Military Coverups in Afghanistan and Wikileaks

[AGS]

Hey guys.

First of a linky to a story by a South African news site - The Daily Maveric - regarding this story.Daily Maverick Story

Then I will ask the question that is mentioned in the story - does it parallel the Pentagon Papers?
What are the implications for the current US administration?
Which US administration should be held accountable for this, if they are to be held accountable at all.

And finally - WTF is going on with this world? Are the good guys now the bad guys??

[nathan]

I don't think it will have the same impact as the Pentagon Papers. See Andrew Sullivan's post: Didn't We Know All This Already?

And finally - WTF is going on with this world? Are the good guys now the bad guys??

Same thing that has always been going on with this world, I suppose. I think a fair argument could be made for good and bad on both sides.

• Is it good for the US to capture bin Laden and stifle terrorists? Yes
• Is it bad for the US to wage an endless war without a defined mission? Yes
• Is it bad for the Taliban to repress the people of Afghanistan and support terror? Yes
• Is it good for the Taliban to fight back against invading colonial powers? Yes (I can't really say "no" as an American, can I?)

Good, bad? It's all a bit too complex. I think it would be a good thing for the US to withdraw, but I know that would result in the bad thing of Taliban rule of Afghanistan. I think it would be fine and dandy if the people of Afghanistan chose democracy for their government, but I don't think that is something which can be externally imposed by force. It would be a bad thing if the US let bin Laden get away with it, but it would be good to stop asking the Afghan and Pakistani people to pay for our incompetence with their lives.

[ggeezz]

I'm not clear on exactly what these papers expose or what the implications will be. Regardless, I think it's clear that public opinion on the Afghanistan war has been going south for a while now and will continue to head that way.

[nathan]

I'm not clear on exactly what these papers expose or what the implications will be. Regardless, I think it's clear that public opinion on the Afghanistan war has been going south for a while now and will continue to head that way.

One interesting new public revelation is that the Taliban have been using heat-seeking missiles against NATO aircraft. As if the parallel to the Soviet-Afghan war of the 80s was not strong enough, it seems that some neighbors (Iran? Elements in Pakistan?) may be fighting a proxy war against us? Turnabout is fair play, and payback's a bitch, I guess.

[AGS]

I am of a firm opinion that asymmetric warfare always favors the locals. There is no way that an invader can outlast a persistent insurgency. The US has got a particularly bad track record with this, as does the old USSR and the UK also lost tons of territory in this manner.

[ggeezz]

[*]Is it bad for the Taliban to repress the people of Afghanistan and support terror? Yes

This is something I ran into while discussing Afghanistan and Iraq a few days ago. Afghanistan was in the midst of a civil war. Both sides were looking to oppress each other.

If there had been one side that was extremely noble promoting freedom, security, democracy, etc., I could see jumping in to support that side. But that doesn't seem to be the case.

[nathan]

Yup. After the Soviets were gone, the Mujaheddin turned on each other, and the Taliban happens to be the group which captured the capitol city. The "Northern Alliance" were no paragon of freedom and democracy, we just shared a common enemy.

[Kafir]

Two comments from Andrew Sullivan's colleague James Fallows, both making comparisons to the Pentagon Papers:

...the basic similarity of the cases involves the question of what "everyone" knows. By 1971, anyone who had been really following the Vietnam war already "knew," or could guess, much of what was in the Pentagon Papers. The Papers mattered because of (a) the confirmation that the government had known about the problems for a very long time, and (b) the spreading of that understanding to the broader public. If the WikiLeaks documents, coming during what is already the deadliest month ever for U.S. troops in Afghanistan, really do mark a shift in mainstream opinion about the war, it will be because everyone [general public, press, and politicians] will now recognize what "everyone" [insiders] already knew.