D-Day June 5

Taliban Propaganda Win

Afghan President's Brother, Ahmad Wali Karzai - Assassinated

The half-brother of Afghan President Hamid Karzai has been assassinated in Kandahar, officials say.

Ahmad Wali Karzai, a leading power broker in the country's south, was shot dead at his home in a blow to Nato's battle against the Taliban in the area.

He was shot twice by his long-time head of security Sardar Mohammed, was also killed .

The Taliban said they carried out the attack, calling it one of their top achievements in 10 years of war.

Sardar Mohammed's motives remain unclear, but the killing will raise questions about securing Afghanistan's top officials.

Read more ....

He was a very corrupt man, involved heavily in the heroin trade. But he was NATO's little buddy. And if they can' protect their friends, how are they going to help anyone else?

Libyan March Into Maddness

Germans Pull Forces Out Of NATO As Libyan Coalition Falls Apart

* Tensions with Britain as Gates rebukes UK government over suggestion Gaddafi could be assassinated

* French propose a new political 'committee' to oversee operations

* Germany pulls equipment out of NATO coalition over disagreement over campaign's direction

* Italians accuse French of backing NATO in exchange for oil contracts

* No-fly zone called into question after first wave of strikes 'neutralises' Libyan military machine

* U.K. ministers say war could last '30 years'

* Italy to 'take back control' of bases used by allies unless NATO leadership put in charge of the mission

* Russians tell U.S. to stop bombing in order to protect civilians - calls bombing a 'crusade'

Deep divisions between allied forces currently bombing Libya worsened today as the German military announced it was pulling forces out of NATO over continued disagreement on who will lead the campaign.

A German military spokesman said it was recalling two frigates and AWACS surveillance plane crews from the Mediterranean, after fears they would be drawn into the conflict if NATO takes over control from the U.S.

Read more ....

WTF?

Who's in charge? Not ME!! Nato is falling apart - expect Italy to pull out next, which means fewer airbases to launch aircraft from... and frankly, 12 minutes into this thing, wasn't the Libyan air threat pretty well bombed to submission? Libya: A No-Fly Zone In A Country With Virtually No Air Force. At what point were the bad guys supposed to just throw their AK-47's into the sand and run away? Hey, Europe, you've got a memory problem just like the US has -- The lessons in Bosnia are already forgotten?

The best part is how quickly the rhetoric has flipped the Lazy-Susan. Republicans traded papers with the Democrats to shout about how illegal this action is... oh, wait? Some of the Democrats are actually consistent and are keeping their anti-Iraq scripts too? Well, good for them. I like to see consistency rather than hypocrisy.

Af-Pac War

FYI: The US and NATO is currently at war with Pakistan. The US killed three Pakistani troops a few days ago. Pakistani militants responded by torching 27 NATO tanker trucks. Today the US killed 18 militants in retaliation.

From the link: The New York Times reported Friday that a senior Pakistani intelligence official had said the border incursions could lead to a “total snapping of relations” between Islamabad and Washington. At the same time, there were reports of attempts to settle the dispute by establishing a joint investigation into the US strikes.

It is estimated that 80 percent of supplies to US, NATO and allied occupation forces in Afghanistan, including 50 percent of fuel, passes through Pakistan. Which, is what one would call a bottle neck in logistics.

Funny - I don't see people marching the streets to stop the CIA's not-so-secret war. I don't see hearings in front of Congress on C-SPAN 8. I don't hear a peep?...

Sorry guys, The Forever War will last Forever.

Obama's Nam?

Let me ask a simple question. If George Bush would have sent 25,000 additional troops to Afghanistan, what do you think the reaction would have been?

Then why is it when President Barack Obama announced his new strategy hasn't gotten a peep of a reaction? Obama's plan which has 'borrowed' to the point of plagiarism, Bush's successful "surge" strategy that quelled violence and tipped the balance in Iraq. Obama said the U.S. would send 21,000 troops, including 4,000 to help train the Afghan army and police.

Poor Afghanistan. It's been on the back burner for so long. Didn't we win that already?

Not so much, it seems.

Don't forget, Iraq was easier to report. A reporter could easily look out their window from their hotel rather than from the streets and 'ascertain' what the situation was. (link) Especially if they could spin it to make the Administration look bad.

Meanwhile, the Taliban - which has been operating in the sovereign nation of Pakistan continues to flex its muscles and spreading violence.

"Kabul is scarcely under siege, but it has turned from a city where [allied forces] and aid personnel could wander as tourists to one so filled with violence that the U.S. and foreign compounds have become the equivalent of a "Green Zone," according to a recent report from Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

So Obama has pledged to send hundreds of civilian officials to help improve public services and curb the country's reliance on opium production. Borrowing again from the Iraq playbook, the U.S. will try to peel away Taliban members who are committed to a paycheck, but not the cause.

Sure, Obama's surge isn't just guns - he's throwing some butter at them too. Just as important, the U.S. must set some clear benchmarks for progress, just as Bush did in Iraq. That means clear, measurable goals and regular public reports on progress. President Obama promises those benchmarks.

There will be 68,000 troops in theater by the end of the year— and there are some NATO forces there too - a force of about 32,000 non-American soldiers in Afghanistan.

When Obama attended a NATO summit he asked European nations for more help in Afghanistan. He got a finger back. Nearly all new NATO troops will be sent to provide security for Afghanistan's elections this summer and will not be permanently deployed.

Not to water down NATO's contributions—Britain, Canada and Australia, for instance—have fought hard and suffered significant casualties. But many other nations have set stifling limits on where and how their troops can be used, effectively removing them from fighting. Those troops, part of NATO's International Security Assistance Force, or ISAF, are so restricted that some American commanders sardonically suggest that those initials stand for "I Saw America Fight."

One senior European diplomat, speaking anonymously to the New York Times said, "No one will say this publicly, but the true fact is that we are all talking about our exit strategy from Afghanistan. We are getting out. It may take a couple of years, but we are all looking to get out." Hey, with Allies like that, who needs the Taliban?

But is Obama prepared to take the fight to Pakistan? There are eerie shades of Cambodia here. He should take heed. Can't win Afghanistan without taking out the Taliban hiding in Pakistan. But you can't just go in bombing Pakistan all willy-nilly. When he suggested it in the campaign, he damn near destabilized the entire government. Oh wait, he did destabilize the Pakistani government! And that thing was standing up as well as a game of JENGA in Michael J. Fox's house.

At least there's a strategy that doesn't say "EXIT" on it.
I hope the US and NATO has the will to see it through.

This isn't just America's war. It's civilization's war.