The problem that you point out is basically a deep structural one within the US military. I’m not calling SF dudes troglodytes, but most didn’t join to develop a deeper appreciation of Rumi. So you will always have to reign in those personal/behavioral aspects (whether inborn or cultivated) that come with being a member of a very small, very militaristic culture. People can spin it all they like, but a warrior ethos is still a warrior ethos. This issue of channeling aggressiveness can also be found in law enforcement and will never eradicate. The only way to stop it would be to set up a psychological litmus test that discourages alpha males from joining the SF. Of course then you end up with a pretty poor SF. One of those ugly facts of life. Call it the sheepdog dilemma, and I think the presence of lots of “contractors”, to use the Orwellian term, exacerbates the problem. Wiser heads than myself have probably gone over and over about this, so I won’t belabor the point. You must build the house with the tools you are given, correct? And listening to McChrystal talk about the populace is kind of sweet and quaint.

As far as bribes go, well it proves nobody has learned anything. Oh there is lot’s of talk about doing away with the warlords. But it seems that the focus is on individuals, not on the system as a whole. This time, I’m sure we’ve learned the error of our ways and will bribe far more effectively. I’m just wandering how this realpolitik fits into our earlier high-flying claims to remake the country? Where do all those little girls who want to go to school fit into this? At least you and others have made the point that the Shinwaris aren’t paragons of enlightenment vis-a-vis gender. And as far as Afghan democracy goes, it will be interesting to see how many times that problematic phrase shows up in future speeches to the American electorate. Actually would make for a good drinking game, but I suspect unless you use old clips everybody might remain sober. And finally, if throwing money at a problem helps how come I haven’t heard of a rash of recently born Pakistani babies named Dick Lugar or John Kerry?

My understanding of how extended families work would indicate that most would take the pragmatic route and try to get a foot in both camps. If you have seven sons, One Taliban, one ISAF terp, one studying at the mosque, four on the farm seems like a good strategy. If not sons, then cousins/nephews.

That obviously depends a great deal on the individual. The point I’m making here is that viewing even the low-level insurgents only in terms of money probably misses a great deal of the sociological backstory behind why they choose a given insurgent group over other means as an income source.

On the note of infiltrators, what about “terps”? I’ve had some interesting discussions with young Afghan teens that have suprisingly good English and some rather interesting views of ISAF. After a little while though, they say, “How can I become an interpreter for the Americans?” Maybe they just want a good paying job, but maybe in the past 8 years, the insurgents have realized the value of teaching some promising young men English. Get one into a job with ISAF and you’ve got some pretty good intel!

Is nobody worrying about that?

There’s obviously more to ponder in that concept, but I think it’s important to keep in mind even while we look above at how unreliable the whole process has been and continues to be. It is probably a bad idea in the first place.