It was in the yet unknown tail end of the Cold-War era, the last decade of the existence of the mightiest communist government the world has ever seen; the Soyuz Sovietskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik (CCCP), or more commonly known to the rest of the world as, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR).

The world watched in stunned silence as the 5th Guards, 108th and 68th motor rifle divisions of the legendary 40th Army of the USSR marched into Afghanistan on December 24, 1979, to throw their support behind the fledgling socialist government of the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA), who gained power through a military coup a year earlier (note: the coup was an internal one, orchestrated by the Parcham faction of the PDPA against the Khalq faction). After two years of covert support for the Parchams, Afghanistan was now officially a Soviet satellite. The USSR leadership, under Leonid Brezhnev, promptly established a puppet government headed by Marxist ideologue, Babrak Karmal, as the President.

As the new government consolidated their position with the capture of strategic locations all around the capital , the specter of a Communist Middle East slowly began to take shape in the minds of America and her allies. The only hope of curtailing the spread of the Red Menace fell unto the frail shoulders of the mujahideen (warriors of the faith), a motley crew of disorganized Islamic radicals, nationalist, monarchist and remnants of the Khalq faction of the PDPA.

Recognizing this, and in place of direct American participation into the war, President Jimmy Carter authorized the CIA to covertly arm the mujahideen in their fight against the Soviets. However, the limited assistance backfired, as massive retaliatory responses from the Soviets crushed the defenseless Afghani mujahideens.

Following Carter's reelection defeat in 1980, the new Reagan administration decided to expand America’s covert assistance of the mujahideen, and with the support and pressure from former Texas Congressman, Republican Charlie Wilson, and the Heritage Foundation, a powerful conservative advocacy group, the Reagan Doctrine was born. The Doctrine has since been widely accepted as the architect of the eventual disintegration of the USSR.

The CIA was tasked with the implementation of the Doctrine, and was armed with a massive budget towards achieving the goal. The plan, code named Operation Cyclone, was led by Army Special Forces NCO Michael G. Vickers (the current Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence) who coordinated efforts to secretly train, arm and provide covert ancillary support to the mujahideen. Two significant developments occurred at the time that will prove to be the crucial in the eventual Soviet retreat and paradoxically, future American deaths; the Tora Bora stronghold and the Stinger missiles.

The need for a secret base to house and coordinate the movements of the mobile mujahideen guerrillas, as well as providing a center of command for the ‘cells’ spread all over the country, saw to the creation of the Tora Bora cave complex. The circuitous network, hidden deep within the White Mountain range, with entrances kept miles apart and only known to a selected few, proved to be a masterstroke.

The threat of the previously deadly Soviet Mi-8 and Mi-24 helicopters meanwhile, were nullified with the introduction of the heat seeking Stingers. In one of the most stunning statistics of any war in recent times, the mujahideen brought down 269 Soviet crafts from a total of 340 shoulder-launched attacks. It forced the Soviets to change their overall military tactics into a ground-based mechanized one. The mujahideen easily countered it with mines placed along major roads and crossing zones, and in the process, contained the majority of Soviet forces into urban centers, and purged huge tracts of the country off the invaders. With mounting military losses and rising economic costs, the humiliated Soviets sought a peace treaty with the Afghanis in 1988 and began an ordered retreat.

However, there was a hidden aspect of the resistance that neither the CIA nor the Army understood. During the height of the resistance, regional and/or communal power bases were created and warlords came into existence. One of the most powerful to have emerged was none other than Osama Bin Laden, the born again Muslim, son of a Saudi billionaire.

The young Osama - an idealist, a nationalist and more importantly, a radical Muslim - founded the Maktab al-Khadamat to recruit soldiers for the cause, a cause not exclusively limited to fighting the invading the Soviets. His men were indirectly trained and armed by the CIA, his commanders taught the art of modern guerrilla warfare and perhaps most dangerously, the whole organization saw with their own eyes the humbling of a world superpower.

II. The Background

In the aftermath of the Soviet withdrawal, a power vacuum existed in Afghanistan. The Marxist government, bereft of their Soviet overlords, struggled to maintain power. However, their cause was helped by the now divided mujahideen, who in the absence of the Soviets and the Americans, who have quietly slipped away, lacked a unifying cause. The country, for all intents and purpose, were controlled by regional warlords, who leveraged the ethnically diverse population to enhance their power bases.

A protracted civil war ensued between the Mohammad Najibullah led Marxist regime against the warlords, which eventually led to the Peshawar Accords that led to the creation of the Islamic State of Afghanistan on April 30, 1992. Unfortunately, a weak central government, regional ambitions of neighboring countries (Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia) and powerful warlords meant that fierce fighting continued still throughout the country. The situation deteriorated, and the country became even more divisive.

The economy collapsed, and the steady inflow of returning refugees slowed down to a trickle. The country was thrown back into the dark ages. There were no police, infrastructures or government presence out of Kabul; Afghanistan became a free for all, a lawless crime-ridden nation with atrocity and violence around every corner. The populace cried for a savior, and it came in the form of ‘The Students’, or as they are known to the world, the Taliban.

The movement began in Pakistan in a religious school known as Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (Assembly of Islamic Clergy). Practicing a strict brand of Islam, the movement advocated the implementation of the Islamic syariah law and the concept of 'ulama (religious leader)- administrator'. One of its students returned to Afghanistan and started a similar religious school there. His name was Mullah Omar, and from all accounts, his movement’s evolution into a socio-political force was triggered by the tyranny of the Governor of Kandahar. His students took up arms and began to enforce the law according to a strict interpretation of Islamic laws.

For a nation that was crying out for peace and order, the Taliban was welcomed with open arms and rapidly grew in strength and influence. Their growth from relative anonymity to a national force surprised many. Two years after coming to prominence, the Taliban, with help from the Pakistan military, captured Kabul and subsequently took control of the country in 1996.

While all of this was happening, Osama Bin Laden was safely tucked in the caves of Tora Bora, which he had converted into an al-Qaeda command center, unbeknownst to many in the intelligence community which lost track of him after his disappearance from Sudan several years earlier. As the war against the Soviets was reaching its end in the late eighties, the increasingly militant Osama, together with his cadres of loyalists, left the mujahideens and formed a new group, the World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders (WIFJAJC), which is the precursor to Al-Qaeda (The Base). Harnessing all the knowledge and expertise learnt from their CIA and ISI (Pakistan’s Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence) handlers, the organization began to launch sporadic small scaled attacks against American interests and individuals in the region. However, intelligence agencies paid little heed to WIFJAJC, likening them instead to the many anti-American militant organizations in the region. This is despite the increasing reports and intelligence chatter of their involvement in acts of terrorism Sudan, Egypt and elsewhere in the region.

Things changed however in 1998 following the release of a fatwa by the group.

"First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples … So here they come to annihilate what is left of this people and to humiliate their Muslim neighbors … All these crimes and sins committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on Allah, his messenger, and Muslims. And ulema have throughout Islamic history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty if the enemy destroys the Muslim countries … The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim"

Extracts from the WIFJAJC Fatwa, 23 February 1998

It was apparent by then that Osama, and the al-Qaeda as a whole, were angered by America’s continued presence in the region, specifically at their holy sites, and were prepared to do everything in their power to remove the infidels. The Clinton administration and intelligence community were left ruing the many opportunities they had in the early nineties to capture the then relatively insignificant Osama, who by now has dropped off the radar and was well on his way towards cementing his status as the bogeyman of international intelligence community (although there are increasing evidence that certain factions within the ISI were still in contact with the man right until his death).

The next three years saw Al-Qaeda finally announcing their presence to the world with a series of attacks of high profile US installations, despite retaliatory attacks authorized by President Clinton against their training camps in Afghanistan and suspected installations elsewhere, which only seem to ignite them further. Bombings of American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, and the U.S Navy destroyer, USS Cole in Yemen, demonstrated the level of planning and sophistication al-Qaeda was capable of. The fluid, clandestine cell structure used by their ground operatives, augmented by an elaborate communication system based on disposal emails and cell phones, made them difficult to track and penetrate. It was through sheer good luck that several of their other plans was halted by law enforcement agencies; the most notable being the planned bombings of the Los Angeles International Airport.

III. 9/11

However, all this pales in comparison against 9/11, a horrific attack that was the first and so far only foreign act of terrorism on US soil. After years of intricate planning, nineteen al-Qaeda operatives hijacked American Airlines Flight 11 (Boston to LA), United Airlines Flight 175 (Boston to LA), United Airlines Flight 93 (Newark to San Francisco) and American Airlines Flight 77 (Washington to LA) with the explicit objective of crashing the planes into pre-selected targets.

The coordinated attacks on September 11, 2001, saw the first two planes struck the North Tower and South Tower of the World Trade Center in New York at 8:46am and 9:03am respectively. Both buildings collapsed by 10:30am. AAL Flight 77 struck the western section of the Pentagon in Washington at 9:37am. The last plane, UAL Flight 93, crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, at 10:03am after a violent struggle in the cockpit as passengers attempted to regain control of the craft from the hijackers.

In the immediate aftermath of the attacks, 2,427 civilians were killed at the World Trade Center. 403 rescue and support personnel from the NYPD, FDNY and Port Authority were also killed. 125 died in the Pentagon crash. The 256 passengers in all four planes died.

Former President George W. Bush speaking to the press hours after the attack

Civilian footage of American Airlines Flight 11 crashing to WTC North Tower

Americans watched the images on their TV screen in disbelief. More than the deaths and the fiery infernos, the sense of security they have taken for granted for so long has been brutally snatched from right under their feet. There was grief, there was bewilderment, there was anger, but most of all, there was a thirst for vengeance, a collective demand for justice.

President Bush appeared on the air the next morning to rally the country.

Excerpts
“This enemy hides in shadows and has no regard for human life. This is an enemy who preys on innocent and unsuspecting people, then runs for cover, but it won't be able to run for cover forever. This is an enemy that tries to hide, but it won't be able to hide forever. This is an enemy that thinks its harbors are safe, but they won't be safe forever. This enemy attacked not just our people but all freedom-loving people everywhere in the world. The United States of America will use all our resources to conquer this enemy."

His approval rating skyrocketed to over 90% following the speech, and the whole country stood behind him. Three days later, Congress passed the “Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists” legislation that authorized him the use of the armed forces to apprehend everyone who was involved in the attacks.

In the midst of it all, New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s leadership shone like a beacon of hope for the traumatized New Yorkers. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 14.3% within a single week, wiping off $1.4 trillion from the market. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) declared the attack as an attack on all NATO members, and invoked Article 5 of organization, promising military support. Britain promised their full support to the United States. Australia and New Zealand invoked Article IV of the Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty (ANZUS treaty), promising similar military support. The whole world mourned for the dead, staring in disbelief at the carnage.

Exactly one week later, after conclusively determining the role of al-Qaeda in the attacks, President Bush delivered an ultimatum to the Mullah Omar led Taliban in Afghanistan;
“The Taliban must act, and act immediately. They will hand over the terrorists or they will share in their fate... Deliver to United States authorities all of the leaders of Al Qaeda who hide in your land. Release all foreign nationals, including American citizens you have unjustly imprisoned. Protect foreign journalists, diplomats and aid workers in your country. Close immediately and permanently every terrorist training camp in Afghanistan, and hand over every terrorist and every person and their support structure to appropriate authorities. Give the United States full access to terrorist training camps, so we can make sure they are no longer operating.”

The Taliban refused, and instead suggested that the accused be tried in an Islamic Court to determine the veracity of the accusation while inviting the United States to submit evidence of their involvement.

Faced with the refusal of the Taliban, on October 7, 2001, the United States launched Operation Enduring Freedom, and with the assistance of a British-led a coalition, initiated a bombing campaign of Afghanistan, targeting suspected al-Qaeda hideouts and Taliban army installations. It has been a decade since the world had seen the Americans in combat, and they watched in awe as the United States armed forces pulverized the country into submission.

Five weeks later, the coalition force and the Afghan Northern Alliance captured Kabul and subsequently the country, as al-Qaeda and Taliban fled to the mountainous regions in the east (in some instance, right to Pakistan), helpless in the face of the onslaught. The coalition, as expected, easily triumphed over the battered Afghanis. However, it was a bittersweet victory, as, by and large, they failed to capture any of al-Qaeda's and the Taliban's senior leaders.

Strangely though, American citizens weren’t cheering as loudly anymore. Ten years on, the cheers have almost died down…

IV. The Now

The expressed objective of Operation Enduring Freedom was “to disrupt the use of Afghanistan as a terrorist base of operations, and to attack the military capability of the Taliban regime”, as articulated by former President George W. Bush in his address to the nation on October 7, 2001, just hours before the offensive against Taliban-controlled Afghanistan commenced.

These objectives were met within five weeks of the United States and the coalition’s entry into Afghanistan, by employing the strategy advocated by former Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld. The strategy revolves around the concept of a short term, small scale deployment of ground-based armed troops, harnessing their superior weaponry and technological advantages, augmented by CIA’s intelligence, Air Force assets and the assistance of the coalition and local allies (the Northern Alliance), to neutralize the enemy’s threats.

However, the escape of senior al-Qaeda and Taliban figures, most notably Osama Bin Laden and Mullah Omar, as well as other emerging threats, forced a review of the campaign's initial objectives and strategies. The challenge now was to ensure that the Afghan Transitional Administration, in the absence of support from the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), would not fall under the weight of a sustained and multi-directional assault by insurgents (al-Qaeda and the Taliban), and the still powerful foreign-backed .

There was a very credible fear that, left on their own, the young Afghan government will suffer a similar fate to the 1992 government established after the Peshawar Accord, overrun by foreign-backed local warlords and more critically, turning once more into a haven for international terrorists, and providing the time and space for al-Qaeda to recover.

After several years of uncertainty and the all too obvious decision to prioritize the Iraqi occupation ahead of Afghanistan, President Bush shared his thoughts on the subject in a speech at the National Defense University in Washington on September 9, 2008.

“it (Afghanistan) has few natural resources and has an under-developed infrastructure. Its democratic institutions are fragile. Its enemies are some of the most hardened terrorists and extremists in the world. With their brutal attacks, the Taliban and terrorists have made some progress in shaking the confidence of the Afghan people. And in the face of all these challenges, the Afghan people are naturally questioning what their future looks like. Afghanistan's success is critical to the security of America and our partners in the free world. And for all the good work we've done in that country, it is clear we must do even more”

President Bush also outlined the administration’s new approach to the Afghan issue:

• “a quiet surge of troops to provide security for the Afghan people, protect Afghanistan’s infrastructure and democratic institutions, and help ensure access to services like education and health care”
• “helping Afghans develop additional security forces, and increasing the direct involvement of Afghan tribes. More experts from U.S. government civilian agencies would be deployed to help Afghans improve governance and to jumpstart the economy”

After almost ten years, $427 billion (as at 25 June 2011), and a total of 1,636 American casualties, General David Petraeus, the Commander of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and U.S. Forces Afghanistan (USFOR-A) and recently nominated CIA Director, acknowledged earlier this year that there is still “a lot of hard work to do”, and while the newly trained Afghan forces made “impressive progress”, there remains a need to continue “improving quality of the Afghan Army and police”. Petraeus also commended on the significant improvements on Afghanistan's health, legal and educational infrastructure.

A Pentagon report in May indicated that while the injection of 30,000 additional troops last year managed to "broadly arrested the momentum of the insurgency in much of the country and have reversed it in a number of important areas," the improvements are "fragile and reversible."

This is in the face of the recent increase in insurgent attacks, a trend that is a cause for concern as intelligence sources predict that the Taliban will attempt to regain their strongholds in the southern and eastern regions in the summer. An earlier Pentagon report in November last year cited “the Taliban's strength lies in the Afghan population's perception that coalition forces will soon leave, giving credence to the belief that a Taliban victory is inevitable" while pointing out “combat incidents have increased 300% since 2007”.

Even the death of Osama bin Laden on May 2, 2011, following a raid on his hideout (a bungalow located half a block away from a Pakistani army base, no less) by US Navy SEALs in Abbottabad, Pakistan, failed to provide any significant military or political boost. It did not surprise those in the intelligence community though, as Osama has long been suspected to have ceded any operational responsibilities within al-Qaeda.

While the Obama administration has largely kept to the same objectives and strategies of the previous administration, last November’s 24th NATO Summit in Lisbon saw the NATO-led coalition in Afghanistan unanimously redefined their objectives and set a target date for their complete withdrawal from the country.

“Looking to the end of 2014, Afghan forces will be assuming full responsibility for security across the whole of Afghanistan … Transition will be conditions-based, not calendar-driven, and will not equate to withdrawal of ISAF-troops”.

“Keep in mind we're talking about ten thousand troops by the end of this year, an additional twenty-three thousand by the end of next summer. And we'll still have sixty-eight thousand US troops there, in addition to all the coalition partner troops. So there is still going to be a substantial presence. But what it does signal is, is that Afghans are slowly taking more and more responsibility”.

Obama’s Live Address: Reducing U.S Troops in Afghanistan

V. Central Issues

•The Objectives

The original objectives for Afghanistan, pursuant to the stated goals of Operation Enduring Freedom, was “to disrupt the use of Afghanistan as a terrorist base of operations, and to attack the military capability of the Taliban regime”. The objectives have been redefined a number of times since then, both officially and unofficially, with the latest announced through the publication of the National Security Strategy by the White House in May 2010, that states,

Page 8, National Security Strategy May 2010
“We will disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qa’ida and its affiliates through a com¬prehensive strategy that denies them safe haven, strengthens front-line partners, secures our homeland, pursues justice through durable legal approaches, and counters a bankrupt agenda of extremism and murder with an agenda of hope and opportunity. The frontline of this fight is Afghanistan and Pakistan, where we are applying relentless pressure on al-Qa’ida, breaking the Taliban’s momentum, and strength¬ening the security and capacity of our partners.”

Page 20, National Security Strategy May 2010
“In Afghanistan, we must deny al-Qaida a safe haven, deny the Taliban the ability to overthrow the government, and strengthen the capacity of Afghanistan’s security forces and government so they can take lead responsibility for Afghanistan’s future.”

After almost ten years, how much progress have we achieved in meeting these objectives? At its peak in 2000, there was an estimated 2000-3000 top tier al-Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan, operating from hundreds of bases in the Eastern ranges and along the Pakistani border, with a good number of daily arrivals of recruits for training and indoctrination.

Al-Qaeda’s current strength has been greatly reduced now, with intelligence officials estimating that the first wave of attacks in 2001 took out two thirds of their members. In 2009, ABC News, citing a senior intelligence official, reported that there remain approximately 100 al-Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan.

The New York Times meanwhile, spoke to Michael E. Leiter, the Director of the United States National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) on July 2010, who estimated there were more than 300 operatives hiding in the country and in Pakistan. A Washington Post article by Newsweek editor Fareed Zakaria two months later contends that there were about 400 operatives left.

However, counter-insurgency officials cautioned that al-Qaeda’s threat is not limited purely from direct terrorism. They are also experienced in recruiting, propaganda and training, an ability that has seen them forging links with organizations such as,

• Iraq’s Jama'at al-Tawhid wal Jihad (Iraq)
• Egypt’s Islamic Jihad
• Iranian-backed Hezbollah of Palestine
• Yemen’s Islamic Army of Aden
• Libya’s Islamic Fighting Group
• Kasmir separatist Lashkar-e-Taiba

Their links with militants in ally-Pakistan are a particular source of concern, as it provides them a de facto ‘safe haven’ to reorganize and rebuild their networks, as well as providing excellent off-site shelter. The Wall Street Journal, in a report last April, cited the return of al-Qaeda into Afghanistan, specifically into ‘white’ regions previously deemed safe. Establishment of hideouts, training and operation centers were confirmed by both Pakistani and Taliban sources.

Worryingly, incidences of insurgent attacks have risen dramatically after a significant decline beginning in 2006. Suicide bombings have risen to thrice the level of 2009, with an average of three bombings a week. Civilian deaths in May 2011 were the highest since 2007, with 119 lives lost and 274 injured and last year’s toll of 2,777 deaths was the most since 2006.

The Cost

Operation Enduring Freedom began on October 7, 2001, with an elite force of 5,200 Special Forces troops, a number that, augmented with tactical air and mechanized support, proved to be sufficient to topple the Taliban.

As America’s objectives in Afghanistan evolved and were subsequently redefined by the administration, the troop strength was increased to 20,000 by 2006, consisting of members from various branches of the armed forces, led by Camp Pendleton-based I Marine Expeditionary Force-Forward, the Screaming Eagles (101st Airborne Division), and the 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry).

At the end of President Bush’s tenure in late 2008, the number of our soldiers had grown to 50,000. The Obama administration increased it further to 65,000 by the end of 2009, and with an additional 30,000 sent as part of a troop surge strategy in 2010, the total number of American soldiers in Afghanistan by the turn of this year breached the 100,000 mark. Almost 80,000 of them were placed under the direct command of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).

The demands placed on these soldiers were not limited to combating al-Qaeda or their symbiote, the Taliban. Their role has been expanded to nation building, namely, training the Afghani security forces and general peacekeeping operations.

The estimate for this year’s total cost of operation in Afghanistan is $113 billion, bringing the total expenditure there to a projected $444 billion by year end. To appreciate the magnitude of the sum involved, let’s put the figure into perspective.

To generalize, it costs the country in excess of $1 million dollar annually to maintain each individual soldier in Afghanistan.

Pakistan

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan, a nation of 180 million situated at the northwest boundary of the Indian subcontinent, has long been recognized as one of the most important allies of the United States in their global war on terror. Their worth as an ally is perfectly captured by the amount of funding they received last year, $4.5 billion, which is the highest ever single-year foreign aid disbursed to any country, bringing the total received by Pakistan in the past ten years to $21 billion.

Interestingly, $17 billion were routed directly to the Pakistani army by the United States. The army has no constitutional obligation to present a budget or report their spending to anyone or any bodies in the government, a situation that led to a protest by Finance Minister Shaukat Tarin in 2009. The lack of accountability and oversight here has led to numerous allegations of abuse; from the serious (funding of militants) to the comical (real estate investments, including hotels and apartment buildings).

Despite the United States’ best efforts to develop a strategic relationship with Pakistan since the mid 1950’s, the country has now turned into a hotbed for some of the most intense, and at times violent, anti-American sentiments in the world. Moreover, there is a strong case to be made that Pakistan can be held directly responsible for the current quagmire that is afflicting Afghanistan. Some have even gone further, apportioning a measure of responsibility for the 9/11 attacks.

There is also the small matter involving Osama bin Laden. The decade-long, biggest manhunt in history ended recently with the death of the al-Qaeda founder on May 2, 2011, deep inside the Pakistani border; inside the garrison city of Abbottabad, in a specially built bungalow located barely a few hundred meters away from an army base and a police station. The former head of the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), General Hamid Gul, was quoted days after the incident, “there is the local police, the Intelligence Bureau, Military Intelligence, the I.S.I. They all had a presence there.” - which brings us to the ISI.

ISI, or rather, its shadowy cabal of high-ranking current and former officers, known as the S Wing, has long been suspected of being one of the biggest factors behind the rise of armed militancy in the Middle East. From their first significant foray in arming the mujahideen of the Soviet-era in the 1980’s, the ISI then disrupted the unification of the fledging nation in 1992 following the Peshawar Accords -a ceasefire agreement which was attained after a bloody three-year war between the Marxist-regime of President Mohammad Najibullah and an alliance led by the Lion of Panjshir, the legendary Ahmad Shah Massoud- by arming one of the most brutal warlords in Afghanistan, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a decision that gave rise to a massive civil war in the war-torn land.

Seeing their man Hekmatyar finally defeated by the forces of the Massoud, now appointed Minister of Defence after turning down the offer of both the Presidency and Prime Ministership, the ISI then turned their attention to the fledgling Taliban movement of Mullah Omar. Once again, Massoud, now heading the Northern Alliance, a disparate collection of anti-Taliban fighters, held their ground against the ISI-armed Taliban and impressively retained control of almost a third of the country. There have been numerous undocumented assertions that the ISI provided Mullah Omar with the initial organizational and logistical expertise, which was the basis for their lightning expansion across the country.

“We have concerns about Pakistan’s behavior in the region”
Ahmad Shah Massoud, speaking to the EU parliament in early 2001.

“The war which clamps down in Afghanistan nowadays is not only an internal conflict. It is especially owed to an interference of enemy foreign countries, particularly Pakistan."
Maasoud, answering questions from a visiting delegation from the EU Parliament on June 11th, 2000

However, perhaps the most damning indictment of ISI’s unofficial involvement and support of terrorist elements they are officially tasked with eliminating, came from the infamous Wikileaks, which revealed on June 3, 2011, a December 2009 diplomatic cable from US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, which among others, states, “Although Pakistani senior officials have publicly disavowed support for these groups, some officials from the Pakistan''s Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate continues to maintain ties with a wide array of extremist organizations, in particular, the Taliban, LeT and other extremist organizations … These extremist organizations continue to find refuge in Pakistan and exploit Pakistan's extensive network of charities, NGOs, and madrassas”. Pakistani Intelligence officials has dismissed the validity of the cable and claim this was an attempt to discredit the ISI.

WikiLeaks - Pakistan, Guantanamo and Al-Qaeda

Note: Ahmad Shah Massoud warned the United States intelligence officers, EU parliamentarians and journalists of an impending al-Qaeda attack in 2001. He was assassinated two days before 9/11. Afghani President, Hamid Karzai awarded Massoud a posthumous title of "Hero of the Afghan Nation". He was also nominated for the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize.

Support our website with Google Plus

2012 Presidential Candidates on Twitter

Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate
Former Speaker of the House

Newt Gingrich

Gingrich Position on Afghanistan

The Objectives
The smartest man in Washington (in the absence of ol’ nemesis Bill Clinton) refused to comment on President Obama’s troops withdrawal plans.

“I refuse to comment directly on the Afghanistan decision because I think if you don’t put it in context, it makes zero sense,”
23 June 2011, Politico

However, he commented on the subject the next day

“There is a radical Islamist war against America and our allies. It would be helpful if President Obama had found time in his speech tonight to explain to the American people how we are going to win this war. Giving a speech in isolation about our military operations in Afghanistan without explaining how it connects with a larger strategy for winning the war against radical Islamists does not help Americans understand what it will take to provide for the security of the American people.”
23 June 20121, Facebook post

And a week later
“None of the generals recommended the speed of the drawdown that the president wants”

29 June 2011, On The Record, FoxNews

Pakistan

Gingrich took Pakistan to task for retaliating against informants who led the US forces to Osama Bin Laden’s hideout in Abbottabad. Speaking at Republican Party fundraiser in Baltimore on June 24, 2011, Gingrich said, "We should have taken extraordinary actions against Pakistanis -- within 24 hours. We should have said if you don't release those people you can assume we have no relationship and we'll chat with you from India."

“The situation in Pakistan is extremely troubling. After $20 billion in aid since 9/11 we discovered that bin Laden was not hiding in a cave in Waziristan, but in a large compound in a military city within one mile of the Pakistani national defense university. Instead of looking for those who had been protecting bin Laden, Pakistan's response has been to arrest those who helped America discover bin Laden. This should be considered a crisis in our relationship with Pakistan with profound implications for our operations in Afghanistan.”
23 June 20121, Facebook post

More on Gingrich

Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate

Kathyern Lane

Lane Position on Afghanistan

Kathyern believes that if our troops are tasked with the training of the Afghanis’ security forces, then we should send the 160,000 soldiers that were originally requested. The sooner the Afghani forces can secure their own territory, the quicker our soldiers can return home. Fewer trainers results in longer time away from home for our troops, and raises the likelihood of our troops having to engage the enemy; resulting in more deaths, and a higher socioeconomic burden on the taxpayer.

More on Lane

Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate
Career Flight Attendant

Tom Miller

Miller Position on Afghanistan

• Miller will bring all U.S. troops home, except for the necessary personnel needed to support Bagram Airfield. This base is vital for our Middle East deployments.

• He believes that with a 70% illiteracy rate and a per capita income of less than $1,000 per year, we cannot buy, force or educate a change in their ideology, even though we are spending $240 million every day trying.

More on Miller

Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate
U.S. Representative from the State of Texas

Ron Paul

Paul Position on Afghanistan

The Objectives

Paul believes in an immediate withdrawal of our forces from Afghanistan

“I wouldn’t wait for my generals. I’m the commander in chief. I make the decisions … I tell the generals what to do and I would bring them home as quickly as possible…”
13 June 2011, Republican Presidential Debate in New Hampshire.

Cost

Ron Paul on the real costs of Afghanistan

“There really is nothing for us to win in Afghanistan. Our mission has morphed from apprehending those who attacked us, to apprehending those who threaten or dislike us for invading their country, to remaking an entire political system and even a culture … This is an expensive, bloody, endless exercise in futility. Not everyone is willing to admit this just yet. But every second they spend in denial has real costs in lives and livelihoods … Many of us can agree on one thing, however. Our military spending in general has grown way out of control.”
27 June 2010, excerpts from Ron Paul article/audiolog at RonPaul.com

Pakistan

Paul’s controversial theory that the administration is planning to invade Pakistan

@ 5:22
“We keep bombing them, we kill innocent people there . . . I see the whole thing as a mess, and I think that we are going to be in Pakistan. I think that’s the next occupation and I fear it. I think it’s ridiculous, and I think our foreign policy is such we don’t need to be doing this.”

18 May 2011, Ron Paul speaking on NBC’s Morning Joe

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

"We’ve learned valuable lessons in the War on Terror. I hope the terrorists have too. If they haven’t, we’ll be here to teach them in new ways. For now, I believe we must settle this."