2. TALK to the TALIBAN (they are all one in the same anyway).
Hey, if ANYONE would KNOW, they would!!!
One thing I would point out is that neither the Russian general nor the AmeriKan reporter mentions the CIVILIANS THEY KILLED!!
"General offers lessons learned by Soviet Union in Afghanistan" by Megan K. Stack, Los Angeles Times | December 5, 2008
MOSCOW - Retired Lieutenant General Ruslan Aushev, 54, served for five years in Afghanistan during the Soviet Union's nearly decade-long battle with mujahideen there. He was wounded and named a hero of the Soviet Union.
Aushev, who later served as president of the Caucasus republic of Ingushetia, is now chief of the Committee of Afghan Veterans.
In his Moscow office recently, he talked about the lessons learned from the 1980s war in Afghanistan, and what those lessons suggest as the US military enters the eighth year of conflict in Central Asia.
Q. In its invasion of Afghanistan, do you believe the United States benefited from the Soviet experience? Do you see any evidence of your lessons from the Soviet defeat?
A. I can tell you which mistakes you made and which mistakes we made. They are the same mistakes. We set up a very weak leader, Babrak Karmal. He didn't have prestige with the people. Today the leadership of Afghanistan does not enjoy popularity with the people.
They said of Babrak Karmal, he only sits there with the help of Russian bayonets. We said, "Afghans, you are living according to the Soviet way of life, where religion is separated from the state, mullahs should be expelled, religion is the opiate of the people. . . . The Soviet way of life in the country that still lives in the Dark Ages!
And what did [the United States] say? You said, "We are giving you democracy." They cannot even translate the term properly.
Under us there was a lot of corruption, and today there's a lot of corruption.
Q. At the height of the Soviet war, there were more than twice as many Soviet soldiers in Afghanistan as there are US and allied soldiers in the country today. Do you believe the United States should increase the level of troops in Afghanistan?
A. You can expand your presence, but what will change? I think you need to do three things. First, create statehood. Set up a popular authority that would deal with corruption and social issues. Second, a combat-able armed force should be created in Afghanistan. And [third] an economy should be created to help people. If you deploy 200,000 troops there, daytime is your time, you're in command. At night, the Taliban comes and they are in command.
And Obama is going to INCREASE TROOPS?
Q. The US finds itself propping up a relatively unpopular government against attacks from a radicalized Muslim population. . . . What advice would you give to American commanders on the ground?
A. No matter what, you won't get away from the Taliban. You need to talk with the Taliban, come to terms. The Taliban should be engaged by the organs of power. They should take part in negotiations.
Well, there are negotiations going on but we never hear of them.
And who are the Taliban?
"Something of a catchall term for loosely affiliated insurgents without a singular command structure. Often, the Afghan government favors the phrase 'enemies of the state' (New York Times July 24, 2007)."
"The Taliban is growing and creating new alliances not because its sectarian religious practices have become popular, but because it is the only available umbrella for national liberation," says Pakistani historian and political commentator Tariq Ali. "As the British and the Soviets discovered to their cost in the preceding two centuries, Afghans never like being occupied."
Also see: Afghanistan's Other Government
And today, readers?
"More and more, people here look back to the era of harsh Taliban rule from 1996 to 2001, describing it as a time of security and peace."
Oh, oh, oh!!!! I'm so offended by the AmeriKan MSM and its bullshit!
Oh, one more thing:
"The U.S. government was well aware of the Taliban's reactionary program, yet it chose to back their rise to power in the mid-1990s. The creation of the Taliban was "actively encouraged by the ISI and the CIA," according to Selig Harrison, an expert on U.S. relations with Asia. "The United States encouraged Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to support the Taliban, certainly right up to their advance on Kabul," adds respected journalist Ahmed Rashid. When the Taliban took power, State Department spokesperson Glyn Davies said that he saw "nothing objectionable" in the Taliban's plans to impose strict Islamic law, and Senator Hank Brown, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on the Near East and South Asia, welcomed the new regime: "The good part of what has happened is that one of the factions at last seems capable of developing a new government in Afghanistan." "The Taliban will probably develop like the Saudis. There will be Aramco [the consortium of oil companies that controlled Saudi oil], pipelines, an emir, no parliament and lots of Sharia law. We can live with that," said another U.S. diplomat in 1997."
Q. So you think the US should explore negotiations with the more moderate elements of the Taliban?
A. Of course they should. You understand, you are dealing with an idea. If an idea exists, you should sit down and think why, and what to do with it. That's why the Soviet Union broke down, not because it was bombed out of existence, but because private ownership of means of production won the day.
Q. At this point, what do you believe would constitute a victory for American forces in Afghanistan? Under what conditions could the US leave Afghanistan?
A. Let me put it this way: Seven years is a long time. We began to talk about troop withdrawal in 1985, six years after the invasion.
In 1986, exactly seven years after the invasion, we began to pull out some troops. But we were reinforcing the authorities in Afghanistan. When we were there, the Afghan army was more or less combat-ready. And there were officials, officers and generals who were educated in the Soviet Union.
Translation: We CAN'T WIN, America -- so let's leave, huh?
Q. What's your assessment of Afghan leader Hamid Karzai?
A. I don't know him. I know one thing: He failed as president. If he's protected by American special forces, then how do people react to this president?With resentment?
--more--"
