HOW DO YOU KNOW WHEN ITS TIME TO LEAVE?
More than 500 suspected Taliban fighters detained by U.S. forces have been released from custody at the urging of Afghan government officials, angering both American troops and some Afghans who oppose the policy on the grounds that many of those released return to the battlefield to kill NATO soldiers and Afghan civilians.
An Afghan official who spoke on condition of anonymity said that President Hamid Karzai's government has personally sought the release of as many as 700 suspected Taliban fighters since July, including some mid-level leaders. "Corruption is not just based on the amount of money that is wasted but wasted lives when Taliban return only to kill more NATO forces and civilians," said the official, who opposes what he considers corruption in the Karzai administration.
The criteria for detention is not based upon a particular affiliation, such as the Taliban, "but rather is an assessment based upon a preponderance of evidence that an individual participated in the conflict as an enemy combatant and, if so, detention is necessary to mitigate the threat posed to the government and people of Afghanistan, the U.S. and its coalition partners," Davis said.
The Detainee Review Board, made up of three U.S. commissioned officers with a rank of major or above, determines when a prisoner is eligible for release and whether a detainee is likely to be rehabilitated.
I GOT JUST ONE QUESTION ...
WHAT WOULD GENGHIS KHAN DO?
In recent days we have heard much complaining from the administration and assorted politicians about how the WikiLeaks disclosures pose a threat to our troops on the ground. By this they primarily mean our soldiers in Afghanistan, which is presently this country's main theater of military operations.
On July 25, 2010, WikiLeaks posted on its website a vast tranche of documents concerning our military activity in Afghanistan. Containing more than 75,000 military logs, it was the largest military leak up to that time. WikiLeaks published these documents under the name of Afghan War Diaries.
Please notice the release date. The documents which now supposedly present such a dire threat to our soldiers were released this past summer. To put it another way, they were made public four and a half months ago.
Now ask yourself: Did we hear anything from the administration -- or, indeed, from our political establishment -- immediately after the release of these documents? Did we hear anything from them on this subject in August or September? Did we hear any complaining in the run up to the elections in October? Did you we anything about it after the elections?
The answer is no. They only began crying foul about ten days ago. Why only ten days ago? Here is a clue: On October 28, WikiLeaks began releasing the infamous State Department cables.
As it happens those cables contained no information that would have direct bearing on the conduct of day-to-day military operations in Afghanistan or in Iraq. But they did contain something else: They revealed information that deeply humiliated and compromised this administration. And it was precisely at that time when they suddenly started to be concerned about the safety our troops. Don't you find this coincidence a little suspicious?
It is, indeed, very suspicious for several reasons. To begin with, their sudden concern for our troops is out of character for the types who run the present administration. After all, many of them have long records of criticism and dislike of the military. This is not surprising, since the military is not particularly partial to their politically correct agendas such as having openly gay men serving in its ranks.
Why -- let us ask again -- are these people showing their concern so late in the game, months after the documents were made public?
The answer is obvious. Their concern for the troops is simply a gambit to divert attention from the information that threatens their own careers. Knowing how much most people in this country care for our armed forces, they want us to get us angry at WikiLeaks under false pretenses. They want us to support their efforts to silence the source that imperils their positions.
If they were sincere in their concern for the troops, they would have protested the moment the Afghan tranche was made public. But they were silent then. They were silent until their own skins were exposed. Only then they began lamenting about the troops. They are using the troops -- the very people about whom they could care less under normal circumstances -- as a cover to save themselves.
The last four and a half months present a classic study in political hypocrisy. The release of the Afghan diaries by WikiLeaks should have been a major blow to this administration.
But let us now ask whether the Afghan dump did indeed pose a direct danger to our troops. The documents it contained covered the period from January 2004 and December 2009. Please keep in mind that their release occurred in July of 2010. At that time even the most recent of the documents would have been more than six months old. The vast majority of the papers were several years old. Because of their being so dated, their value as a source of actionable battlefield intelligence was for all practical purposes zero. For an enemy to be able to take tactical advantage of other side's information, it has to be fresh. Anything which is more than few weeks old is usually not very helpful.
Despite the craze stirred up by the politicians, it would appear that the leaks have caused no direct damage to our troops or those who work with us. In August, for example, a Pentagon spokesman stated that "we have yet to see any harm come to anyone in Afghanistan that we can directly tie to exposure in the WikiLeaks documents." In October Pentagon concluded that the release "did not disclose any sensitive intelligence sources or methods" and that "there has not been a single case of Afghans needing protection or to be moved because of the leak."
This is not to say that Assange walks on water certainly not ... he has his faults and perhaps baggage but we must appreciate the fact that our security at State was a bit lacking. Dragging his sorry ass back here for a trial is absurd ... spend the time and money fixing the security problem rather than trying to save face. The egg has been thrown ... Hillary should wipe her face and get on with her job!
