Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: CNN: U.S. to Arm Local Afghans to Fight Taliban

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Tempe, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    29

    Post imported post

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapc...ing/index.html

    Sources: U.S. to arm local Afghans to fight Taliban
    by Barbara Starr
    CNN Pentagon Correspondent

    WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. military plans to help the Afghanistan government recruit, train and arm local Afghans to fight a resurgent Taliban, U.S. military officials say.

    U.S. officials describe the proposal as a "community-based" security effort.

    The main job of the local units is to be an "early warning system" and be armed mainly for defensive operations, a U.S. military official said.

    Participants will get uniforms so they can be readily identified, officials said.

    The first phase of the program is expected to begin next year in Wardak province, where the Taliban have overrun many local government institutions.

    For the United States, the most sensitive part of the proposal will be the use of American military funds to purchase small arms, most likely AK-47 rifles, that will be given to local Afghans, according to a U.S. military official.

    U.S. commanders acknowledge concerns that arming local groups is risky, as it could lead to new armed conflicts between tribes, putting American troops in the middle of unexpected firefights.

    The Afghan government will select men for the new security program. It will train them and technically arm them, although the funds will come from the U.S. military.

    The Afghans will be responsible for ensuring the loyalty of people in the program, but the United States will oversee the effort and collect biometric information, such as eyeprints and fingerprints, on all participants, according to the U.S. military official.

    U.S. officials are emphasizing that because of tribal diversity, the Afghan program differs from the Awakening Councils in Iraq, which include tens of thousands of Sunni gunmen and was credited with helping reduce violence there.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Indiana, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    674

    Post imported post

    This sounds reeeeally familiar...

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member PrayingForWar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Real World.
    Posts
    1,705

    Post imported post

    Aran wrote:
    This sounds reeeeally familiar...
    It's not as familiar as you might think. Afghans are literally living in the 13th century. The only noticable difference is the vehicles and weaponry. They have no national loyalties too speak of. Only tribal loyalties, and to those who pay more.

    Iraq was fairly modern until we bombed them back into the 19th century, but they've had a real country for the better part of the last century, and are much better educated that many would believe. They don't thrive in conflict like the Afghans, although they don't run away from it like europeans.
    If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training. You will become a minister of death, PRAYING FOR WAR...

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    147

    Post imported post

    PrayingForWar wrote:
    Aran wrote:
    This sounds reeeeally familiar...
    It's not as familiar as you might think. Afghans are literally living in the 13th century. The only noticable difference is the vehicles and weaponry. They have no national loyalties too speak of. Only tribal loyalties, and to those who pay more.

    Iraq was fairly modern until we bombed them back into the 19th century, but they've had a real country for the better part of the last century, and are much better educated that many would believe. They don't thrive in conflict like the Afghans, although they don't run away from it like europeans.
    Actually its astoundingly familiar. We are doing the same thing we did 20-30 years ago, the same thing that got us into this "War on Terror".

    You see, Soviet Russia was invading a little country known as Afghanistan at the time. US was afraid of the "Domino effect" that spreading Communism might have, so we funded and trained a group of local Afghans to fight back. And that group was led by one Osama bin Laden.

    Wow, that certainly bit us in the ass, and here we are, doing it again.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    302

    Post imported post

    One word: blowback.

  6. #6
    State Researcher .40 Cal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    COTEP FOREVER!, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,379

    Post imported post

    Round two...DING!

  7. #7
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,713

    Post imported post

    I think it is a good idea.

  8. #8
    Regular Member KansasMustang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Herington, Kansas, USA
    Posts
    1,005

    Post imported post

    The difference being here is that we are not just supplying them with arms and munitions. WE are training them and assisting them. Hopefully this will,,as in this country, armed citizens will be able to defend themselves against tyrrany.
    ‘‘Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.’’ Thomas Jefferson

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member PrayingForWar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Real World.
    Posts
    1,705

    Post imported post

    Brigdh wrote:
    PrayingForWar wrote:
    Aran wrote:
    This sounds reeeeally familiar...
    It's not as familiar as you might think. Afghans are literally living in the 13th century. The only noticable difference is the vehicles and weaponry. They have no national loyalties too speak of. Only tribal loyalties, and to those who pay more.

    Iraq was fairly modern until we bombed them back into the 19th century, but they've had a real country for the better part of the last century, and are much better educated that many would believe. They don't thrive in conflict like the Afghans, although they don't run away from it like europeans.
    Actually its astoundingly familiar. We are doing the same thing we did 20-30 years ago, the same thing that got us into this "War on Terror".

    You see, Soviet Russia was invading a little country known as Afghanistan at the time. US was afraid of the "Domino effect" that spreading Communism might have, so we funded and trained a group of local Afghans to fight back. And that group was led by one Osama bin Laden.

    Wow, that certainly bit us in the ass, and here we are, doing it again.
    NO, it's not even close. We provided support to Pakistani officials, and helped them aquire the weapons. Namely Red Eye anti Aircraft missles and Stingers. All we are doing in this case is handing out AK's, which are plentiful anyway, and taking ID information from the individual. We know who has the weapon, and where they live. They are not getting RPG's, RPK's dishka's or anything else.

    Even insinuating that we trained mujahedeen or directly armed them is silly, suggesting we armed and trained Bin Laden is F!)*ing STUPID.
    If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training. You will become a minister of death, PRAYING FOR WAR...

  10. #10
    Regular Member KansasMustang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Herington, Kansas, USA
    Posts
    1,005

    Post imported post

    Uh,,sorry Prayingforwar the CIA trained and supported Osama Bin Laden. Yes indeed they did. That's when the biggest threat was the Russians, sorry fella read your REAL history. WE made Osama Bin Laden
    ‘‘Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.’’ Thomas Jefferson

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , Nevada, USA
    Posts
    716

    Post imported post

    They did a story on it on the history channel. The funny thing is that the first stinger missile that they fired was a dud, the second one worked just fine.

    The fact that we provided the mujahideen with stinger missiles was a cause of great concern after 9/11. We knew that they had them, we just didn't know how many were still functional.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    147

    Post imported post

    PrayingForWar wrote:
    Brigdh wrote:
    PrayingForWar wrote:
    Aran wrote:
    This sounds reeeeally familiar...
    It's not as familiar as you might think. Afghans are literally living in the 13th century. The only noticable difference is the vehicles and weaponry. They have no national loyalties too speak of. Only tribal loyalties, and to those who pay more.

    Iraq was fairly modern until we bombed them back into the 19th century, but they've had a real country for the better part of the last century, and are much better educated that many would believe. They don't thrive in conflict like the Afghans, although they don't run away from it like europeans.
    Actually its astoundingly familiar. We are doing the same thing we did 20-30 years ago, the same thing that got us into this "War on Terror".

    You see, Soviet Russia was invading a little country known as Afghanistan at the time. US was afraid of the "Domino effect" that spreading Communism might have, so we funded and trained a group of local Afghans to fight back. And that group was led by one Osama bin Laden.

    Wow, that certainly bit us in the ass, and here we are, doing it again.
    ... All we are doing in this case is handing out AK's, which are plentiful anyway, and taking ID information from the individual. We know who has the weapon, and where they live. ...
    Yeah.... cause that works out real well here (ie, a gun registration database). Hell, the BATFE can't even keep their database straight.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    Instead of giving them AKs, why not give them M-16s. That way, if we ever want to disarm them we just stop giving them ammo, and more importantly cleaning kits. Within 30 days of cutting off the cleaning supplies, none of the M-16s will be functional anymore due to mistreatment or lack of care.If we give them AKs, they'll just keep working for 30 years. :P
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lake Charles Area, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    1,723

    Post imported post

    PrayingForWar wrote:
    Aran wrote:
    This sounds reeeeally familiar...
    It's not as familiar as you might think. Afghans are literally living in the 13th century. The only noticable difference is the vehicles and weaponry. They have no national loyalties too speak of. Only tribal loyalties, and to those who pay more.

    Iraq was fairly modern until we bombed them back into the 19th century, but they've had a real country for the better part of the last century, and are much better educated that many would believe. They don't thrive in conflict like the Afghans, although they don't run away from it like europeans.
    When I was there, there was one village we raided that had NEVER seen a white person. They also had never been out of that village either. No electricity.

    Yet we still found AK's and ammo stashesout there, mostly from the Russian's.

    I think we bombed them back to the stone age and they were like,

    Yippie an Upgrade !

  15. #15
    Regular Member opusd2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Butt is in, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    453

    Post imported post

    Dustin wrote:
    When I was there, there was one village we raided that had NEVER seen a white person. They also had never been out of that village either. No electricity.

    Yet we still found AK's and ammo stashesout there, mostly from the Russian's.

    I think we bombed them back to the stone age and they were like,

    Yippie an Upgrade !
    :celebrate Hilarious!
    I aim to misbehave

  16. #16
    Regular Member shad0wfax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,067

    Post imported post

    deepdiver wrote:
    Instead of giving them AKs, why not give them M-16s. That way, if we ever want to disarm them we just stop giving them ammo, and more importantly cleaning kits. Within 30 days of cutting off the cleaning supplies, none of the M-16s will be functional anymore due to mistreatment or lack of care.If we give them AKs, they'll just keep working for 30 years. :P
    LOL That's an elegantly humorous solution.

    Their favorite method to clean an AKis to knot a shoelace, dip it in used motor oil, and then run that down the barrel. (I'm not making that up either.)

  17. #17
    Regular Member Flintlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska, USA
    Posts
    1,224

    Post imported post

    Perhaps they should try this tactic in Chicago and Detriot by arming the citizenry to fend off the atrocious criminal element that has taken a foot hold in those cities.
    Peace through superior firepower

    Luke 11:21
    "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed.

  18. #18
    Regular Member opusd2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Butt is in, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    453

    Post imported post

    But then they'd have no one in office...
    I aim to misbehave

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southwest Virginia
    Posts
    188

    Post imported post

    So they will give assault rifles to foreign citizens who are potential rebels and criminals, but for law-abiding US citizens they're banned (unless you've got 20 grand to spend on a gun).

    More atrocious hypocrisy and double standards by the United States' Government. What else is new.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •