DOES OBAMA WANT TO LOSE IN AFGHANISTAN?

On the eve of Islam’s Day of Infamy, the September 11 Islamic Atrocity upon America, I found my mind drifting back to a day when I was in college.

It was May 11, 1965, and as I was walking across the UCLA campus from where I parked my car to my first class, everywhere I looked I saw students reading The Daily Bruin.  They were really immersed in some article – and I knew immediately what it was.

It was a huge double-spread article of mine emblazoned with the title Victory in Vietnam:  Go North.

By the spring of ’65, the Marines had just been deployed, battles with NVA (North Vietnamese Army) units had begun, and Johnson had initiated the "Rolling Thunder" bombing of a handful of ersatz-strategic targets in North Vietnam.  The student anti-war riots and protests were just getting going.

I explained that the claim of the conflict in South Vietnam being a "civil war" fought by home-grown Viet Cong was a myth.  The cold reality was that the country of North Vietnam – overtly Communist and backed by Red China and the Soviet Union – was attempting to militarily conquer the country of South Vietnam.

The Viet Cong were bought and paid for by Hanoi.  The only way to win, I argued, was to stop playing defense in South Vietnam but go on the offensive against Hanoi – and not with useless pinprick bombing micromanaged with ridiculous ROE (rules of engagement) restrictions.

The only way to win, my argument continued, was to shut down Hanoi’s capacity to wage war upon the South, and as quickly as possible.  Destroy the bridges carrying war materiel from Red China into North Vietnam.  Blockade the port of Haiphong.  Bomb the Red River sluice gates and dike system, flooding the entire Red River Delta and thus incapacitating North Vietnam’s ability to feed itself.

None of this was done, and as we all too bitterly know, North Vietnam did conquer South Vietnam.  We lost a war because we had no intention of winning it.

So – is America going to lose another war, this one in Afghanistan, because its government doesn’t want to win it?  A war against an enemy that perpetrated or helped to perpetrate the September 11 Islamic Atrocity, and will again if they are not defeated?

Last night, I had dinner with a Congressman who had just suffered through Zero’s "You Lie!" speech.  He voted for Bush’s troop deployments and surges in Iraq, because Bush wanted to win.  He told me he will vote against funding for additional troops in Afghanistan, because Zero doesn’t want to win – and hasn’t a clue how even if he did.

What would Zero do if he did – want to win and knew how?  The Congressman asked and I answered:

1.  Recognize that the Soviets had won their war in Afghanistan by August of 1986.  Study how they did it and apply their strategy and techniques to the Taliban.

Afghans are wonderfully bribable (thus the old joke:  You can’t buy an Afghan but you can always rent him).  The Soviets liberally bribed any Muhajaddin who would take their money.  Those who provided good information were bribed more;  those who provided false information were shot. 

Using this information, Spetszaz special forces hunter-killer teams were sent to wipe out Muj commanders and bases – relentlessly, 24/7, until the Muj gave up and retreated back to the refugee camps in Pakistan.  I saw this with my own eyes.

The war turned around only when we gave the Muj Stinger missiles beginning in September of 1986.  The Soviets lost because of, and only because of, the Stingers.

2.  Recognize that insurgencies require a sanctuary, which must be denied.  The country providing the sanctuary is in fact waging war against its neighbor via proxy.  Just as North Vietnam was trying to conquer South Vietnam with its VC proxies, Pakistan is trying to conquer Afghanistan with its Taliban proxies.

Form special forces hunter-killer teams of our own, bribe Taliban for info and shoot those who lie, hunt Taliban groups down and kill them – in Afghanistan and Pakistan.  If any bodies of Pak ISI agents are found among the dead Taliban in Pakistan – too bad.

There is no actual border between Pakistan and Afghanistan, it’s a fiction, and we should act accordingly – albeit with small, light, and fast Spetszaz-type teams.  No sanctuary.  No where to run, nowhere to hide.

3.  Revive the Northern Alliance – disbanded by Bush to placate Hamid Karzai and the Pushtuns.  Let the Uzbeks and Tajiks revive their militias and their local autonomy – give them the money and materiel to do so.

4.  Do the same with local Pushtun militias, again disbanded for Karzai.  Afghans by the tens of thousands will only be too happy to fight the Taliban if you pay them.

5.  Take away Karzai’s drug money.  His brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, head of the Kandahar Provincial Council, is reported by Indian intelligence sources to have accumulated some $600 million.  Find out where the accounts are and seize them.  Same goes for Jamil Karzai, the nephew of the Afghan leader. 

6.  Wipe out the poppy fields.  Spray at high-altitude from C-130s a variant of the mycoherbicide fungus pleospora papaveracea designed by DARPA to be lethal to all varieties of poppy plants (and harmless to other plants and animals including us).

Heroin money in the billions is the life blood of the Taliban, the ISI in Pakistan, the Karzai government in Afghanistan.  Destroying the poppy fields and draining away their life blood is the single most necessary condition for winning this war.

The Afghan farmer survived for many, many centuries without heroin money.  He can do so again.

7.  Decentralize power.  Scrap the recent national elections as hopelessly corrupt, with massive ballot-box stuffing by Karzai.

The Congressman and I agreed.  Not a single one of these solutions is or will be applied by Zero.  He supports the corruption of Karzai.  He shows no interest in Spetsnaz-type hunter-killer teams, especially in Pakistan.  He is determined to keep the heroin money flowing into the Taliban’s, the ISI’s, and Karzai’s pockets.

So much so, regarding the latter that he has renounced poppy eradication as official US policy in favor of "interdiction" – which involves getting US soldiers killed.

Think hard on that:  President Zero would rather have American soldiers killed than eliminate poppies from 30,000 feet with a mycoherbicide.

We are headed for defeat in Afghanistan far worse than that of Vietnam.  Neither the North Vietnamese Communists nor the Communist Viet Cong ever attacked the United States or committed mass murder on American soil.  Al Qaeda and their Taliban allies in Afghanistan did – and will again from there unless they are defeated there again.

The President of the United States seems either determined to create a sanctuary for Moslem terrorism, or is clueless as to how to prevent it.  Does it matter which is worse?