How will the Taliban read the WikiLeak reports if over 90% of them are illiterate?

[zulchzulu]

A story came out about how the Taliban are skimming over the WikiLeak reports and will seek to knock off those cited in reports who sided with the interlopers, I mean the invaders, I mean... the US troops.

Exactly how does a population of people where over 90% are illiterate read a report? That's not even including the fact that the CIA wouldn't use real names.



They change tribal alliances more frequently than a puppy takes a crap. Who is on one side last week is on the other side a week later... just show some cash, some opium and perhaps a rifle from Peshawar.

Most of the Taliban and even Afghan police are illiterate. The choice is to join one group or to beg in the street.

[BootinUp]

1. So...some of them can read?

This doesn't seem like a tough question to me.

[zulchzulu]

3. The real point is the Taliban already know who is talking to the American troops

They can see them in their villages without reading a report, which probably doesn't use real names for intelligence purposes anyway.

[BootinUp]

5. Are the known collaborators are still breathing? nt

[alcibiades_mystery]

8. Your point

is dumb and wrong.

The reports clearly put some informants in a great deal of danger, and there's no finessing that no-how. Now, you might want to make a decent argument by weighing that danger against something else, but denying the danger based on dreamed up stupidities is not the way to go.

[zulchzulu]

16. Without seeing the reports, you can't say one way or another what is or is not...

If you've been following the Afghanistan war closely outside of typical mainstream media channels, you'd know that the way the NATO/American troops go into villages to get "support" are out in the open and those who know their villages and its ways of communicating know who is siding with the NATO/American forces.

Their names and their families are already on the list. They don't need to read a report in a language they don't know how to read.

This effort by the Pentagon and willing stooges in the press to make it all seem like it's WikiLeak's fault or that somehow more people will die because of this report is dubious at best.

Those siding with NATO/US who are also involved in tribal infighting battles that cross-layer what is happening with the occupation are either going to get killed eventually or will allow the occupation forces to kill off a band or two of Taliban and bring more antagonism in the villages, thus making more Taliban fighters.

[izquierdista]

2. Haven't you heard?

There's a special iPod app that translates Wikileaks into Pashtun, has a speech synthesizer to read it, and they come standard with every goat bought in Helmand province.

[Ozymanithrax]

4. That Taliban leadership are neither stupid nor illiterate...

They will murder anyone who works with the U.S. or NATO forces to deter people from working with the enemy.

[cherokeeprogressive]

6. If I had to guess, I'd say that 10% might read the reports to the other 90%.

[tsuki]

10. My first thought, the 10% read the report and tell the other 90% what to do. nt

[seattleblue]

7. The word "Taliban" means "student" in Pashtun

which is the language of much of eastern Afghanistan. The Taliban are educated and literate. Also these are not CIA reports. Most of the leaked reports were from low level Army personnel who did in fact use real names.

[Chulanowa]

9. Problem is, they are almost solely students of the Koran

Arabic (or perhaps Pashto) literate, with limited vocabulary. English literacy with a technical vocabulary could very well just be blablabla to 'em.

I wouldn't bet any money on it, just saying it's not an unreasonable possibility.

[Hekate]

12. The data includes real names, villages, everything you need to locate them. They're already dying.

[Exilednight]

18. The reports do not include the real names of informants ............

The CIA issues each informant an alias to help protect their identity. It would be as if someone unearthed a bunch of KGB documents that contained the alias list of names of US informants, and all the US could do is run around and look for people named John, Bill, Rob and Dave; none of which are their real names.

The real names that it does include and aren't aliases are government officials, police chiefs and tribal elders. Everyone already knows who these people are so it doesn't make much difference.

[seattleblue]

23. These are not CIA documents

They are field reports by low level army personnel.

[Exilednight]

24. The CIA is the one who handles informants, not the military. Any name that the military has .......

was given to them by either CIA on the ground, or SF who use the same rules for informants as the CIA. The people typing these reports have never seen the people mentioned. They sit in some little room and type out messages to their respected destinations that were handed to them by someone actually in the field dealing with these people.

This PFC, if he is the one responsible, has never met any of these people.

Stop buying into the hyperbole about how dangerous this is.

[seattleblue]

27. You hve no idea what you re talking about.

You clearly did not read any of the reports. The reports are by army field personnel mainly on routine missions. But sit in your armchair and type on if it makes you feel better.

[Exilednight]

33. I;ve read many of the reports, and some are reported by ..............

regular soldiers, but those messages are for stuff like medevacs, enemy contact and items of that nature.

The messages dealing with informants are a totally different animal from the rest of the documents posted.

The same is true with reports about meetings with high level officials. None of these messages have anything to do with regular soldiers.

I spent 8 years in the military, and I know who has access to what and who is responsible for which messages. The Pentagon is depending on public stupidity to hype this to make their case, and sadly many are falling for it.

[zulchzulu]

37. Thank you

...for your service and your insight on these matters.

As you mentioned, the Pentagon messaging machine is hoping that people think that the leaks are going to make the war "worse" than it already is.

The reports prove that the war is nonsensical, void of a reasonable mission and bereft with dubious alliances with the Aghfan and Pakistan government.

Some people apparently are upset that the truth is now out there.

[Hekate]

11. They're not stupid, and contrary to US propaganda by Bushco, leadership isn't illiterate either

They have a fairly sophisticated operation that makes propaganda/recruiting DVDs and distributes them throughout the Muslim world -- they show up in marketplaces in Indonesia, for instance.

A fair amount of recruitment takes place among lonely university students in Europe. Some upper middle class kid leaves Cairo or Karachi for university in Britain or Germany -- culture shock -- loneliness -- looking for a touch of the familiar -- lo and behold, a radical cleric has set up an Islamic Student Center convenient to campus. Friday night prayers, get-togethers, lectures.

So anyway, no problem with skimming over the WikiLeaks data. According to a PBS program tonight, Afghans who worked with Americans are already starting to be bumped off. The data is pretty comprehensive: names, dates, villages where they live. They're easy to find now. :-(

Hekate

[vaberella]

13. And you think the people in charge are not literate.

They have names and locations dude---a person in charge can do some recon and people's lives will be chanced. Some have said they are already dieing, don't justify this...it's not worth it.

[NutmegYankee]

14. This is the best defenders of wikileaks can do?

There are plenty of literate (in English) folks in the Taliban who can read these dispatches from regular soldiers, who are not CIA trained and did use real names and locations. You see, the dispatches were classified so that these useful people wouldn't be identified and eliminated, which harms both them and us. But through this act of cowardliness, a soldier has betrayed his country to release files that revealed nothing new to the American public about how the war is progressing. We already knew all of this! The only thing different now is that a lot more 7.62x39 mm rounds will find their mark.

The FBI should kick down the door on Julian Assange and secure any classified material. Then both he and Pfc Manning need to be brought up on espionage charges.

[zulchzulu]

17. Defenders of the "We already knew all of this!" want to hide the truth about the war

Hide it. Don't allow it to be published. Keep it away from our poor little heads. $900 billion a month to try to prop up an absolutely corrupt narco-kleptocracy and have the blood of innocents and our troops spill is something we must do forever.

Nonsense.

The reports SHOW THE TRUTH ABOUT THIS BULLSHIT WAR.

You have a problem with that. Good for you. You probably have no idea how many have died this month there. You probably think there is a huge Al Qaeda presence in Kabul, which you probably couldn't even point out on a map.

Yay!

:crazy:

[NutmegYankee]

20. Nice Strawmen

We did already know about all of this. My problem isn't admitting that the war is a loss and a waste, it's the cheerleading over a crime that even now is getting our informants killed! Take your self righteous attitude somewhere else.

As for the rest of your post, I have been following the wars in Afghanistan since the mid 1990s and I can name every country in the Middle East and Asia. I'll gladly go toe to toe with you on geography in RL. Bring it!

As for local impact - two local men (barely) have died in the last few months fighting in Afghanistan, and I personally know several deployed there right now.

[zulchzulu]

25. So if we already know it's f*cked up, we should stay and continue f*cking it up?

I get your logic now... it's your cheerleading for a ridiculous war and wanting to penalize people who are trying to end the war by bringing out the truth that are the problem.

As for informants now being under scrutiny and/or on a hit list, that's already been happening... or as you infer, we know that already.

As for naming countries in the Middle East, it's not just geography that's at stake and/or a test of the region. It's knowing the cultural differences with Afghanistan (for instance) and how the Taliban work both sides of tribal wars in South Waziristan (for instance) with assistance from Pakistani factions. It's knowing that the tribal areas throughout the country were originally devised by the British to control the Pashtun tribes, who have historically fought against colonial occupation. Now they are against US/NATO occupation.

So when these tribal groups see some of the villagers cooperating with NATO/US forces, they are already marked for retribution later. Some report that mentions the collaboration between the villagers is already known.

So thinking that the leaks are somehow news that the Taliban didn't know about before and thinking that more blood will be spilled because of the leaks is essentially nothing more than trying to "kill the messenger" that has brought new questions on the validity of the NATO/US mission there.

I also know two people who were in Iraq and now are stationed in Kabul (last I was told). They both think the Afghanistan war is a clusterf*ck.

[NutmegYankee]

29. Point out where I said we should stay!

Do it - Find the explicit post that states that or fucking apologize! Or are you like Breitbart, and too good for that?

You seek to dismiss the damage done to people through the release of these Classified files. Fine! My problem isn't that the files look bad on the war, it's that classified material is being released illegally. Material that is likely leading to deaths right now. The end DOES NOT justify the means.

[Sheepshank]

31. It's a red herring

nothing going on other than a diversion from the topic at hand.

I wonder, no matter how innocuous and obscure a reference to family members, anyone here would feel about having said family member referenced as an informant (in a web publisized document)....to lets say..... Al Q? Sure, nothing to worry about.

Al Q has been very forgiving in the past of such actions? Al Q doesn't even need to question said informant. Wikileaks gave them up for free.

[alcibiades_mystery]

32. It has to be put in local context

The OP is a little bit like arguing that naming people in South Chicago who inform on drug gang activities would be no big deal because most drug dealers drop out of high school. It is a deeply stupid and ignorant argument.

[Sheepshank]

34. ITA n/t

[NutmegYankee]

35. I know.

It seems as of late that any post counter to an OPs post must be responded to with slander and ad hominem attacks. I oppose the war and want us to leave, but I also oppose illegal releases of classified information. But I'm lumped into the "pro-war" group for expressing the opinion that this leak was wrong.

[zulchzulu]

38. I merely suggested you don't think the truth about the war should be out there

Your notion that "we already knew that" falls flat on its face when you imply that by knowing what was leaked was something already known and therefore should have never been leaked.

Now the Pentagon is trying to cover its ass and wanting to message that the leaks hurt the mission, even though the reports expose that the mission is nonsensical and ill-contrived.

You may be against the war. Good. But if you really were against the war, you would want it to end. The leaks and exposure showing how badly and wrongly the war is going should be seen as something to help end the war.

Covering up what is happening there is not the answer. That's why the war has lasted as long as it has.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

15. If those who support the leaks argue that the repercussions are worth it. Then fine.

I'd respect that. Instead what I'm seeing is that the leaks will have no repercussions. People will die because of these leaks and pretending otherwise is nothing more then cognitive dissonance. Personally, I'm not sure it's worth it, mainly because in the end, I don't think they'll have that much lasting impact.

[alcibiades_mystery]

19. Exactly right - the defenders can't even identify the only argument worth a damn

Instead they retreat behind the utter stupidity that publication of this information is generally harmless- - in this particularly asinine thread, because the Taliban are 'illiterate.'

Weigh the costs and benefits of the leaks. At least then I'd respect their argument. This is just patent stupidity at this point.

[zulchzulu]

26. The "We Already Knew" Crowd wants to hide the truth about the war's disastrous mission

It's that simple.

You whine "we already knew that!" while wanting the facts not coming out about the war. And yes, look it up. A very large majority of the Taliban ARE ILLITERATE. Cite me any examples where they are not.

[alcibiades_mystery]

30. You must be responding to somebody else

Since I don't know what this "We already knew" argument is supposed to be, so I can hardly be grouped with a "crowd" of that name. Likely, their argument is as dumb as the OP.

Zulch, I like you, and think you're generally right about stuff. But this is a deeply stupid argument you're making, and you're holding on to it for pride and lack of self-reflection. Weigh the costs and benefits of the leak in an honest and straightforward way - as you usually do - rather than in this absurd way.

[zulchzulu]

36. I've looked at the whole picture and from my angle, the leaks will actually help

...more than hurt.

The mainstream media has been playing along with the filtered view from the Pentagon regarding the "slow successes" from the Afghanistan war. Reports about new resources being found (which is BS), about how Karzai is "coming around", how Pakistan is a reliable ally and other utter fabrications from the Pentagon are being repeated by the usual sockpuppets in the media.

These leaks will actually save more lives than not if you understand that the real truth is now coming out about how much of a horrible mission the war in Afghanistan is.

The red herring that the Taliban will now target people they had no idea where cooperating with US/NATO forces from the report is based on not knowing that the Taliban already know who in fact is cooperating with US/NATO forces WITHOUT any report leaked. Heads will roll, as they already have been and were already going to despite any lack of leaked documents. Tribal wars and retribution are also part of the scenario, which is not apparently reported in the leaked documents. That's because they have been fighting each other for centuries and turning on occupiers for a long time as well.

I find this to be an honest assessment of the fallout from the leaks. I would even suggest that the military are in some ways relieved that the real story about the war is out there, if only as an impetus that the troops should actually start withdrawing in 2011 as projected.

[woo me with science]

21. Oh well then!

That settles it, doesn't it?

[lunatica]

22. It's amazing how word of mouth works so well

It's been working effectively for centuries and centuries.

[treestar]

28. Find one of the 10% who can read.

[zulchzulu]

39. Even US military experts find the leaked documents are mostly bullshit anyway

Aside from the fact that the Taliban are for the most part illiterate and couldn't even read the leaked documents, it is apparent by many military experts and officials that the leaked documents are bullshit anyway...

A retired senior American officer said ground-level reports were considered to be a mixture of "rumours, bullshit and second-hand information" and were weeded out as they passed up the chain of command. "As someone who had to sift through thousands of these reports, I can say that the chances of finding any real information are pretty slim," said the officer, who has years of experience in the region.

If anything, the jumble of allegations highlights the perils of collecting accurate intelligence in a complex arena where all sides have an interest in distorting the truth.

"The fog of war is particularly dense in Afghanistan," said Michael Semple, a former deputy head of the EU mission there. "A barrage of false information is being passed off as intelligence and anyone who wants to operate there needs to be able to sift through it. The opportunities to be misled are innumerable."

(snip)

One report from 2006 notes that an informant "divulges information for monetary remuneration and likely fabricated or exaggerated the above report for just that reason".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/25/pakistan-isi-accused-taliban-afghanistan

So believe the Pentagon trying to cover their ass or those uninformed who think that the leaked documents somehow are going to make a very badly run war even worse. Or believe that the fog of war and its deceptions are being repeated by the usual sockpuppets.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

40. I think they only need one person who is literate to do the job....(nt)