These generals and majors are the certifiable loonies! The MIC loves it, I’m sure.

Barack Obama is a madman.

When Obama sent more troops the Taliban cheered because there were more fish in the barrel to shoot at. Now they want to send bigger fish? When troop surge happened troop KIA and WIA increased. Why do they really believe that it will be different now? Definition of insanity, repeating an action and expecting different results.

i saw this blurb on cnn, sending in tanks this late in the war is hilarious

But at least we’re not invaders.

It just can’t get any dumber. But then, there’s always tomorrow.

Have I mentioned lately that unreliable neo-con puppet Hamid Karzai has issued an ultimatum. All United States mercenaries, and presumably, secret privatized assassination armies, must leave Afghanistan by Dec. 17.

This is peanuts. Tank mobility in Afghanistan is severely limited by the harsh terrain. I say take the gloves off — B-52 carpet bombing worked real well in ‘Nam.

Behold: YOUR & MY tax dollars at work. Hooray for our side. /s

I would say: incredible… except it’s not. As always: cha-ching cha-ching cha-ching cha-ching… oh and, uh, support the troops… (said in W-like frat boy sneering snigger).

I don’t think “the officer” understands that unlike the yanks, the afghans aren’t really that impressed with hardware.

“yes the tanks are indeed impressive my american friend. so were the russian tanks.”

The gobbledygook and fawning propaganda in these kinds of pieces afford one sardonic amusement at times. Most of this article reads like “Catch-22″. I like the caveats to Petraeus’s “modern counterinsurgency doctrine”:

Although Petraeus is widely regarded as the father of the military’s modern counterinsurgency doctrine, which emphasizes the role of governance, development and other forms of soft power in stabilization missions, he also believes in the use of intense force, at times, to wipe out opponents and create conditions for population-centric operations. A less-recognized aspect of the troop surge he commanded in Iraq in 2007 involved a significant increase in raids and airstrikes.
“Petraeus believes counterinsurgency does not mean just handing out sacks of wheat seed,” said a senior officer in Afghanistan. Counterinsurgency”doesn’t mean you don’t blow up stuff or kill people who need to be killed.”

Gosh, I wonder why this aspect of his doctrine was “less-recognized” until now?

This is even better, both for its Orwellian ring and the quintessentially flippant, vapid jargon:

“Because Petraeus is the author of the COIN [counterinsurgency] manual, he can do whatever he wants. He can manage the optics better than McChrystal could,” the adviser said. “If he wants to turn it up to 11, he feels he has the moral authority to do it.”

And finally, whoa…for those of us being acquainted for the first time with the bland term “line charge”:

In another recent operation in the Zhari district, U.S. soldiers fired more than a dozen mine-clearing line charges in a day. Each one creates a clear path that is 100 yards long and wide enough for a truck. Anything that is in the way – trees, crops, huts – is demolished.
“Why do you have to blow up so many of our fields and homes?” a farmer from the Arghandab district asked a top NATO general at a recent community meeting.
Although military officials are apologetic in public, they maintain privately that the tactic has a benefit beyond the elimination of insurgent bombs. By making people travel to the district governor’s office to submit a claim for damaged property, “in effect, you’re connecting the government to the people,” the senior officer said.

That “connecting the government to the people” is really the piece de resistance. Priceless, Colonel Korn.

Emptywheel has a fresh cross-post ready: Both Dodd and Frank Call on Admin to Use Powers of Dodd-Frank

“Awe and shock” instead of “Shock and awe”? Why, that’s just superior marketing! Let’s run it up the flagpole and see if the world’s best guerrilla fighters, hardened by 30 years of battle, salute.

And nothing says “Change we can believe in” quite like changing “Shock and Awe” to “Awe and Shock.” Way to show up those professional leftists, Mr. President!

In the picture at the top of this post, the two Afghans’ and their small herd of Yak(?)are walking in front of the minesweeper, WTF.

Heh. These tanks are incredibly vulnerable.

1. Tanks are useful in flat country, which does not describe Afghanistan.
2. It’s an admission that the guerrilla tactics of the local are working, because infantry are too vulnerable.
3. The locals will now hit the maintenance and supply routes. These tanks drink an incredible amount of jet fuel, and unlike planes, do not return to base for re fulling and maintenance.

The only strategies that work are the Malaysian One, fortified secure villages, or the South Africa One (Kitchener), depopulate the countryside.

The South African one failed 47 years later when the locals won.

Those valleys are flat. Points 2 and 3 are spot-on, though. Precisely whey these NYT and Post articles are always so amusing — they’re wry, oblique admissions of failure.

“Because if you’ve been besieged by war for 30 years, you are going to be awed and shocked by tank fire”

THANK YOU. One really has to wonder why they allow colonels and such to speak to reporters. The only people their trying to awe and shock are the american public.

The terrain of afghanistan is notoriously deadly for heavy armored vehicles. The tanks’ one major vulnerabilty is UP. lots of rocks narrow ravines and defiles in afghanistan turned it into a Soviet tank graveyard. most Soviet tank crews learned to abandon their tanks as soon as they were a few miles from base and walk back with a sob story. all too soon we will be watching afghan guerilla fighters in M1 ABRAHMS having traded up from cold war era T-70′s

We will win this forever war because we got Leadership.

The Commander-in-Chief: “During a flight in May, after a glass of wine, Petraeus told his own staffers that the administration was “[expletive] with the wrong guy.” http://firedoglake.com/2010/09/22/president-obama-needs-to-fire-david-petraeus/

Our Second in Command: Garry Wills – Can you tell us what advice you gave him?
I said, “Don’t go into Afghanistan.”

We were already there, so I assume you’re referring to the deployment of additional troops. How did he respond?
He was very prickly. He said: “I’m not a naïve optimist. I know of the difficulties. They’re all being considered and taken care of.” He really cut off this conversation.

That’s surprising, especially since you describe him as a placater.
He’s kept a pretty tight little circle around him. By the way, that meeting with us was supposed to be the first of many. There have been none after. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/31/magazine/31FOB-Q4-t.html

Team America! Fuck Yeah!

p.s. I think I got that chain of command messed up, it’s a little confusing, sorry. But as long as Obama goes along with our Afghan Corregidor Commander he won’t have to worry about him in ’12 will he? “No politics under here”…hah, hah, hah.

“Because if you’ve been besieged by war for 30 years, you are going to be awed and shocked by tank fire.” – good point.

Although our press doesn’t hardly discuss it, i have been hearing that the Afghan military is still largely ethnic minority, not Pashtun, and that fact alone virtually guarantees that if we ever pull out, they will not survive. Also, we and Karzai send the Afghan military and police to be trained in India. India?? Any wonder why the ISI and Pakistani military don’t trust us?

Yes look how effective those multiple armored brigades were for the russians….the CIA taught afghan’s how to kill tanks 30 years ago…including BIN LADIN. Bets on how this plan works out?

They learned how to deal with them a generation ago, I suspect. You have to have a pretty narrow view of military history for that thought to have not occurred to you, yet that seems to be the view of that officer.

We were just toying with them so far. Now we’re going to get serious and beat them in four years.

Absolutely, Spencer!

After years of bloody and crueller-than-us occupation by the Russians, the sight of some MIAI Abrams rolling along is going to convert the Taliban into Freewill Baptists, instanter.

Napalm anyone? Although I don’t think they have much foliage to de . . . Oh well, it’s awesome.

didn’t we lose vietnam?

What would bring shock and awe would be if someone arrived with jobs, road building equipment, schools, basic training in construction, engineering, tech, etc. for the population and something like workable power.

Instead, someone thinks it’s going to be really kewl to bring back the ’80s. You know, when the Soviets awed and shocked the Afghas with 1800 tanks.

So, what’s the next iteration?

Schlock and argh?

Several weeks ago the NY Times fluffed the Pantagon with a piece on how Lockheed Martin’s wonder rocket has changed the war in US favor. They even used Vietnam-era schtick like, “local villagers tell of a terrifying new weapon that is driving the enemy off the land…”

MBT fluffing is nothing new, either. Remember how the media coverage made the Abrams seem invulnerable in Iraq? All sorts of virile prose about the special armor and whatnot.

Guess someone got bought off to write dreck propoganda again at the “liberal” (cough cough) NYT. Feh.

Yeah, they are the house organ of Merkin Liberalism, (with “merkin” in the dictionary-correct usage).

“C’mon Guys, super-villians can’t get lazy on the victim taunts. You’re taking all the fun out of being an evil-doer.”

Let’s try this again… on 3. 1…2…3…

“I’M GONNA TEAR OUT YOUR PANCREAS, DIP IT IN CHEEZE WHIZ, AND EAT IT WHILE YOU WATCH!!”

“I’M GONNA TEAR OUT YOUR PANCREAS, DIP IT IN CHEEZE WHIZ, AND…

We didn’t lose Vietnam. It was a tie! (stolen from)

Spencer you misheard:

But This Time, We Call It “Awe Shit!”

The NY Times had the following quote about the mine clearing procedure,

“We had to destroy them to make them safe.”

Just like in Vietnam

This is a superior idea. Think how fast the Taliban will run to negotiate for those 35,000 givernment jobs now!!!

And whaaaat? They shippin’ leftover tanks from Iraq since everything’s going so swimmingly there? JSOC and Blackwater don’t need no stinkin’ tanks! Erik Prince deem them all invisible and impervious to RPGs like Crazy Horse?

I know Afghanistan is land locked but isn’t there some way tactical nuclear subs can get in on the action too. Their budget is threatened even more than heavy armoured divisions.

Seems to me that someone is starting to consider securing the perimeters of some bases. I cant see tanks maneuvering real well outside the “uncontested areas”.