Afghanistan war logs: Massive leak of secret files exposes truth of occupation

I think its important that these documents were leaked.

I mean, god forbid that theres freedom of information in a democracy

It has been stated here before, but the point is worth reiterating. These reports will only shock those who want to be shocked. Nothing overly sensitive has been released and if anything new has come from this, it is the knowledge that the Taliban are a far more effective fighting force than previously thought. But we knew that already.

Pakistan is cited amongst these reports for continuing to offer liaison and support for the Taliban. Although the Pakistan government maintains it removed all pro-Taliban officers from its security services years ago, it is clear a relationship exists. Why?

The Taliban have been removed from power, but not defeated. There isn't the resources to clear the Taliban from Afghanistan. al-Qaeda has set up bases in a number of other countries, notably Pakistan, so the occupation of Afghanistan is irrelevant to fighting al Qaeda. Strategically, a stable Afghanistan is very important to Pakistan. They don't want hostility on both western and eastern borders.

More than likely, the Taliban will form an influential part of whatever government is finally left in Afghanistan. Pakistan expects this to happen, so why shouldn't they collaborate with an organization who will probably form part of that new government.

I still say, burn the poppies, disable Pakistan's nuclear capabilities and get the flock out of there!

This whole thing was reportedly leaked to wikileaks by an apple cheeked young soldier, one incarcerated now for the same crime of leaking information to wiki. To me he sounds like a patsy.
I think a "Code Red" was put out on Obama and this war.
Orders from Mc Crystal (as the Jack Nicholson character) carried out by those fiercely, and ultimately loyal to him.
Maybe the General has seen enough, and is so disillusioned or disgusted with this war strategy - he wants to end it. The only way he can. Alert the people.
Perhaps he knows it is not a winnable fight, a bad plan. If Gen. McCrystal is trying to end the war I have to give the guy a thumbs up.
Between us though, the man has an emptiness in his eyes that is foreign, somewhat avian and more than a little frightening to me.

Now John Kerry is suggesting that if we leave, Taliban will occupy and Al-Qaeda will follow. So what? If we weren't arming every farmer signing up for a gun we would not be effectively arming Al-Qaeda.
Like any gun in any home, statistically it is more likely to cause the death of a loved one, than your enemy. These guns will be confiscated by warlords...as all guns are, I think they can smell the metal or the sulfur and alas, few are good people.

I suggest we take all the big guns, tanks and weapons back and come home. Pay people there for information only when it is accurate. Keep an eye on them that way. There's always the unsavory, but connected, looking to make a buck.

If we are going to arm anyone...
give small easily concealed pistols to the women in schools...
let them distribute them to like minded women,
for personal protection only.

And give them shovels.




[edit on 27-7-2010 by rusethorcain]

reply to post by XenoStuffz


The ISI, Pakistan's Intelligence service is propped up and funded by... drumroll please......the CIA. So, whose funding the Taliban?

reply to post by Seeker63


If your statement is true, then this would add an interesting angle. However, I don't believe the Pakistani intelligence services are funded by the CIA. Why would they? Pakistan is a nuclear nation and was left to prop up the disaster left by Russia. The Taliban came to power when Pakistan couldn't form a stable government in the wake of the mujahideen after Russia left the scene.

reply to post by rusethorcain


With respect, I fail to understand your point. The whole situation needs to be looked at strategically. Pakistan will be left to pick up the pieces and they are ensuring their western border remains as peaceful as possible. The Taliban will probably become part of whatever power-sharing government that is left and they have a right to secure their border and prevent hostility with the Taliban.

I don't understand how arming women with pistols contributes to the situation. And burning poppy fields, well in this moment the farmers profit from their growth, so an alternate economy needs to be found before destroying their crop.

We must remember that Afghanistan wasn't about removing the Taliban, but hunting al-Qaeda. They have now set up shop in numerous other countries. Iraq was ostensibly about regime change, not Afghanistan. It has been very clever how this war has played out. We never went to war with the Taliban and yet it has become nothing but the Taliban.

[edit on 27-7-2010 by LarryLove]

Can't believe I missed this thread. Oh well.

Just found some interesting articles on an Australian news site. Here they are for anybody interested:

Osama bin Laden is dead, giving away wives - the quick guide to the Wikileaks war logs (Provides a 12-sample list of some of the most interesting leaks.)

Defence investigation into Wikileaks documents (details how the leaks have caught the attention of the Australian Government.)

reply to post by pavil


I prefer them to be put on trail and jailed, so they can suffer the rest of their life behind bars, death is to lenient.
Assuming that the terrorist on trial is, in fact, a terrorist who has killed people.

Double D post, sorry.

[edit on 7/27/2010 by Alexander the Great]

reply to post by LarryLove


You do not recognize sarcasm and it is such a serious subject - there is no place for it so, I will retract that. Of course I don't think we should arm women.

reply to post by rusethorcain


No, I recognise sarcasm all right. I just wasn't sure what you meant about arming women unless the assumption is that they would decide a more justifiable target!

Instead of the poppies they could grow vanilla.
I don't understand why we don't buy the poppy crops from them since it is dirt cheap from the farmer. It would be a worthwhile investment and pay for itself in the long run
If they were smart they would open up to tourism. Create new museums. There is plenty to excavate. An archeologist, and biblical archeologists dream. Set up refreshment stands, camel rides and get a taxi service going, a few hotels and you could support a lot of people on that business. I won't hold my breath waiting though.

reply to post by LarryLove


In his book, Crossing the Rubicon, Mike Ruppert lays it all out. It is completely documented. In fact, the head of ISI made a payment to Atta on 9/11 in the sum of 100 or 200K and was in DC on that date.

Nothing is as it seems. This is a staged war and while the relationship between Pakistan and the US could have changed since Ruppert wrote his book(due to our relentless drone attacks in their country), in the events leading up to 9/11, the ISI and the CIA were in cahoots. Remember, it was the Pakistani foreign minister that predicted in March of 01 the US would invade Afghanistan by Ocotber. They just needed the catalyst.

reply to post by beansanmash


The interesting question is: Are they important? What is documented is low-grade intelligence and there's nothing contained within that we couldn't have found for ourselves. The reports will shock only those that want to be shocked.

What the reports may do is increase public hostility towards the war and speed up a troop withdraw.

Edit to say: Also, it is surprising that such a database has been collated. Data must have been collected from many different sources and grouped together by perhaps a handful of people. Surely, the whistleblower(s) would have been easily identified? The purpose of the leak is interesting, so too is how and why such a database was created.

[edit on 27-7-2010 by LarryLove]

Great.. just great!!

Barack Obama today said the disclosures about the mishandling of the Afghanistan war contained in leaked US military documents justified his decision to embark on a new strategy.

But he went on to say that the material, which catalogues a series of blunders, revealed the challenges that led him to announce late last year a change in strategy that involved sending an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan.
www.guardian.co.uk...

What does one have to do with the other?????

Asange ought to be ashamed. These are field reports, not even admissable in a tribunal. But some divulge tactics, practices, locations and give the Taliban valuable information. He's worse than Jane Fonda.

And who gives a rats arse about a kill or capture order on Taliban leaders without a trial? It's a war. You don't try people on the battlefield. You kill them, that is your purpose.

The biggest problem with this entire "war" is it's limited scope. Everyone knows if we unleashed the full might of the US military it would be over very very quickly. Instead it's dragging on costing more lives than it would to quickly and decisively end it.

I believe General Patton once said, "YOu don't win a war by dying for your country, you win a war by making the other bastard die for his."

If you look at the most effective military campaigns of all time they were quick and decisive. It's time to wrap up Afghanistan. Leave or end it. Pick one. At this point I don't care which.

And I hope Mr. Asange travels to a country that will extradite him here.

reply to post by ModernAcademia


See, it really is all about Obama.

He stalled on the troop increases while soldiers were being killed in Afghanistan, he didn't want to send more at all, in fact he wanted a reduction in numbers... Oh and he never really cared about the war strategy, he responded to pressure only. Do some research!

I told you on page two of this thread, what this was all about.

Obama is desperately seeking a bump in his approval numbers before the upcoming elections because he fears losing his compliant majority now.

And this whole wikileaks farce is proof that he and his administration will stop at nothing to get what they want.

His and their theory is that they can still use the Bush administration's "wars" to get votes for democrats.

It would be funny if it wasn't so damned pathetic.

It may work, the American people could be apathetic and gullible enough to fall for it... Again.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

What does one have to do with the other?????

About the same amount that attacking Iraq had to do with 9-11.

When life hands you oranges, make lemonaide, right?

Since when do the American people care if there is logical consistency with something coming out of a politicians mouth? Who can be bothered to actually read and evaluate information on their own?

If a President says 1+1= Several billion in new spending, it must be true.

reply to post by rusethorcain


what on earth are you on about ?