NATO: Troops can target Afghan drug operations

phr

Bluelighter
Joined
May 25, 2004
Messages
36,678
Location
St. Charles, IL
NATO: Troops can target Afghan drug operations
Paul Ames
The AP
10.10.08



BUDAPEST, Hungary (AP) — NATO defense ministers Friday authorized their troops in Afghanistan to attack drug barons blamed for pumping up to $100 million a year into the coffers of resurgent Taliban fighters.

"With regard to counter-narcotics ... ISAF can act in concert with the Afghans against facilities and facilitators supporting the insurgency," said NATO spokesman James Appathurai, referring to the NATO force.

The United States had been pushing for NATO's 50,000 troops to take on a counter-narcotics role to hit back at the Taliban, whose increasing attacks have cast doubt on the prospects of a Western military victory in Afghanistan.

However, Germany, Spain and others were wary and their doubts led to NATO imposing conditions on the anti-drug mandate for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force.

Troops will only be able to act against drug facilities if authorized by their own governments; only drug producers deemed to be supporting the insurgency will be targeted; and the operation must be designed to be temporary — lasting only until the Afghan security forces are deemed able to take on the task.

NATO defense ministers will review the success of the mission when they next meet February in Poland. Despite the limitations, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates welcomed the NATO move.

"Secretary Gates is extremely pleased that, after two days of thoughtful discussion, NATO has decided to allow ISAF forces to take on the drug traffickers who are fueling the insurgency, destabilizing Afghanistan and killing our troops," said Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell.

Germany and Spain agreed to the anti-drug mission after an appeal for help from Afghanistan's defense minister.

"We've asked NATO to please support us, support our effort in destroying the labs and also the interdiction of the drugs and the chemical precursors that are coming from outside the country for making heroin," Gen. Abdul Rahim Wardak told reporters after meeting his NATO counterparts Thursday.

Afghanistan supplies 90 percent of the world's heroin, a trade worth billions of dollars.

Until now, responsibility for dealing with the problem has lain with the Afghan police, but NATO commanders believe the fledgling force cannot cope with the problem. They say the time has come for NATO to move against the drug barons.

Some allies were concerned that a counter-narcotics campaign could spark a backlash against their troops, even if, as NATO commanders insist, the campaign will not target farmers who depend on growing opium poppies for a living.

They also feared that widening the mission could over-stretch the hard-pressed troops and undermine NATO's long-term goal of handing more responsibility to Afghan forces.

NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer on Thursday stressed the need for action.

"Our guys are killed by the weapons bought by the Taliban, financed by drugs money," de Hoop Scheffer said.

Associated Press writers Barbara Schaeder, Pablo Gorondi and Lolita C. Baldor contributed to this story


Link!
 
For some reason I don't see much coming from this. They tried to word it as cautiously as possible, implying that they know that if they were going to go after narcotics head on, the clusterfuck over there will greatly increase in magnitude.
Also, it doesn't help that some of the NATO member countries are against this measure and won't have anything to do with drug interdiction.
 
Here is nifty map of production sites from the AP article of the same title:

_44960379_exsum_afghan3_466.gif



I've read that over the past few years production has been at more than twice of what global demand is at.......... that is just amazing. shit ton of smack laying around afghan coutryside :)
 
...Or they could just legalize drugs, thus cutting off one of the largest sources of income to terrorists around the world, without the use of violence. But i guess they'd rather murder poor Afghans who have no other means to make any kind of money, and who are producing opium to simply stay alive.
 
^QFT

Wake up Sheeple !

We are being played from both sides. The result is unimaginable sums of money, all unacountable, all being used to finance the evil agenda that is the New World Order.
 
Why do they keep saying opium production is supporting the Taliban? Hasn't the Taliban always been AGAINST opium? I mean, before the Coalition went in in 2001, Opium production was at an all time low because of Taliban restrictions. It goes against their beliefs.

So why does the media keep saying this money is supporting the Taliban? Or, do they mean that certain drug-lords are supporting the Taliban with money they make from the drugs?
 
When I was in helmand province, as boots on the ground, we only shot at opium people if they shot at us first.

otherwise...lets say we enjoyed some very nice tea and chased a few dragons.

winning hearts and minds and all..

as for 6p7...the taliban where against it when they where in power...but when they need money to fight a war...not quite so against it.
 
sixpartseven said:
Why do they keep saying opium production is supporting the Taliban? Hasn't the Taliban always been AGAINST opium? I mean, before the Coalition went in in 2001, Opium production was at an all time low because of Taliban restrictions. It goes against their beliefs.

So why does the media keep saying this money is supporting the Taliban? Or, do they mean that certain drug-lords are supporting the Taliban with money they make from the drugs?
The Taliban tax it and afaik, have always taxed it. They may be against it in rhetoric, but that's just on the surface. As for it "disappearing" when they were in charge, that didn't happen. They just stockpiled it to decrease the visible supply and therefore increase the price and their tax revenue.
 
Top