Hey, what could possibly go wrong?
This is the strategy:
“We look at detainees who have influence over other insurgents —
individuals whose release could have a calming effect in an entire
area,” one U.S. official said. “In those cases, the benefits of release
could outweigh the reasons for keeping him detained.”
"When the
insurgency appears to be gathering steam in certain provinces, for
instance, prisoners have been released to alleviate mounting tension."
So, just to rephrase. An area that is increasingly "tense" and bubbling over with "insurgent" activity (of no particular origin, and related to no particular ideology) requires the release of the most extreme "insurgents" back into said tense area to "alleviate mounting tensions".
I'm sure it's working out very well.
RELATED:
Another "lone wolf" attack in Afghanistan.
Some information from the British press that might not be widely seen in America:
"The US-led coalition routinely reports each time an American or other foreign
soldier is killed by an Afghan in uniform, but the military is
under-reporting the number of overall attacks. The Associated Press reported
earlier this month that the coalition does not report attacks in which the
Afghan wounds – or misses – his US or allied target. It also doesn't report
the wounding of troops who were attacked alongside those who were killed"
"US officials say that in most cases the Afghans who turn their guns on their
allies are motivated not by sympathy for the Taliban or on orders from
insurgents, but rather act as a result of personal grievances against the
coalition. "
