BUY THE BOOK AT AMAZON!
"This explosive book is a long-needed answer to court histories that continue to obscure key facts about our backstage war with Moscow. Must-reading for serious students of security issues and Cold War deceptions, both foreign and domestic."
-- M. Stanton Evans, author of Stalin's Secret Agents and Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America's Enemies
"[West] only claims `to connect the dots,' which is a very modest description of the huge and brilliant work she has obviously done. ... It is not simply a good book about history. It is one of those books which makes history."
-- Vladimir Bukovsky, author of To Build a Castle and co-founder of the Soviet dissident movement, and Pavel Stroilov, author of Behind the Desert Storm.
"Every once in a while, something happens that turns a whole structure of preconceived ideas upside down, shattering tales and narratives long taken for granted, destroying prejudice, clearing space for new understanding to grow. Diana West's latest book, American Betrayal, is such an event."
-- Henrik Raeder Clausen, Europe News
"No book has ever frightened me as much as American Betrayal. ... It all adds up to a story so disturbing that it has changed my attitude to almost everything I think about how the world actually is."
-- Steven Kates, Quadrant
“What Diana West has done is to dynamite her way through several miles of bedrock. On the other side of the tunnel there is a vista of a new past. Of course folks are baffled. Few people have the capacity to take this in. Her book is among the most well documented I have ever read. It is written in an unusual style viewed from the perspective of the historian—but it probably couldn’t have been done any other way.”
-- Lars Hedegaard, historian, editor, Dispatch International
"Diana West's new book rewrites WWII and Cold War history not by disclosing secrets, but by illuminating facts that have been hidden in plain sight for decades. Furthermore, she integrates intelligence and political history in ways never done before."
-- Jeffrey Norwitz, former professor of counterterrorism, Naval War College
Do not be dissuaded by the controversy that has erupted around this book which, if you insist on complete accuracy, would be characterized as a disinformation campaign.
-- Jed Babbin, The American Spectator
Enlightening. I give American Betrayal five stars only because it is not possible to give it six."
-- John Dietrich, formerly of the Defense Intelligence Agency and author of The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy.
"Diana West masterfully reminds us of what history is for: to suggest action for the present. She paints for us the broad picture of our own long record of failing to recognize bullies and villains. She shows how American denial today reflects a pattern that held strongly in the period of the Soviet Union. She is the Michelangelo of Denial.”
-- Amity Shlaes, author of Coolidge and The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression
If you're looking for something to read, this is the most dazzling, mind-warping book I have read in a long time. It has been criticized by the folks at Front Page, but they don't quite get what Ms. West has set out to do and accomplished. I have a whole library of books on communism, but -- "Witness" excepted -- this may be the best.
-- Jack Cashill, author of Deconstructing Obama: The Lives, Loves and Letters of America's First Postmodern President and First Strike: TWA Flight 800 and the Attack on America
American Betrayal is a monumental achievement. Brilliant and important.
-- Monica Crowley, Fox News analyst, radio host and author of What the Bleep Just Happened: The Happy Warriors Guide to the Great American Comeback
"If you haven't read Diana West's "American Betrayal" yet, you're missing out on a terrific, real-life thriller."
-- Brad Thor, author of the New York Times bestsellers Hidden Order, Black List and The Last Patriot.
Sunday, September 25, 2011 4:48 AM
Five British soldiers shot and killed by a 'rogue' Afghan policeman in Helmand province in November 2009. In all, at least
37 40 Western troops have been killed by Afghan "allies" in the past 22 months.
London Telegraph: "Commanders ignored warnings that British troops were at risk from attack by Afghan allies: carry a loaded pistol whenever working alongside them, secret Nato report warned"
The report, ordered after a rogue Afghan policeman shot dead five British servicemen, recommended that British troops should be armed with 9mm pistols at all times - even when sleeping - because of the high risk of being attacked.
It also called for British soldiers to have separate sleeping and living quarters from Afghan troops, and for all British "administrative areas" to be covered by armed sentries, such were the fears of further incidents.
But the rulings were never implemented amid fears they would lead to a breakdown in trust between members of the Afghan security forces and the British troops who train them and fight alongside them.
And "trust" is the holy grail of the West in Afghanistan. (Tried it in Pakistan, too.)
Only eight months after the deaths of the five servicemen, three more British troops were killed when a member of the Afghan army ran amok in a rocket and machine gun attack at a patrol base in central Helmand.
Subsequent attacks by rogue Afghan soldiers and police have led to the deaths of 15 further members of Nato's International Security and Assistance Force (ISAF), including American and Spanish servicemen.
The Telegraph count is way short.
Fifteen Between 11 and 16 Americans were killed by Afghan "allies" in April 2011 alone. (The high number includes five "foreign" troops killed and not further identified.) Using this timeline from Reuters (April 2011) plus this report about two more American murders and this report about one more British murder (and possibly that of a second Western soldier), both from July 2011, the total comes to at least 37 40 Western troops and security contractors killed by Afghan "allies" in the past 22 months.
In November 2009, a group of British soldiers were relaxing after a patrol at a check point known as Blue 25 when an Afghan policeman known as Gulbuddin, who was working alongside them, opened fire at close range.
Three members of the Grenadier Guards and two Royal Military Policemen were killed, and a further six soldiers were injured. All were unarmed and none were wearing body armour.
Wearing body armor, by the way, is believed to be offensive to Afghans.
Less than two weeks after the attack, a "Nato Secret" post-incident report was circulated to commanders recommending the extra arming of British troops.
In the second incident, in July 2010, three members of the 1st battalion of the Royal Gurkha Rifles were killed when a member of the Afghan Army ran amok at a base known as Patrol Base Three in the Nahr-e-Seraj area of central Helmand.
Talib Hussein, an Afghan soldier working alongside the Gurkhas, shot dead Major Josh James Bowman while he slept.
He then fired a rocket propelled grenade into the company operation's room killing Lieutenant Neal Turkington, 26 and Corporal Arjun Purja Pun, a senior Nepalese Gurkha soldier.
The MoD maintains that even if the Gurkhas had been issued with pistols, their deaths would not have been prevented.
However, at an inquest earlier this year, Lieutenant Colonel Roly Walker, who was the Commanding Officer of the Grenadier Guards in November 2009, said that following the five deaths at Blue 25 he had ordered that all of his soldiers working alongside the Afghan security forces should be armed at all times as a deterrent against future attacks.
This newspaper has also learnt that some British commanders have independently ordered that soldiers due to take over the mentoring of Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) troops should be trained in pistol "close quarter battle" techniques by members of the special forces in case they are attacked.
Troops are being tested in a variety of scenarios in which they have to respond to surprise attacks by members of the Afghan army and police within the confines of a secure compound.
Besides the victims from Nato countries, soldiers and police in the Afghan security forces have also been killed in attacks by rogue colleagues.
Although the Taliban have claimed that such assaults are part of a carefully orchestrated plan, there is no hard evidence to suggest high levels of inflitration by insurgents, and the attacks are thought largely to have been the work of individuals acting alone.
Despite the deaths, commanders maintain that there has been no breakdown in trust between British and Afghan troops. ...
And "trust" is all that counts. As Brig. Gen. Steven Kwast so inimitably put it in 2009, "Victory in this conflict is about winning the hearts and minds of the Afghan people and engendering their trust. When the Afghan people trust us and believe us ... we will win this overnight."
An MoD spokesman said the training of Afghan security forces would never be completely “free of risk”.
He added: “Overly aggressive measures, like making all service personnel deploy with loaded side arms, are likely to create threats where there were previously none.
“Local commanders have to find a balance between effective internal security and a strong relationship with their Afghan counterparts which can only be built on trust.”
In COIN we trust.