Taliban running out of ammunition

[walker]

Hi all

Like the title says:

Page last updated at 14:05 GMT, Thursday, 18 February 2010
Taliban ammunition 'running low'

Taliban militants battling coalition troops in Marjah, Afghanistan, are running out of ammunition, Nato officials say.

A BBC correspondent in Kandahar says that from eavesdropping on Taliban communications, Nato understands militants have called for support.

On Wednesday, an Afghan general said Taliban fighters were increasingly using civilians as "human shields"...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8521503.stm
As always follow the link for the full story

Rumours are that western intelligence services after removing the likes of Viktor Bout and other arms dealers from the equation have begun to control both ends of the Taliban's logistics train. Capturing data on those supplying capital and finance and either turning them or "removing" them. While at the other end providing damaged and traceable ammunition with "Smartwater ™" like capabilities in order to foul weapon barrels and trace convoy routes back through their sources. They can of course continue to recycle the same batches of damaged and track able munitions, so it is a very low cost operation.

I would suggest the next stage is probably to make IED precursors traceable and also to introduce inhibitors into things like fertilizer. A chemical that causes say diesel to froth and produce an easily identifiable smell when added together and something that causes its explosive capability to decrease rapidly. Introducing something like "Smartwater ™" to IED precursors would also be good allowing their sources to be tracked.

That Al Qaeda is becoming increasingly extreme and foreign fighters are using Afghan children, the very sons and daughters of Afghans as "human shields" shows the increasing desperation of the Wahhabi Arab Al Qaeda.

It is through investigative CSI and police style methods that the best effects will be seen on the Taliban in turning those that can be turned and capturing or killing those that cannot.

Anyway good to see some proper use of Intelligence operations. This may also be why their has been a lot of success against Al Qaeda lately, with over ten senior operatives killed recently and according to Bin Laden's son his father suffering a near miss recently.

Kind Regards walker

[BangTail]

Hi all

Like the title says:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8521503.stm
As always follow the link for the full story

Rumours are that western intelligence services after removing the likes of Viktor Bout and other arms dealers from the equation have begun to control both ends of the Taliban's logistics train. Capturing data on those supplying capital and finance and either turning them or "removing" them. While at the other end providing damaged and traceable ammunition with "Smartwater ™" like capabilities in order to foul weapon barrels and trace convoy routes back through their sources. They can of course continue to recycle the same batches of damaged and track able munitions, so it is a very low cost operation.

I would suggest the next stage is probably to make IED precursors traceable and also to introduce inhibitors into things like fertilizer. A chemical that causes say diesel to froth and produce an easily identifiable smell when added together and something that causes its explosive capability to decrease rapidly. Introducing something like "Smartwater ™" to IED precursors would also be good allowing their sources to be tracked.

That Al Qaeda is becoming increasingly extreme and foreign fighters are using Afghan children, the very sons and daughters of Afghans as "human shields" shows the increasing desperation of the Wahhabi Arab Al Qaeda.

It is through investigative CSI and police style methods that the best effects will be seen on the Taliban in turning those that can be turned and capturing or killing those that cannot.

Anyway good to see some proper use of Intelligence operations. This may also be why their has been a lot of success against Al Qaeda lately, with over ten senior operatives killed recently and according to Bin Laden's son his father suffering a near miss recently.

Kind Regards walker

More western propaganda that will only serve to make NATO/US look even more inept than they already do when they are eventually forced to leave that place.

There is a reason why that place is referred to as "The Graveyard of Empires".

[TRexian]

Even terrorist organizations have logistics "tails."

Good on the allies for going after that part.

However, I tend to agree that the definition of "winning" in Afghanistan needs careful definition. It does not mean what most people would think it means.

[walker]

Hi TRexian

For me victory would be a politically and economically stable state with an increasing GDP able to look after its own borders and prevent external and criminal groups from using it as a base.

Kind Regards walker

[TRexian]

Prepare for failure.

There is not one example with which I am familiar of such "nation building." To be successful, there has to be a pre-existing culture of such stability.

Somalia? Never had it, won't for the foreseeable future.

Iraq? Most absolutely had it, and is on the road to getting back to it.

To be successful in those terms, there must be an indigenous, natural effort to achieve it. It cannot be imposed from the outside - as the main impetus will always be against the external force.

Success in Afghanistan should be roughly defined as providing sufficient security so as to deprive international terrorist organizations a safe haven. After that, set a timeline to either withdraw and use friendly bases outside the country for temporary incursions, or set up permanent bases.

Afghanistan has never been stable, and shows no ability to become so.

All IMHO.

[BangTail]

Prepare for failure.

QFT

/10 chars

[walker]

Prepare for failure.

There is not one example with which I am familiar of such "nation building." To be successful, there has to be a pre-existing culture of such stability...

Hi TRexian

You are incorrect.

Nation building does work and history proves it.

Post colonial Malaysia. Post WWII German Marshall Plan and Japan the work of Douglas MaCarthur. Post Napoleonic France. Uganda after Tanzania war of liberation that threw out the Gadafi backed Idi Amin's regime. Post Mau Mau Kenya. You can go back through history right back to Classical Greece and peloponnesian wars when Sparta allowed Athens to survive.

The Nation building does not work argument often comes most vociferously from those companies and people involved in the sale weapons and preys on the inherent racism of those stupid enough to listen to such crap. Essentially it is contrick to prevent the nations involved from finishing the job so the conflict festers and they can sell you more weapons.

Wars happen and Peace happens history of the world mate, history of the world.

Kind Regards walker

[TRexian]

Wars happen and Peace happens history of the world mate, history of the world.

Absolutely agree with this.

But, sticking to modern history (I don't think the nuances of politics in ancient Greece are particularly applicable, except in the abstract) I don't see "post-colonial Malaysia" as a particularly good example. Certainly Germany, Japan and France were economically successful cultures before the world wars. Any success Uganda and Kenya have had (which I submit is limited) is due to the LACK of external military presence.

My point is not that "third world" countries are destined to remain that way. Quite the contrary. My point is that those countries that have achieved escape from such status have done so ON THEIR OWN, without the "benefit" of an occupying military. Economic help, access to resources, finding a way to tap into their "inner capitalist" - those things are what is necessary. Not having a foreign army provide security.

Granted, there is a risk to other nations in allowing such countries to succeed or fail on their own. Afghanistan is a good example of that, too. Left to their own machinations, the Taliban came to power. Plenty of other despotic gov'ts to point to, also.

Sending in a foreign army is not the long-term solution. We couldn't get it done in Vietnam, USSR couldn't do it in Afghanistan, and we're certainly having problems doing it there, too.

Edit:
To more directly counter your implicit racist/weapon-mongering straw man, my proposition is that "nation building" only works in the sense of "nation-rebuilding." There is a prerequisite that there be a cultural norm of stability - both military and economic - upon which to build.

[Bascule42]

Peace in Afghanistan has always meant the local factions not fighting each other. Prior to the Soviet invasion, these factions were at relative peace, (Arguments between faction leaders - called "Warlords" by our media - and skirmishes resulting from these notwithstanding). I say relative, as a lot of the time it was one step short of Civil war.

Before the fall of Democratic Republic of Afghanistan that is. When Mujahid fighters attacked the pro Soviet government at the time, president Taraki requested help from the Soviets the various factions of Mujahideen coalesced to fight the Russians. It was during this time, that several factions ties became stronger and eventually became the Taliban. Religious and political ideals were also strengthened. It was after the Soviet-Afghan war that Afghanistan "enjoyed" one of its most peaceful periods. (The fact that it was under an iron rule and a very fundamental interpretation of Islamic values by the Taliban is a for another point - one that hardly needs to be made). Why am I saying this? Because if one thing from the history of Afghanistan is clear, it is that outside influence - from the British Empire to the Soviets to the current Coalition - is very unwelcome, and any progress in the exercise of nation building will in this case inevitably lead to failure, not through the lack of will, (though it's possible), or incompetence, (very possible), or even "the inherent racism of those stupid enough" to believe the nay sayers.

Because the Afghans would rather tear down all work done by the coalition, US & UK especially, than admit to needing our help.

It's also worth remembering the Islamic/Middle Eastern maxim: "A thousand years of tyranny is better than a day of turmoil".

Also we tend to make the mistake, when talking about things such as this, of applying western ways of looking at things and expecting other people to think like we do - for better or for worse.

In this case nation building is futile. But, having said that we have to make the effort. In Iraq, we have a chance, enough people agree with the removal of Saddam, in Afghanistan...its another matter.

[walker]

Hi TRexian

Allow me to expand on what I said. The military have to be there for a specific purpose of bolstering a nations own police and military. Once they are in a positions to sustain them selves the external force should withdraw to bases and then back to their own nation.

That true nation building requires an increasing transfer of budget away from military support and to building roads, power and water infrastructure, schools and health centers as well as supporting and ensuring an equitable political process and general education that reduces the power of external and internal disruptive influences.

You start with Roads, water and power, you pay enough but work the people hard so they are too tired to do anything else and give them a visible success to feel invested in. Their Town now has a road, now it has clean water, now it has electricity. You build a school and make it mandatory for every child below say 14. you have the school teaching adults as college. You employ the local welder to teach engineering. You build a health center, you put the doctor on the local government committees along with that welder who has started to think of himself as a teacher.

If necessary you circumvent old political structures by creating new towns. You tax the local population to pay for maintenance of local school and health centers. You begin to build a nation.

Yes you invest about one tenth of what you are doing in war. In my opinion a 10% tax on all arms companies would be the best source of income.

Kind Regards walker