Posted on Dec 2, 2015
Was DOD money used to pay the Taliban not to attack convoys?
3.54K
16
14
1
1
0
I just came across this article regarding the firing of the Rear Admiral who was put in place to weed out the flow of Pentagon funds to the Taliban. Did we use tax dollars to pay off the Taliban?
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/6708:why-did-petraeus-fire-the-auditor-charged-with-stopping-flow-of-pentagon-funds-to-taliban
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/6708:why-did-petraeus-fire-the-auditor-charged-with-stopping-flow-of-pentagon-funds-to-taliban
Posted in these groups: 
Taliban
Corruption
Taliban Corruption
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 5
6
6
0
The story would have the reader reach a conclusion that all Afghan leaders are Taliban. What is more accurate is that all Afghan leaders operate in shades of gray.
The actual back story is that Petraeus was trying to replicate the Anbar Awakening in Afghanistan. The premise was that by making regular payments to specific Afghan warlords, you could leverage their militias and even bring them to bear on the Taliban. Lots of those warlords had some shady history - you couldn't really survive the past couple of decades out of obscurity without making some unsavory friends - and many had objections to financing these kinds of people. Right or wrong, that was the notion. It might have even worked if enough pressure shifted to heretofore "safe" Taliban held territory to force them to displace or fight.
But we will never know, because Petraeus was sent to head the CIA before real advances could be made on this initiative.
The actual back story is that Petraeus was trying to replicate the Anbar Awakening in Afghanistan. The premise was that by making regular payments to specific Afghan warlords, you could leverage their militias and even bring them to bear on the Taliban. Lots of those warlords had some shady history - you couldn't really survive the past couple of decades out of obscurity without making some unsavory friends - and many had objections to financing these kinds of people. Right or wrong, that was the notion. It might have even worked if enough pressure shifted to heretofore "safe" Taliban held territory to force them to displace or fight.
But we will never know, because Petraeus was sent to head the CIA before real advances could be made on this initiative.
(6)
(0)
CW2 Joseph Evans
Nailed it.
The more problematic issue isn't so much the Taliban in Afghanistan as it was the Taliban in Pakistan. Much of our shipping moved from ports in the Indian ocean that then moved overland through "Taliban" controlled areas of Pakistan... Paying their "insurance" cut potential costs significantly. And it was also an area we couldn't touch them.
The more problematic issue isn't so much the Taliban in Afghanistan as it was the Taliban in Pakistan. Much of our shipping moved from ports in the Indian ocean that then moved overland through "Taliban" controlled areas of Pakistan... Paying their "insurance" cut potential costs significantly. And it was also an area we couldn't touch them.
(2)
(0)
SSG Carlos Madden
Spot on. 1) our definition of corruption in the US is vastly different than the rest of the world and 2) this is essentially the main idea behind the SOI program
(2)
(0)
SFC William Farrell
Interesting Top. I know very little of this and always find these articles interesting. Thanks.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
1SG (Join to see)
I wonder if they do birthday parties?
Hire a bunch, tell them to wait in a nice open field, and... BRRRT!!
Hire a bunch, tell them to wait in a nice open field, and... BRRRT!!
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
I don't think anyone really wants to know the stats on what was paid, by whom, and to whom, over more than a decade of "hearts and minds".
(1)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
I could tell you stories... it is a very large number. That $400 million quoted in the story is a fraction of the number.
(1)
(0)
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google