If I were President, Vol 2

[Amir al Ghaznavi]

Continuing in my ongoing series of delusions of grandeur, I will present another policy I will adopt if I were President

The ANA stands at 300,000 on paper. Of course, once we remove the "ghost" figures, the number stands at half of that. Once we removed the illiterates and drug addicts, we have a 1/10th of that number. And once we remove those units that are still dependent on foreign forces for operations, we probably have one brigade worth calling soldiers

The foreigners want to continue building a huge conventional army based along Western lines. Stupid leaders in Kabul no doubt are salivating at the prospect of a mighty Afghan army.

This logic (or lack of) discounts two factors:

1- We are at least 50 years behind the armies of Iran and Pakistan, not to mention the Russian security blanket north of the Oxus that we cant even concieve of rivalring.

2- Americans like creating large third world armies because it buys them the allegiance of a powerful class of society and its a market for their toys

The last thing Afghanistan needs is a conventional standing army. It has no means to win any offensive war, so why even go down that route. Afghanistan should declare itself a non aggressor state, declare neutrality, disavow any land claims, and build a security apparatus strictly dedicated to homeland defence

I propose a standing guerilla army of 25-30,000 that can expand to 100,000 reserves. With the exception of a token tank force and token air force (more so for rescue operations and internal turmoil), these guerillas should be armed with light weapons, bombs, ieds, etc etc

The force should be broken down into semi autonomous units a la Hezbollah to prevent foreign intelligence infiltration and potential military coups. It should be dedicated to strict training for a defensive guerilla warfare. For while, we have no means of attacking another nation, defending our soil is something we know well.

Thoughts?

[R3SISTANC3]

I suggest a new religious school of thought, representing the local cultures and their adoptation of Islam. Most sects today in Afghanistan and amongst Pashtun are politically motivated by the influence of their origin. I am not suggesting a sect, but a school. I am sure there are a few, strictly Sunni and Hanafi, the major one should be standardized in line with mainstream Islam and the Sunnah of the Prophet PBUH. We shall call it Jamat ul Afghaniya.

[Amir al Ghaznavi]

I suggest a new religious school of thought, representing the local cultures and their adoptation of Islam. Most sects today in Afghanistan and amongst Pashtun are politically motivated by the influence of their origin. I am not suggesting a sect, but a school. I am sure there are a few, strictly Sunni and Hanafi, the major one should be standardized in line with mainstream Islam and the Sunnah of the Prophet PBUH. We shall call it Jamat ul Afghaniya.

You are welcome to create your own thread on what you would do as President. Please do not hijack my rants

With regards to your suggestion, the intention is good. However one needs to be careful in your approach. I would leave this initiative for my 2nd term

[R3SISTANC3]

Well Amir Jan, you have to address this issue since religion plays a huge role over the lives of your future subjects. Just look at all the armies and militias presently in the home land. They belong to one school or another. How will resolve this?

[Babygak]

I would vote for u for president, if i can call you "Mr Prez"

[Alchemist]

Continuing in my ongoing series of delusions of grandeur, I will present another policy I will adopt if I were President

The ANA stands at 300,000 on paper. Of course, once we remove the "ghost" figures, the number stands at half of that. Once we removed the illiterates and drug addicts, we have a 1/10th of that number. And once we remove those units that are still dependent on foreign forces for operations, we probably have one brigade worth calling soldiers

The foreigners want to continue building a huge conventional army based along Western lines. Stupid leaders in Kabul no doubt are salivating at the prospect of a mighty Afghan army.

This logic (or lack of) discounts two factors:

1- We are at least 50 years behind the armies of Iran and Pakistan, not to mention the Russian security blanket north of the Oxus that we cant even concieve of rivalring.

2- Americans like creating large third world armies because it buys them the allegiance of a powerful class of society and its a market for their toys

The last thing Afghanistan needs is a conventional standing army. It has no means to win any offensive war, so why even go down that route. Afghanistan should declare itself a non aggressor state, declare neutrality, disavow any land claims, and build a security apparatus strictly dedicated to homeland defence

I propose a standing guerilla army of 25-30,000 that can expand to 100,000 reserves. With the exception of a token tank force and token air force (more so for rescue operations and internal turmoil), these guerillas should be armed with light weapons, bombs, ieds, etc etc

The force should be broken down into semi autonomous units a la Hezbollah to prevent foreign intelligence infiltration and potential military coups. It should be dedicated to strict training for a defensive guerilla warfare. For while, we have no means of attacking another nation, defending our soil is something we know well.

Thoughts?

I agree with you...

Large armies arose as a product of the industrial revolution and the obsession of the old guards with "systems of managements". The first two world wars were absolute disasters because of the excessiveness of force, the thousands of lives lost simply because the generals were disconnected from the realities of the battlefields. In fact some would argue that the reason for the wars was because these countries had standing armies. And the reason for wars being perpetuated is because the production and exportation of arms has become the chief source of income for most western nations..

This is the age of information and electronics. It is far better to invest in smaller regiments of highly capable individuals that are skilled and intelligent in the ways of the modern world. This sounds a bit like a hollywood produced secret intelligence organization which is backed by a government...but even that idea has it's roots in Plato's Republic which was based on the idea of establishing "The Guardians", who would be the chosen elites of that society.
Pakistan has it's ISI, Iran the republic guard, and as I understand it Saddam's former guards are still active. Che had a similar idea and he wanted to start revolutions across latin america's using guerilla tactics and the support of locals, until the cia clipped his wings. There is also the esoteric SS that comes to mind and their intrigue with the occult...or even the hashashins.

If all the resources invested in 300,000 sheep are spent on 3000 lions, the results would be more fruitful in the future.

This all depends on the regiment of training, the myths created by your own charisma as the leader. Hizbullah are shia and the they have their own eschatology which is similar to the shia's of iran in reference to the return of imam e zaman. So Resistance does have a good point...you do need a spiritual dimension for your army...a goal...something worth dying for. whatever it takes to instil the mind with a strong sense of duty.


I could work on that for you...i'll be che and you be castro, or i ll be Himmler and you be hitler...

[JAMALUDEEN]

you would have to be best friends with the US in order to be the president.

[randolph85]

i agree on the issue of an army and its priorities. military's need to accommodate reality. there is simply no need for a massive afghan army, if nato can't defeat the taliban, what chance do a bunch of desperate fools have? nevermind the fact that sustaining such an army would cost far more than the national budget. civil war aside, if there is peace in the country and still a large army, i think saddams military is a good example of what a waste it would be. one of the largest military's in the world defeated and humiliated in a matter of weeks during gulf war 1. this because iraq was stupid enough to believe that its conventional army was a match for a far more technologically advanced US. they probably wouldn't of been a match for the 1950's version of the US military.

like saddam taught us, whats the point of playing conventional soldier when u are just wasting men and money. a modern afghan army should be based on purely defensive guerrilla tactics. take the best of talib strategy, mix it with mujahadin strategy and make anyone stepping foot into the country piss themselves at the thought of being shot in the back or having their convoy blown to hell. money should be invested in defensive weapons and ideally defensive weapon design as it is cheaper for us and a bigger blow to morale for the enemy to have its 50 mil plane shot down with a relatively cheap rocket.

[Soldat_Amir]

For a strong army you need a strong ideology for which Afghanistan does not have. Afghanistans future looks very dim and I can predict partition very soon with the North splitting to join its former USSR cousins and enjoy access and trade with Russia, Pakistan will likely send its Taliban proxies to control the South and Herat and co will join with Iran for trade and resources thats unless Israel and American attacks Iran and teaches those Clerics a lesson or the public rises up and establishes a secular government which is most likely will happen.

The Pashtuns will as usual be blamed for everything even though the minorities are just as traiterous and back stabbing as the Pashtuns who sold themselves to Arabs and Pakistanis.

Afghanistan will be listed as a banana state with no law but a piece of land with different warlords ruling different regions,provinces and land, women will have no rights as usual, and the Pashtun region will be flooded by foreign Jihadis who will be given refuge by opportunistic greedy warlords and clerics.

That's my view of things President Ghaznavi, how do you resolve my concerns?

[khushal]

afghaistans future is going to be like its past with no real army or a very weak one. you dont really need an army, you just need legitimacy. if the people sees you as the legitimate leader chosen by a real loya jirga. then the people are your army. if you betray your people, then you are betraying your army.

Thomas Jefferson beleived that when a government becomes entreched, it evolves into tyranny. "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."-T. Jefferson

[khushal]

you would have to be best friends with the US in order to be the president.

then you are betraying your people, so your presidency would be in jeopardy.

[NokiaWnW]

Continuing in my ongoing series of delusions of grandeur, I will present another policy I will adopt if I were President

The ANA stands at 300,000 on paper. Of course, once we remove the "ghost" figures, the number stands at half of that. Once we removed the illiterates and drug addicts, we have a 1/10th of that number. And once we remove those units that are still dependent on foreign forces for operations, we probably have one brigade worth calling soldiers

The foreigners want to continue building a huge conventional army based along Western lines. Stupid leaders in Kabul no doubt are salivating at the prospect of a mighty Afghan army.

This logic (or lack of) discounts two factors:

1- We are at least 50 years behind the armies of Iran and Pakistan, not to mention the Russian security blanket north of the Oxus that we cant even concieve of rivalring.

2- Americans like creating large third world armies because it buys them the allegiance of a powerful class of society and its a market for their toys

The last thing Afghanistan needs is a conventional standing army. It has no means to win any offensive war, so why even go down that route. Afghanistan should declare itself a non aggressor state, declare neutrality, disavow any land claims, and build a security apparatus strictly dedicated to homeland defence

I propose a standing guerilla army of 25-30,000 that can expand to 100,000 reserves. With the exception of a token tank force and token air force (more so for rescue operations and internal turmoil), these guerillas should be armed with light weapons, bombs, ieds, etc etc

The force should be broken down into semi autonomous units a la Hezbollah to prevent foreign intelligence infiltration and potential military coups. It should be dedicated to strict training for a defensive guerilla warfare. For while, we have no means of attacking another nation, defending our soil is something we know well.

Thoughts?

You missread the sources, my bro. 300 000 stands for the Afghan National Security Forces (Armee, Police, Local Tribal Armies (Arbakis), regional private militias...). The number of the army is around 180 000. The number of Police some 60 000 to 70 000 and the rest are local powerbrokers with their militias or tribal polices and village guardians.

Btw, so bad isn´t the security force. Day by day they catch and kill servants of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. People need to make experiences to become better. 10years after, majority of the security members face dy by day dangers and terrorism. Give them a chance and see how they will fight these creatures from hell. Even now the Taliban are not able to fight the security forces on the battlefield. So, they send their children under Burqas and among women to our country.

http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/129805/afghan-forces-kill-10-taliban-insurgents-detain-40.html

[Afghanistan2010]

I remember my uncle sitting in the front seat,before us a small convoy of ANA agents hiding themselves in civilian cars,when suddenly from the mountains the sound of PKM eruppted,they were screaming and fleeing in a way that not even animals will do...and i said to myself this is ANA murtad urdu when they can not protect themselves how can they protect afghanistan.
The Bullets were bizzing and fizzing around the vehicle,no civilian was harmed.

In another area
When i was among ANA soldiers,they told me that they were not really fighting against Taliban,rather they tricked the americans always and started shooting in the wrong direction when taliban came,they said they are our brothers we will never fight them...deployed with the 10Th Mountain Division.

[khushal]

and i said to myself this is ANA murtad urdu when they can not protect themselves how can they protect afghanistan.
The Bullets were bizzing and fizzing around the vehicle,no civilian was harmed.

this is because the ana dont have legitmacy. if they had legitimacy, first no one would fire on them, second if anyone does, they will feel the wrath of the people, third the ana members dont want to die for an ilegitimate goverment or a foreign idea.

[Amir al Ghaznavi]

I agree with you...

Large armies arose as a product of the industrial revolution and the obsession of the old guards with "systems of managements". The first two world wars were absolute disasters because of the excessiveness of force, the thousands of lives lost simply because the generals were disconnected from the realities of the battlefields. In fact some would argue that the reason for the wars was because these countries had standing armies. And the reason for wars being perpetuated is because the production and exportation of arms has become the chief source of income for most western nations..

This is the age of information and electronics. It is far better to invest in smaller regiments of highly capable individuals that are skilled and intelligent in the ways of the modern world. This sounds a bit like a hollywood produced secret intelligence organization which is backed by a government...but even that idea has it's roots in Plato's Republic which was based on the idea of establishing "The Guardians", who would be the chosen elites of that society.
Pakistan has it's ISI, Iran the republic guard, and as I understand it Saddam's former guards are still active. Che had a similar idea and he wanted to start revolutions across latin america's using guerilla tactics and the support of locals, until the cia clipped his wings. There is also the esoteric SS that comes to mind and their intrigue with the occult...or even the hashashins.

If all the resources invested in 300,000 sheep are spent on 3000 lions, the results would be more fruitful in the future.

This all depends on the regiment of training, the myths created by your own charisma as the leader. Hizbullah are shia and the they have their own eschatology which is similar to the shia's of iran in reference to the return of imam e zaman. So Resistance does have a good point...you do need a spiritual dimension for your army...a goal...something worth dying for. whatever it takes to instil the mind with a strong sense of duty.


I could work on that for you...i'll be che and you be castro, or i ll be Himmler and you be hitler...

You have hit it right on the head. Afghanistan needs an IRGC. And youre absolutely correct, it needs to be a vanguard of the regime/revolution, which requires a specific narrative and identity. This will be the focus of Vol 3, the logic of Afghanistan. Alchemist, we will have to continue discussions on this

i agree on the issue of an army and its priorities. military's need to accommodate reality. there is simply no need for a massive afghan army, if nato can't defeat the taliban, what chance do a bunch of desperate fools have? nevermind the fact that sustaining such an army would cost far more than the national budget. civil war aside, if there is peace in the country and still a large army, i think saddams military is a good example of what a waste it would be. one of the largest military's in the world defeated and humiliated in a matter of weeks during gulf war 1. this because iraq was stupid enough to believe that its conventional army was a match for a far more technologically advanced US. they probably wouldn't of been a match for the 1950's version of the US military.

like saddam taught us, whats the point of playing conventional soldier when u are just wasting men and money. a modern afghan army should be based on purely defensive guerrilla tactics. take the best of talib strategy, mix it with mujahadin strategy and make anyone stepping foot into the country piss themselves at the thought of being shot in the back or having their convoy blown to hell. money should be invested in defensive weapons and ideally defensive weapon design as it is cheaper for us and a bigger blow to morale for the enemy to have its 50 mil plane shot down with a relatively cheap rocket.

Again, you captured my feelings perfectly.