A really stupid idea from the lunatics who thought that invading Iraq was a good idea

[ProSense]

This Sounds Like a Really Fun Mission

18 Nov 2007 11:39 am

Fred Kagan and Michael O'Hanlon say we'd better get ready to deploy "a sizable combat force" to Pakistan for a mission that "would involve supporting the core of the Pakistani armed forces as they sought to hold the country together in the face of an ineffective government, seceding border regions and Al Qaeda and Taliban assassination attempts against the leadership." Now since this is obviously a terrible idea, Kagan and O'Hanlon endeavor to make it less terrible by assuming a can opener and arguing that this force should come "not only from the United States, but ideally also other Western powers and moderate Muslim nations."

This plan and a pony will get you a pony.

Even more stunning in some respects, as Max Bergmann points out for Democracy Arsenal, is that they're quick to assure us that despite the necessity of this coming occupation of Pakistan, it wouldn't "be strategically prudent to withdraw our forces from an improving situation in Iraq to cope with a deteriorating one in Pakistan." Thus indicating, as Bergmann says, that "Kagan and O'Hanlon clearly have a hidden stash of U.S. soldiers."

What's more, in what seems to be a growing trend among advocates of a hawkish defense posture, Kagan and O'Hanlon actually appear to concede in advance that their plan won't really work:

The task of stabilizing a collapsed Pakistan is beyond the means of the United States and its allies. Rule-of-thumb estimates suggest that a force of more than a million troops would be required for a country of this size. Thus, if we have any hope of success, we would have to act before a complete government collapse, and we would need the cooperation of moderate Pakistani forces.

Can you imagine a responsible member of the Pakistani military inviting a large foreign military presence into the country as a prophylactic measure against a government collapse that hasn't actually happened? Can you imagine what the popular response to that would be? People already seem tired of living under a military dictatorship over there -- transforming it into a military dictatorship that involved tons of foreign troops seems very unlikely to shift that calculus.

[TwilightGardener]

1. Holy shit. Where on EARTH do these idiots think we're going to get the troops

to put into Pakistan? We're bogged down in a peacekeeping stalemate in Iraq, we're LOSING ground in Afghanistan. And what makes anyone think Pakistan is going to let us "spirit" their nukes out of the country for "safekeeping", in New Mexico or elsewhere, under our control? Boy, wouldn't the Islamic population love the infidels coming to openly steal their nukes, leaving them weak against India? Gee, THAT won't piss them off, will it? Jesus. I'm afraid of a failed state there, too--but until we start pulling troops out of Iraq (where they're wasted), there can't be any talk of putting ground troops elsewhere, unless there's a draft...oh, by the way, what about Iran? Have we moved on from that menace, or are we still going to bomb them? The neocons have driven us to the brink of ruin.

[Beelzebud]

2. So they advocate siding with a mililtary coup, and dictatorship?

These neo-con scumbags would love to enact this plan right here in the U.S.

[TomInTib]

3. Goodness. To think that these people actually make a living...

dreaming up crap such as that.

KnR

[SalmonChantedEvening]

4. If Palau ain't on board, we're already sunk.

Kagan and O'Hanlon bring you Coalition of the Bribed Part II.

This gem of moooCaCa speaks for itself:

"We do not intend to be fear mongers. Pakistan’s officer corps and ruling elites remain largely moderate and more interested in building a strong, modern state than in exporting terrorism or nuclear weapons to the highest bidder. But then again, Americans felt similarly about the shah’s regime in Iran until it was too late."

The shah? He was exporting terror? He wasn't to busy torturing his own people?

We do not intend to be fear mongers. Yea, and I don't intend to post a message when I click Post Message.

[ProSense]

5. Down the Rabbit-Hole in Pakistan

Down the Rabbit-Hole in Pakistan

Posted by Shawn Brimley

Just when you thought things coundn't get any stranger, according to today's New York Times, DoD is planning to "expand the presence of American military trainers in Pakistan, (and) directly finance a separate tribal paramilitary force..."

Apparently this proposal is "modeled in part on a similar effort by American forces in Anbar province in Iraq." The idea reportedly originated within Special Operations Command and has yet to be approved even there, so it's possible this proposal may never materialize once Congress and the rest of the government start to scrutinize it.

It's hard to know where to start with this one. First, the idea that one can replicate the so-called Anbar Awakening in the tribal areas of Pakistan seems to me wishful thinking at best. The dynamics in Iraq are unique to Iraq, and the internal politics of Anbar were already well underway by the time the U.S. expanded it's advisory role there. What happened in Anbar in late 2006 and into 2007 was clearly "enemy of my enemy" dynamics and it is far from clear that the Taliban have overstayed their welcome in Pakistan's frontier areas. On the contrary, after several years of conflict in the area between Pakistani forces and Taliban-affiliates, local residents are angry at the government and one might imagine this environment would not be conducive to an American military presence - however small.

<…>

I doubt that this program will go ahead given the dubious proposition that local actors would welcome an American presence, the chance that a visable deployment of U.S. military trainers would supercharge the tension throughout this region, and the real possibility that this would simply further destabilize an already precarious situation in Pakistan.

Foreign policy for kooks!