# Benchmarks for Winning in Afghanistan



## 7point62 (Sep 17, 2009)

According to the AP, this is the Obama Administration's "road map" to winning the war in Afghanistan:  


1. Disrupt terrorist networks in Afghanistan and especially Pakistan.

2. Monitor effectiveness of Pakistani COIN ops aimed at clearing extremists from towns and villages.

3. Monitor foreign assistance/support to Pakistan and UN coordination of those efforts.

4. Measure level of insurgent-related violence in Afghanistan by looking at changing populations in areas under extremist control, those undergoing clearing operations and those that have been stabilized by US/NATO forces.

5. Defeat extremists.

6. Secure the Afghan people.

7. Train Afghan security forces to fight with reduced US assistance.

8. Classified.


Any comments?


----------



## AWP (Sep 17, 2009)

Why are 2, 3, and 4 "measuring" or "monitoring?" If Pakistani COIN isn't successful will we continue to monitor it or will we do something?

It reminds me of the old Robin Williams bit on the Bobbies in England: if you don't have a gun what can you do? "Stop!......Or I'll say 'Stop!' again!"

Monitoring is the key to victory? Um, okay......


----------



## Totentanz (Sep 17, 2009)

Freefalling said:


> Why are 2, 3, and 4 "measuring" or "monitoring?" If Pakistani COIN isn't successful will we continue to monitor it or will we do something?
> 
> It reminds me of the old Robin Williams bit on the Bobbies in England: if you don't have a gun what can you do? "Stop!......Or I'll say 'Stop!' again!"
> 
> Monitoring is the key to victory? Um, okay......



The other question wrt those bullets - how are you going to measure/monitor?  Is this going to be a serious intel push that you're actually going to make in terms of determining what's going on there, or do you just plan to ask nicely... "you're making an effort?  it's working?  nothing to see here?  okay..."


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Sep 18, 2009)

SOFA-KING-WE-TALL-DID


----------



## Pete S (Sep 18, 2009)

Uh, why isn't "defeat extremists" the first on that list?

Unless number 8 is "If all other benchmarks fail transform local area into radiological paradise," the plan is destined to fail.


----------



## 7point62 (Sep 18, 2009)

I wouldn't want to speculate on #8, but I'm hoping it's something like Fuck Pakistan, send 3 Divisions in to seal off tribal areas, unleash all SOF assets, find that sheep-eating goat-fucking turd, waste his ass and drag his smoking carcass off the mountain...and hang it from a pole at Ground Zero, NYC.

What's the point of being there if Revenge for 9/11 isn't topping the list? 

(Unless it's the revival of that oil and gas pipeline from Turkmenistan that UNOCAL tried to pull off in the late 90's and that both the Paks and the US wanted.)


----------



## 7point62 (Sep 19, 2009)

And what about #6? "Secure the Afghan people." What does _that_ mean? Create a sense of national unity among people who are famous for being ethnically and culturally diverse, not to mention fiercely independent?

Will the ANA--even with the nurturing of our SF FID experts--ever be at a state to impose government authority over the whole country?

I'm all for eradicating the vermin, but I'm beginning to question the political goals of our leadership. I'm wondering if anybody really knows what our end goal is?


----------



## LibraryLady (Sep 19, 2009)

7point62 said:


> And what about #6? "Secure the Afghan people." What does _that_ mean? Create a sense of national unity among people who are famous for being ethnically and culturally diverse, not to mention fiercely independent?
> 
> Will the ANA--even with the nurturing of our SF FID experts--ever be at a state to impose government authority over the whole country?
> 
> I'm all for eradicating the vermin, but I'm beginning to question the political goals of our leadership. I'm wondering if anybody really knows what our end goal is?



A couple thoughts come to mind as I'm reading this thread:

1.  Politicians do not understand the issues in a country like Afghanistan and they will set goals that are unattainable by our military, so there will be failure.  It happened to us in Vietnam, the Soviets in Afghanistan, and countless other places.

2.  You cannot create a country from without unless the people within are resolved to create a country for themselves.  Afghani's, as an aggregate whole, are not interested in creating a country for all of them, they are interested in their traditional tribal interests/feuds/affiliations.

LL


----------



## LongTabSigO (Sep 19, 2009)

The Administration is hedging on any "new" strategy until the Afghan election situation is sorted out.  A Karzai gov't seen by the people (and some in the international community" as illegitimate is not going to motivate the President to commit more forces or take a more aggressive line.  In fact, it may serve the opposite effect.

See this story from the Washington Post 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/16/AR2009091602774.html

(h/t SWJ)

Essentially the President's advisors are trying to have it both ways...they "want" to act but they don't want to act "rashly"...and are using the election results as justification for slow or no action.  *sigh*


----------

