After years of officials insisting that the Afghan War is going well, Lt. Col Daniel L. Davis has broken from this trend with his candor. The career Army man has released two reports, one unclassified and one classified, describing a reality on the ground considerably inconsistent with the official statements the military presents to political leadership or the American public.
The Pentagon has dismissed the report, insisting everything it said was totally honest, apparently including statements that appear to contradict one another. Congressmen who have met with Lt. Col Davis have admitted to receiving “a lot of resistance from the Pentagon.”
Click here to read the New York Times story on Lt. Col. Davis
Click here to read Lt. Col Davis’ unclassified report at AFJ
January, 2012 combat deaths in Afghanistan.
Bulgaria 1
France 4
Georgia 1
NATO 1
UK 3
US 31 ( includes four US contractors )
They say the Col. plagiarized large parts of "The Bear Came over the Mountain", the US War College study on the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
There is nothing this "whistle-blowing" colonel states in either article that readers of this website haven't known for half-a-dozen years. The NYT's piece spends far too much time on flattering biographical details and the 'unclassified' report by the colonel is the usually complaining about pentagon bloat and ridiculous anger at the Afghans for not fighting America's failed, half-hearted occupation for them.
Consider Panetta's 2013 draw-down announcement I suspect this "whistle-blowing" has political implications I can't be bothered to tease out.
The Pentagon would like you to know that they see a light at the end of the tunnel in Afghanistan
The hilarious thing about the Army Times piece is the breathless indignation that follows the exchange where the locals tell this idiot that the anti-invasion irregulars are routinely putting direct and intense psychological pressure on Quislings and collaborators (that's what you call someone who takes the side of the invader).
Does he seriously think that if the US was invaded tomorrow by China, an anti-invasion force of irregulars would not do precisely the same thing? The FIRST thing that any anti-invasion force has to do, is to ensure a 'chilling effect' that reduces the willingness of people to collaborate with the invaders.
It happened in Vichy France, it happened in South Viet Nam (under both the French and the US occupations), it happens in Palestine. It happened when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in the 1980s, and when the British invaded Afghanistan in the 1840s.
It's perfectly understandable – if you are seeking to drive out a would-be conqueror, there is no creature more despicable than the man who bends his knee to an invader: betrayal of your own kind in service to the invader is unforgivable.
Whatever happens to them – and to the invaders themselves – is significantly less than they deserve.
No surprise here. Only idiots and FAUX viewers would believe the crap the corporate media puns on them. This guy, however, makes it official since the saying of those like us the internet/blogs/political websites has zero weight. Now, we can wait for the USan Empire to pull out, tale between the legs whilst claiming victory and from that day forward, we'll now we'll have all but a handful of years before the entire house of card collapses.