Russia Seeks Role in Afghan War Planning as NATO Deaths Climb

[laststeamtrain]

Source: Bloomberg

Russia Seeks Role in Afghan War Planning as NATO Deaths Climb
By James G. Neuger

Sept. 2 (Bloomberg) -- Russia is seeking a role in planning NATO’s war in Afghanistan two decades after Soviet forces were ejected from the country.

As East-West ties improve under President Barack Obama, Russia wants to be involved in setting the political, military and intelligence strategy for the war against the Taliban, said Dmitry Rogozin, Russian ambassador to the alliance.

“We want to be inside,” Rogozin said, in English, in an interview in Brussels today. He spoke for the rest of the hour- long interview through a Russian translator.

Allied military planners are groping for a new strategy as casualties climb. The commander in Afghanistan, U.S. Army General Stanley McChrystal, this week called the situation there “serious.” In what Obama calls a “war of necessity,” some 153 allied troops were killed in July and August, according to www.icasualties.org.

Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=aj3SBV9.sFog

---

This sounds like a great idea. Let's get the last losers to help plan our failure. They know how it's done.

Oh Brother...

[Soylent Brice]

1. wow. where do i even start with this...

nevermind the irony.

shit, if they want to help i don't even give a fuck at this point. we should have already pulled out for good, imo.

the best part of this is if we do work with thr Russians on this, if they have any hand in it, you can bet your ass the Commie/Socialist meme the right is pushing will stick FOREVER.

the CT's will fly like poop from a monkeys hand.

[Craftsman]

4. Are they going to suggest mines shaped like kids toys

like the ones they used in the 1980's?

[Nihil]

5. Like the cluster bomblets that you manufacture, use and sell?

:shrug:

[IndianaGreen]

8. and that have been used by our pal Israel in Lebanon and Gaza?

:mad:

[Soylent Brice]

11. ouch.

lol

[Hubert Flottz]

17. They want to help out because...

The Russians need those two 48" pipelines through Afghanistan from those huge Caspian Basin oil and natural gas deposits, to be secure. They want the US taxpayers to go on providing security for their pipelines. China and India needs that gas and oil to be able to keep on outproducing the US and taking away more production jobs from Americans. The Russians still would like to "Bury" us.

Edit to add link...

Afghanistan and the new great game

Prized pipeline route could explain West's stubborn interest in poor, remote land

http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/679670

[FarCenter]

2. The Russians are already helping us by embargoing arms

If they were selling the Taliban anti-aircraft missiles, anti-aircraft guns, and anti-tank rockets, we'd be out of there by now.

It appears that the Taliban have to get along on captured weapons and whatever they can get from Pakistan.

Iran and China don't appear to be helping the Taliban either.

[PeaceDreamer]

3. Obama's war in Afghanistan is a complete failure

Obama seems to want another Vietnam.

[byebyegop]

16. yawn....and I suppose your saying the same about the stimulus as well?

What other predictions do you have for us Nostradamus?

[Nihil]

6. Why not?

> This sounds like a great idea. Let's get the last losers to help plan
> our failure. They know how it's done.

You're already working with their predecessor losers (UK) and coming
into it with all of the winning strategies from Vietnam through to Iraq ...

:shrug:

[damntexdem]

10. Wow, you're right: we have such a track record that we could go it alone.

Or we could do it in concert with the Brits and Russians.

Either way, we can plan and execute a lovely failure in Afghanistan, with oh so many deaths to sanctify it.

;-)

[IndianaGreen]

7. The truth is that the Soviets defeated the religious wackos that became the Taliban

but the US decided to provide surface to air missiles to them, and that turned the war around in favour of the people that would help bin Laden a few years later.

[Vidar]

15. Exactly right--as usual.

[Ghost Dog]

18. The truth is the Soviets began to provide relatively enlightened education.

(Silence: crickets).

Tragedy.

[IndianaGreen]

21. Afghan girls and women were encouraged to go to school

and no one had to wear a veil or a burqa. Our intrusion into Afghanistan was a setback to women's rights, as it was in Iraq decades later.

[damntexdem]

9. Well, why not? After all, they were so successful in Afghanistan.

;-)

[tocqueville]

12. actually the Russians eradicated the Mujahedeen in one year

but things started to go awry when the CIA provided the remnants with modern weapons, training and cash

send the Spetznaz

[tocqueville]

13. and the truth is...

if Afghanistan falls back into Talibans hands, the insurgency is going to spread to the former Sovietic Muslim republics

and that's the last thing the Russians want

[Vidar]

14. We shouldn't be there, but if we stay, please accept the Russian's help.

[Kurska]

19. Awesome, lets team up and kick some taliban ass.

Russia has alot they could bring to the table in Afghanistan.

[pinniped]

20. Russia could try and fix their bombed out tanks littering the country.

.

[oct2010]

22. Chinese troops offer an Afghan solution

Chinese troops offer an Afghan solution
By Francesco Sisci

snip
Those maneuvers served only to exert psychological pressure on the Taiwanese population. It worked to a small degree, in the sense that the Taiwanese were scared, but it backfired in that the Taiwanese were not intimidated into submitting to China, conversely, they were convinced to resist China's reunification pulls.

Since those self-defeating initiatives, the PLA has become smarter, but it still has political goals behind each of its announced maneuvers. In this case, the PLA is thinking of long-range projection - that is, sending troops out of Chinese territory for special purposes. The one territory that needs troops and where Chinese soldiers could be deployed is Afghanistan

With its latest exercises, China could be winking at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the United States - both of which are presently engaged in Afghanistan - saying, we have troops, they are trained, and we could send them over.

NATO needs more troops in Afghanistan. Even though the combined number of foreign troops there now stands at about 100,000, the territory is infamously mountainous and inhospitable. It is twice as big as Italy, and slightly smaller than the US state of Texas.

snip

Less ideally but more practically, China could send troops to Afghanistan and open a comprehensive regional dialogue on Afghanistan, involving also the Russians and the Iranians - besides the Americans, Pakistanis and Afghans.

The value of Chinese troops on the ground could be political. In the past 60 years, China has been an unflinching Pakistani ally, and its presence on the ground could be a pledge to keep Afghanistan in "Pakistani hands". On the other hand, India should agree to leave Afghanistan to Pakistan, in return for a Pakistani back-down over Kashmir. This latter agreement would be very difficult, but it could be helped by the Indians agreeing to Chinese troops in Afghanistan.

All this would not only serve the purpose of having more foot soldiers on the ground, it would serve the Pakistani interest of wresting Afghanistan from the Taliban's hands. Pakistan should close the faucet so the flood of militants will dry up.

snip

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/KH27Ad02.html