targetting intelligence, continued presence of air power on the southern margin of the Gulf). Offshore balancing seems to be an up and coming policy "sell" judging from some of the Washington seminar titles I see on the web, but I tend to think it's not going to be as tidy as some buying it politically may think.
Posted by: JustPlainDave | 17 October 2010 at 06:28 PM
PL
Ah! Did I hurt your feelings? pl
Posted by: Patrick Lang | 17 October 2010 at 07:22 PM
Pirate Laddie,
Just a point on details:
The building shown, with the Huey loading up people climbing a precarious ladder, was not the embassy. It was another building (claimed to be used by the CIA). The embassy's rescue helos landed in the courtyard, once they had cut down an inconvenient tree.
Posted by: fasteddiez | 17 October 2010 at 07:49 PM
"Another Dolchstoslegende involving hippies will be constructed."
I think this has already started, even though America seems to have a shortage of actual hippies. Perhpas fans of Lady Gaga/Enimem/Keisha and whoever the college crowd is listening to now?
Posted by: Fred | 17 October 2010 at 07:56 PM
Ah, A slight correction on my last. The Embassy had a rooftop helo pad (for light birds), but the 53's and jolly greens could not use it, and used the courtyard instead.
The CIA building that had the rooftop pad was at 22 cong ly street, Saigon.
Posted by: fasteddiez | 17 October 2010 at 08:11 PM
Colonel:
Did you perchance ever meet Orrin DeForest (agency guy who wrote the book "slow Burn,") who ran a successful collections unit in Country?
Did You ever meet George W. Allen (DoD Intel and CIA), who, with others, tried to counter MACV's low ball infiltration and OOB figures? I read his book "None So Blind."
Posted by: fasteddiez | 17 October 2010 at 08:37 PM
If DP becomes Chaiman of the JCS next year, we might have some positive outcomes on other mideast problems.
DP has approached the White House about the difficulty of military operations in Muslim countries without settlement of the Israeli/Palestine situation. We might see a renewed and more realistic push there.
In addition, I would think that it would lessen the possibility of a US attack on Iran. After DP settles two wars I do not see him being a party to starting a third. It would screw up his "saintly" reputation.
Posted by: R Whitman | 17 October 2010 at 08:59 PM
I was at a conference at the end of last week in which Michael O'Hanlon of Brookings said (after warning that the paradise we've crafted for Afghan women would end if we didn't stay there for ever)that "there is no difference between the Taliban and Al Qaeda. None."
I kid you not.
Posted by: DanM | 18 October 2010 at 07:50 AM
WRC,
Re: Is it true that the Chinese symbol for "transition" and "danger" are the same?
Guten abend (from my side of the hemisphere),
Actually the characters depict both CRISIS (危 wei) & OPPORTUNITY (機 ji). But lately the U.S. of A seems unable (due to lack of means & capability) to capitalize on the latter. Well, you get my drift...
Posted by: YT | 19 October 2010 at 09:12 AM
DanM,
Michael O'Hanlon is due here in a few days to talk on NATO/ISAF strategy in Af'stan.
Could it be that the Brookings Inst and St David (aka 'the Teflon general') think differently on this? Or is St David's new line more due to 2012 considerations, never mind the Afghans or the condition of their women?
Gautam Das
Delhi, India
Posted by: Gautam Das | 21 October 2010 at 12:30 PM