PDA

View Full Version : An inside look at the CIA in Afghanistan


ndebord
December 30th, 2005, 10:51 AM
If you have not read it yet, then JAWBREAKER, by Gary Berntsen, should be on your must read list. An inside look at what the CIA did in Afghanistan after 9/11, their mistakes, their victories, along with more about how the Army mucked up Tora Bora and the hunt for Bin Laden.

Judy G. Russell
December 30th, 2005, 10:21 PM
I don't wanna read how the hunt for bin Laden was mucked up. It already makes me so angry I can't see straight to think that he hasn't been caught. I don't wanna know the details.

RayB (France)
December 31st, 2005, 03:16 AM
I don't wanna read how the hunt for bin Laden was mucked up. It already makes me so angry I can't see straight to think that he hasn't been caught. I don't wanna know the details.

Temper, temper, young lady! If/when he is caught, the only thing in the world that will change will be his address.

lensue
December 31st, 2005, 07:09 AM
>I don't wanna read how the hunt for bin Laden was mucked up<

Judy, the author was interviewed on the Today Show--I guess he's making the TV show rounds. He said that he called in for rangers but the bureacracy turned him down saying there would be too many casualties--he's convinced that he could have snared bin Laden at that time. Regards, Len

ndebord
January 1st, 2006, 01:55 AM
>I don't wanna read how the hunt for bin Laden was mucked up<

Judy, the author was interviewed on the Today Show--I guess he's making the TV show rounds. He said that he called in for rangers but the bureacracy turned him down saying there would be too many casualties--he's convinced that he could have snared bin Laden at that time. Regards, Len

Len,


And the contrarian argument goes like this. The Rangers were not acclimated to high terrain and the only high altitude force available was the 10th Mtn, which was not used. The 10th was the outfit that later got bloodied at Shahikot in Operation Anaconda, fighting at a similar altitude.

As I look at maps of the area, I'm struck by how close it is to the now famous Khyber Passes where the Brits and Indians lost 16,000 troops in 1842.

lensue
January 1st, 2006, 09:55 AM
>The Rangers were not acclimated to high terrain and the only high altitude force available was the 10th Mtn, which was not used<

Nick, thanks, very interesting and what tough calls are always required. I of course have no answers but it could be a matter of how many lives is it worth to capture bin Laden--at this point I guess capturing him wouldn't really help our terror situation that much except in the area of morale. Regards, Len

ndebord
January 1st, 2006, 11:13 AM
>The Rangers were not acclimated to high terrain and the only high altitude force available was the 10th Mtn, which was not used<

Nick, thanks, very interesting and what tough calls are always required. I of course have no answers but it could be a matter of how many lives is it worth to capture bin Laden--at this point I guess capturing him wouldn't really help our terror situation that much except in the area of morale. Regards, Len

Len,

Well the gossip about Anaconda was that the Australian SAS were there and doing recon and told the Americans that they were walking/flying into a trap. The slander is their supposed allegation that American recons were just not up to the job (literarlly, as they alleged they were all pumped up on steroids and couldn't spend the week or two or more in the field that a proper recon required). The Americans didn't listen and I recall some actual combat reportage about one American unit that handled itself well because it took its tubes with it. Lots of the 10th dumped excess weight because of the altitude and didn't have mortars to fight back against the entrenched enemy up in the hills surrounding the LZ. The 10th was a cherry outfit to my mind (at that point in time. The Brits (SAS and Royal Marines) were better.

Judy G. Russell
January 1st, 2006, 10:30 PM
Any address that isn't six feet under is not what I have in mind...

Judy G. Russell
January 1st, 2006, 10:31 PM
I somehow doubt it would have cost more American lives than this foolish venture into Iraq, regardless of the conditions.

lensue
January 1st, 2006, 11:58 PM
>I somehow doubt it would have cost more American lives than this foolish venture into Iraq, regardless of the conditions.<

Judy, I think I heard him say to the Today Show interviewer he was looking for 800 rangers but I may have that wrong--I certainly am in no position to know if with those rangers he could have gotten bin Laden. Regards, Len

Judy G. Russell
January 2nd, 2006, 11:50 AM
I just wish we'd really really tried to get him. It offends me, right down to the very core of my being, that we didn't get him. If ever there was somebody who needs to face American justice...

lensue
January 2nd, 2006, 12:25 PM
>I just wish we'd really really tried to get him<

Judy, me too--still getting him probably wouldn't stop the dilemma our world faces with all the terrorism scares--it's a very unfortunate situation. We'll be heading down for a few weeks in the Florida sun and it's so sad to think about airplane travel now with all the need for security. Regards, Len

Judy G. Russell
January 2nd, 2006, 09:41 PM
The airplane security stuff doesn't bother me at all. As I once told a security guard at Heathrow, I'd much rather have my baggage searched than spend eternity on a hillside in Lockerbie... (or at Ground Zero... or a field in Pennsylvania... or the Pentagon...).

lensue
January 3rd, 2006, 11:18 AM
>The airplane security stuff doesn't bother me at all<

Well the delays and inconveniences are a bother for me but I think they're necessary. Regards, Len

ndebord
January 3rd, 2006, 11:13 PM
>I somehow doubt it would have cost more American lives than this foolish venture into Iraq, regardless of the conditions.<

Judy, I think I heard him say to the Today Show interviewer he was looking for 800 rangers but I may have that wrong--I certainly am in no position to know if with those rangers he could have gotten bin Laden. Regards, Len

Len,

That is exactly where the debate gets interesting. Outside of the U.S. sources have more to say on that combat and those sources are Brits, not CIA. The commonwealth was there and had little good to say about the American efforts.

Those 800 rangers were not conditioned to fight at 10,000 feet, which is what I believe the altitude was there. I think that CENTCOM, trying to run the war like LBJ did instead of the White House, used their war room in FL, were not up to the task. It could have been handled better.

But then IF you wanted to prosecute a war indefinitely with expansion outside your territorial borders, would you really want to catch the bogeyman, or rather leave him free to help hype up your decisions? (I may be cynical and am probably quite out of line here, but I can't help but think of Orwell).

Judy G. Russell
January 4th, 2006, 10:27 AM
Realistically, Newark has always had delays so I haven't noticed much difference!

lensue
January 4th, 2006, 10:46 AM
>Newark has always had delays so I haven't noticed much difference!<

Judy, maybe I'll get lucky on Sunday when we head down to Ft. Lauderdale! Regards, Len [g]

Judy G. Russell
January 4th, 2006, 01:34 PM
Anybody who's heading south in January is lucky anyway!