Search This Blog

Friday, August 24, 2012

'Insider Killings' in Afghanistan

This post has been moved. It can be viewed HERE.


  1. I now find myself fascinated to read this volume! Many thanks for a once again eye-opening blog post.

  2. Thanks again Mark for your insightful analysis. This post is distinctly prophetic given the most recent 'green on blue' shootings in Afghanistan which has tragically taken the lives of three more young Australians.

    And in the debate following this latest incident not one of those commentating about it have grasped the point - in fact you are, to my knowledge the only informed commentator who has. I suspect that as far as our politicians and leaders are concerned, none seem to understand, or even want to understand less they too are labelled 'Islamophobes'!

    Your point about the colonial Dutch experience in their endless campaign to 'pacify' Aceh is well made. Snouck Hurgronje was one of the most astute observers of Islam in the 20th century. Unfortunately his observations are yet another lesson of history that has been lost on the current generation.


  3. Exactly Mark - I've heard no one provide a link from any of the "rouges" to the Taliban. Also no evidence of an insult/abuse of the man causing an emotional response. So the underlying this is an Islam Country seems to be the reason

    So Mark what should be done? All I can understand is Leave. Or continue the training - our military seem to think the ANA is not ready yet!

  4. This is utter nonsense. This is exactly what the ISI wants us to believe. I just returned from serving two years there, and the Afghans don't want this killing nor do they consider it Islamic. They recognize it for what it is... A subversive war by Pakistan on Afghanistan and the west.

    1. Either way, it's all about deceit and fooling the "infidel." I don't doubt that Pakistan has many jihad supporters right up to the highest levels in their military. The Afghanis have the same problem -obviously. Deceit is the name of the game. One never knows what an indoctrinated Muslim will do next - Nidal Hasan is one example.


    3. "Either way, it's all about deceit and fooling the "infidel."

      You blithely accept the probable taqiyya of a poster named "Timur Khan"??

      There is none so blind as he who refuses to see.

  5. There are peace loving Muslims in Afghanistan, Somalia, Nigeria, Iran, Egypt and many other Islamic countries in the world, so why are all these places so awful?

    Is Islam the solution or the problem?

    Obviously the peace loving Muslims are either not good enough, or there are not enough of them to stop those who commit terrorist attacks in the name of Islam.

    Clearly these attacks against our soldiers are ideologically driven. One does not have to be part of the Taliban to want Sharia.

    Mark's article is very important.

  6. You need a print friendly version of this Mark.

  7. Mark
    I am new to your blog but even the little I have seen I find so relentlessly negative in it’s anti-Islam bias.

    On the topic of the Acehnese “defections” for example, you say “the Dutch regarded this as an odious betrayal” but then go on to adopt the Dutch vilification of the fighters actions as “deceit and betrayal”. You also refer to the “Acehnese insurgency”.

    An insurgent is “a person who revolts against civil authority or an established government” ( and is now most often used in references to Iraq.

    The Aceh conflict was between the Sultanate of Aceh and the Netherlands. These people were fighting against an outside colonial force seeking to impose its rule. Is not the use of such a value laden term both derogatory and inappropriate?

  8. "the successful pacification of Aceh" ie imperialist European foreigners killed enough of the native population to force them into submission.

  9. Dear 'Anonymous'.

    Your own bias is showing.

    The Acehnese were proud to describe their switching sides as "deceit". They rejoiced to have outwitted the Dutch through their deceit and celebrated it in their poetry, considering such acts a moral virtue. Are you suggesting that the Acehnese 'vilified' themselves by calling their own actions deceit?

    You also show your bias by carefully selecting a definition of "insurgent" which suits your intent to vilify me. Miriam-Webster's is a poor definition. Truer is the Oxford Dictionary: "insurgent: a person fighting against a government or invading force".
    The fact is that the term 'insurgent' need not have any negative moral judgement attached to it. (The term comes from a Latin word meaning 'rise up'.) As an example of a morally neutral reading see the Wikipedia article on the Prague uprising ( which refers to the Czechs who rose up against the German occupation as 'insurgents': "The insurgents attacked any Germans ..." This use of 'insurgent' is not derogatory of the Czechs, it is not value-ladern, and it is not inappropriate. It is neutral and accurate. Countless other examples can be found in books, journals and newspapers.

    Also you display ignorance when you assert that the population was forced into submission by mass slaughter. Yes there was slaughter. But the military policy which eventually suppressed the anti-colonial jihadi insurgency against Dutch aggression had as one its key principles the avoidance of attacks against the native population. Indeed slaughter of native population was one of the factors which prolonged the war, rather than hastening its conclusion: it had the effect of inciting the courageous Acehnese uprising to more determined feats of resistance. The Acehnese were not so easily cowed.

    You are seeking offense, and finding it as your bias incites you to do so.


Comments are moderated. Avoid profanities or foul language. Stay on topic. Avoid ad hominem attacks. Posts which violate these principles or are deemed offensive in any way will be deleted.