David Killcullen - Analysis - Radio 4

#1
In a frank and outspoken interview, David Kilcullen, who has just become policy advisor to US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, outlines his view of the conflict in Iraq and the future of the struggle with militant jihadism.

You can listen to the programme here - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/analysis/7072942.stm

Interesting programme. Frank Gardner - the interviewer - isn't exactly Jeremy Paxman and lets him off some pretty big hooks but Kilcullen comes across very well, as you'd expect.

Charlie
 
#2
Good find, C_C, thanks.
 
#3
I actually bumped into Kilcullen in Iraq a good while back. All I knew was that I was chatting to a random Aussie reservist academic who kept on gabbering on about COIN theory. Embarassingly my response was "erm, yeah, cheers, thanks for that." :oops:

No great suprise to an avid reader of ARRSE but he seemed pretty certain that some of us are bound to be on a plane to Pakistan in the next year or two...

The big hook that Frank Gardner let him off was ( I'm paraphrasing ) "Does the West have the political will to see your "Long War" through?".

Kilcullen was also pretty glib about the shiny new model of training the local Army / Police to do your fighting for you, as soon as possible. Well, I don't think its new or shiny - he avoided the question of how to actually make it work, and what "accepting that they'll conduct the fight their way, which you or I may not agree with" actually means...

Rather like the recent "Just War" book ( ISTR Guthrie is a co-author? ) he was pious but vague at times. That said, still a really interesting programme. We don't seem to be short of strategic level comment / analysis ( all the "Clash of Civilisations" stuff ) or reporting at the tactical level but Kilcullen is rare in looking at TWoT ( awful name as he admits ) at a strategic level but from an operational background.

How many experts' scope includes company level COIN ( http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/pdf/kilcullen_28_articles.pdf ) and advising the US SoS (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2007/01/a-framework-for-thinking-about/) ?

Top bloke.

Charlie
 
#4
Charlie_Cong:

I actually bumped into Kilcullen in Iraq a good while back. All I knew was that I was chatting to a random Aussie reservist academic who kept on gabbering on about COIN theory. Embarassingly my response was "erm, yeah, cheers, thanks for that."
No need to be embarrassed in the least. First impressions and all that. Yours was quite the correct response. Kilcullen is a COIN operated theory machine. His ability to 'gabber' terror talk morning noon and night is why he is hired. He is in fact just a gushing geyser convinced of his own gush.

If there were no 'War on Terror' he'd just as enthusiastically flog diet tea on the shopping channel or flats in Bristol to Cherie Blair.
By the way was he constantly on his mobile or fidgeting away on a laptop or just playing with a game boy when he was filling you in with the lowdown?
I ask because I fear there is a profound imaturity in Kilcullen.

Everthing he says could just as well be as untrue as it might also be true.
Yet either way none of it would make any difference at all.
He is a bought and paid for 'terror mouth' a particular kind of song bird whose song neo cons find useful to help persuade the public of the wisdom of the path they intend to take anyway. Better still he is a pied piper of terror. He lives in a world invented by George Lucas rather than the one invented by god almighty. And the correct responce is either your first one or one big yawn.

Serious people like Cheney or 'Snarler' as I prefer to call him probably couldn't put up with him for more than five minutes in the veeps office. It'd give him ear ache.
 
#5
Utter, utter BS.

I'd like to see you submit a Doctorate on SAS styled warfare, and become one of the leading tactians in the 21st century; cnutfuck.
 
#6
You really are something SLRboy. You denegrate anyone who doesn't hold Your point of view, despite Your not ever having served.
 
#7
In-Limbo said:
Utter, utter BS.

I'd like to see you submit a Doctorate on SAS styled warfare, and become one of the leading tactians in the 21st century; cnutfuck.

Of course I could not submit a doctorate on SAS style warfare or become a 'leading tactician' in the 21st century. I neither have the time nor am I capable of reaching level five in Grand Theft Iraq Islamofascist Tomb Raider or whatever dumb fool game these clowns are playing.

As war is payed for from the taxes of all of us war is too important to be just left to the military. The military life, especially at the moment is an intense one. This leads to an over intensity of focus. The military through no fault of its own is now co existing in a parallel universe to many of the rest of us.
The military is obsessed with developing and deploying means to deal with 'international terrorism.'
The civvy wakes each morning and goes about his business completly untroubled by a phenomena for which there is barely any evidence.

This here cnut**** along with many others are wondering why so much money is being wasted on over long, over expensive military campaigns that rather than resolve the original problem breed more so called terrorism that necessitates more of the same.

As a business model these wars are utter crap. But then some (like sven) haven't yet woken up to the idea that the terrorism malarky has only been dreamed up to gull the unsuspecting into supporting wars that have been launched for entirely other reasons than those stated.
 
#8
I see you're still spouting the same old meaningless drivel kurtz. Nothing like banging the same old drum endlessly to delude and convince oneself that one is right, is there? Did you learn that from your friends in the Whitehouse?
 
#9
whitecity said:
I see you're still spouting the same old meaningless drivel kurtz. Nothing like banging the same old drum endlessly to delude and convince oneself that one is right, is there? Did you learn that from your friends in the Whitehouse?
If I had friends in the Whitehouse I would be keeping schtum about how the shrill song of the Australian Terror Mouth bird is used to drown out the grinding noise of exploratory drill bits in action - wouldn't I?

From the Asia Times Oct 6. 2001.

The oil behind Bush and Son's campaigns
By Ranjit Devraj

NEW DELHI - Just as the Gulf War in 1991 was all about oil, the new conflict in South and Central Asia is no less about access to the region's abundant petroleum resources, according to Indian analysts.

"US influence and military presence in Afghanistan and the Central Asian states, not unlike that over the oil-rich Gulf states, would be a major strategic gain," said V R Raghavan, a strategic analyst and former general in the Indian army. Raghavan believes that the prospect of a western military presence in a region extending from Turkey to Tajikistan could not have escaped strategists who are now readying a military campaign aimed at changing the political order in Afghanistan, accused by the United States of harboring Osama bin Laden.

Where the "great game" in Afghanistan was once about czars and commissars seeking access to the warm water ports of the Persian Gulf, today it is about laying oil and gas pipelines to the untapped petroleum reserves of Central Asia. According to testimony before the US House of Representatives in March 1999 by the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan together have 15 billion barrels of proven oil reserves. The same countries also have proven gas deposits totaling not less than nine trillion cubic meters. Another study by the Institute for Afghan Studies placed the total worth of oil and gas reserves in the Central Asian republics at around US$3 trillion at last year's prices.

Not only can Afghanistan play a role in hosting pipelines connecting Central Asia to international markets, but the country itself has significant oil and gas deposits. During the Soviets' decade-long occupation of Afghanistan, Moscow estimated Afghanistan's proven and probable natural gas reserves at around five trillion cubic feet and production reached 275 million cubic feet per day in the mid-1970s. But sabotage by anti-Soviet mujahideen (freedom fighters) and by rival groups in the civil war that followed Soviet withdrawal in 1989 virtually closed down gas production and ended deals for the supply of gas to several European countries.

Major Afghan natural gas fields awaiting exploitation include Jorqaduq, Khowaja, Gogerdak, and Yatimtaq, all of which are located within 9 kilometers of the town of Sheberghan in northrern Jowzjan province.

Natural gas production and distribution under Afghanistan's Taliban rulers is the responsibility of the Afghan Gas Enterprise which, in 1999, began repair of a pipeline to Mazar-i-Sharif city. Afghanistan's proven and probable oil and condensate reserves were placed at 95 million barrels by the Soviets. So far, attempts to exploit Afghanistan's petroleum reserves or take advantage of its unique geographical location as a crossroads to markets in Europe and South Asia have been thwarted by the continuing civil strife.
http://www.atimes.com/global-econ/CJ06Dj01.html
 
#11
This bloke was my Bn's OPSO in East Timor in '99, and was the bloke that had to talk with the TNI after one of our Coy's got into a gunfight with them near the border. He is good with the gab and had the Indos believing they were in the wrong, and on the wrong side of the border. How far he has come eh? From a MAJ to Rice's man.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top