Will Marjah be a 'success' on the ground in southern Afghanistan, or only in the Western press?

from RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty: http://www.rferl.org/content/What_Does_Victory_In_Marjah_Mean/1960600.html


An Afghan soldier frisks a farmer during a patrol near Marjah. Can the Afghan government and its NATO allies win public support there?

What Does ‘Victory’ In Marjah Mean?

February 17, 2010

. . . The immediate question that springs to mind is: will Marjah be a success on the ground in southern Afghanistan, or only in the Western press? In that respect, Marjah threatens to be another Fallujah, the 2004 battle in Iraq that was declared a success before it even began. For months and years afterwards, U.S. troops killed in Fallujah were reported as dying in "Al-Anbar Province" to prolong the myth that the victory in Fallujah was swift and just. Such deceit begs the question whether the perception of success is more important than victory on the ground.


. . . U.S. allies are hoping for immediate dividends in Marjah. "I can't say how long it will take for this military phase to get to the point where we can bring in the civilian support from the Afghan government. We hope that will happen quickly," says Mark Sedwill, NATO's civilian chief in Kabul.

It's doubtful, however, whether a war-weary and desperate people who have repeatedly been promised a quick military victory by a foreign force, and security by a Karzai government built on graft, will overlook eight years of incompetence and embrace wholeheartedly an effort that -- now or later -- could certainly cost them their lives and livelihood.

In addition, Marjah is populated by Pashtuns, the same ethnic group that comprises the majority of the Taliban ranks. This fact is given short shrift by U.S. officials who tend to speak of "development" and "democracy" as if hollow rhetoric belied by nearly a decade of half-hearted and counterproductive efforts can transcend centuries of tribal unity.

Duplicating previous strategies in Iraq and Vietnam, U.S. officials appear to be projecting American goals on to the local population without considering the real possibility that Afghans may choose to support their co-ethnics, however brutal, rather than embrace a foreign political ideology, especially if that ideology is being imposed by guns that too often do not discriminate between civilians and Taliban fighters.

And Marjah civilians are already paying the price for NATO's mistakes . . .

read more: http://www.rferl.org/content/What_Does_Victory_In_Marjah_Mean/1960600.html

was buried in the AP article I read yesterday: the CIA has issued orders to leave the poppy fields unharmed. Instead of leveling the fields with bombs, soldiers don't even fire live ammunition. They use smoke weapons so they do not damage the opium crop.

Yup, this is all about freedom. Really.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cedar_Falls

Enemy near capital. Check.

Ship out inhabitants. Not yet.

Fuck with the civilian population. Check.

the MSM has it's orders from the MIC. NO REAL NEWS.

Whatever the outcome give it a year or so and it will default back to as was. Attempts at culture change by social engineering rarely work.