NATO Launches Huge Afghan Offensive

More Than 5,000 European, Afghan Soldiers Will Go After Militants In Helmand Province

(CBS/AP)  NATO-led troops launched an offensive against Taliban militants Tuesday in a volatile southern Afghan province where hundreds of militant fighters have amassed.

The operation, which will eventually involve 4,500 NATO troops and 1,000 Afghan soldiers, was launched at the request of the Afghan government and will focus on the northern region of Helmand province, NATO's International Security Assistance Force said.

"Our first maneuver elements reached their positions at approximately 5:00 a.m. this morning," said Maj. Gen. Ton van Loon, ISAF's southern commander.

The alliance announced soon after the operation's start that one soldier had been killed.

A statement from NATO's International Security Assistance Force gave no further details about the soldier's death or where it happened.

Dubbed Operation Achilles, the offensive is NATO's largest-ever in the country. But it will involve only half the number of soldiers that fought in a U.S. offensive in the same region just nine months ago, when some 11,000 U.S.-led troops attacked fighters in northern Helmand province during Operation Mountain Thrust.

NATO said that Achilles would initially focus on improving security conditions, but that its "overarching purpose is to assist the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan improve its ability to begin reconstruction and economic development."

"We cannot allow extremists, criminals and Taliban to decide what happens in this country," van Loon told reporters in Kandahar. "We need to make sure the government of Afghanistan with our support ... secures the area."

The government has little control over many parts of northern Helmand, and the British troops stationed there fight almost-daily battles with militants. U.S. intelligence officials say Taliban fighters have flooded into Helmand the last several months, and that there are now more fighters there than any other part of the country.

The militants overran Musa Qala, in central Helmand province, on Feb. 1 after defying a peace deal between the government and elders reached last fall that capped weeks of fighting. The Taliban still control the town more than a month after the initial attack.

British troops have also been battling militants in the nearby district of Kajaki, in northern Helmand, to enable repair work on a hydroelectric damn there, which supplies close to 2 million Afghans with electricity.

"Strategically, our goal is to enable the Afghan government to begin the Kajaki project," van Loon, said. "This long-term initiative is a huge undertaking and the eventual rehabilitation of the Kajaki multipurpose dam and power house will improve the water supply for local communities, rehabilitate irrigation systems for farmlands and provide sufficient electrical power for residents, industries and commerce," he said.

Helmand is the world's biggest producer of opium, and a new U.N. drug assessment indicates this year's poppy harvest could be higher than last year's record output. The U.N. says Taliban fighters protect poppy farmers and tax the crop, deriving much-needed income for their insurgency.

Meanwhile, a remote-control bomb targeting a police vehicle on Tuesday killed one policeman and wounded another in Murja district, also in Helmand, said Ghulam Nabi Mulakhail, the province's police chief.

The blast also wounded six Afghan civilians nearby, said Abdul Basir, a police officer in the district.

[lars008-2009]

diplomacy3

what religious slurs and hatred?

[diplomacy3]

markster6

Let me refer to the last part of your note. Taliban are the general population of Afghanistan. A 'Talib' is a religious student and its plural is 'Taliban'. Every child in rural Afghanistan must go to receive elementary education at a religious school which is either a mosque or a cleric-run school. After graduation, they normally migrate to Pakistan or Iran for higher studies at religious Madrasa(which you may call Islamic University). This used to be in vogue since the 70's. That's how the term Taliban was born. They are the same folks who fought against the former Soviet Union and are now confronted with 'NATO'. There are already more than 2 million Afghan refugees in Pakistan being aided by the UNHRC. There is no distinction between a refugee and a Talib. A Talib could be a refugees or the vice versa.

[joanpz]

Lord, a HYDRA has been unleashed in the Mid-East!
There are 600,000,000 Muslims - for some reason these forces think that "cutting off the head" of this snake will cause it to die - BUT NO, MORE HYDRA BLOSSOM EVERY WHERE - Angry Muslims can be compared with the HYDRA! Stop ALL WARS - especially when ONE GOVERNMENT PROMISES to BRING DEMOCRACY - EVEN IF NO ONE ASKED or UNDERSTOOD - the MidEast DOES NOT HAVE a HISTORY of GREEK or ROMAN GOVERNMENT - DEMOCRACY WILL NEVER WORK THERE!

[markster6]

Farmerbb,
I can answer your question. There are 37 nations contributing approx. 31,000 troops under NATO command (currently led by an American general). The bulk of the combat is done by the U.S. with about 12,000 troops under NATO and an additional 12,000 outside of NATO, 2,500 Canadians, 6,300 British, 1,900 Dutch(Netherlands). Most other contributing nations won't agree to deploy to the "hotspots" of South Afghanistan including France's 1700 troops, Spain's 800 troops, Italy's 500 troops, and Germany's 3000 troops. It has been difficult getting nations to contribute in South Afghanistan. It has been equally difficult getting Pakistan (Musharraf) to pursue the Taliban. The Pakistani gov't created and nurtured the Taliban during their rise to power in Afghanistan, and now the monster they created may one day swallow Pakistan.

[farmerbb]

It would be nice if for once the writer of this story bothered to mention the nationalities of the NATO troops in question. Not many in the U.S. know just how many troops from other countries are doing combat work, and how many are just doing support work.

[diplomacy3]

lars008

I think we should follow the "rules of engagement" on this board. Why religious slurs and hatred. That's not a healthy discussion. This is not an advice but just a suggestion. I hope you won't mind. Thank you.

[getcentered]

GO KICK SOME TALIBAN A_S_S!!
BURN THOSE FILDS OF POPPIES!!

Many Americans today have been enlightened by the two wars we find ourselves involved. One war, the "war on terrorism", finds its main battleground in Afghanistan, and it is a war that costs lives and money but the majority of Americans support. Liberals, Democrats, Republicans, Conservatives, most don't have a problem with us kicking down the doors of members of the Taliban.

When talking about the war in Iraq the parties have much difference. Democrats say that the public and congress was mislead to justify the war in Iraq and that the Bush Administration no longer deserves autonomy in situations where US service men and women's lives are on the line. Based on the results of the last Congressional elections, most Americans see a problem with GOP/Republicans; at least in the way they make decisions about the use of our military.

So why is it that in the GOP/Republican party there are no dissenters, no independent thinkers, no moderates? Where are the real conservatives who would laugh at how conservatively the current Republican party has been spending taxes, and creating big government? Has the Republican Party lost its identity? Can the ideology of the GOP be so easily summed up in Karl Rove talking points like %u201Csupport this and support that%u201D, and angry rhetoric like %u201Cliberals are traitors%u201D?

Hello centrist Republicans! Anybody out there?

[lars008-2009]

the war is legal

the resumption of hostilities was only a matter of time since iraq broke the ceasefire agreement.....

blame iraq on saddam.... even clintoon and the dems wanted to resume hostilities in 1998....

[obiquital]

bluestardad, even though this article has nothing to do with Iraq, you continue to persist with your anti-Iraq rhetoric.
Despite the fact that I do not think anything will change you mind about this even if the insurgency is eventually pacified, I will give you as reasonable an explanation of Iraq as I can at this time.

1. Did Iraq attack us on 9/11? No
2. Were there terrorists in Iraq prior to the invasion of Iraq? Yes
3. Did those terrorists have ties to the Iraqi government? No
4. Was there an act in place that said we should work to change the regime in Iraq? Yes (Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 signed by Clinton)
5. Should Saddam been removed from power? Yes
6. Should we have occupied Iraq? No
7. Did we occupy it anyways? Yes
8. Following the invasion, are there terrorists in Iraq? Yes
9. Is the purpose of the war on terror to seek out and destroy terrorists? Yes
10. Therefore, from 8 and 9 has the war in Iraq become an extension of the war on terror? Yes

By the way, I'm not Republican.

[lars008-2009]

global jihad of the fascist nazi islamic muslims...
Islamic worldview and the reason why it becomes a calamity in the 21st century

The Islamic world view of converting the entire human species to Islam at the pain of death is not something novel. It has existed for 1400 years since this cult of death and destruction was founded by Mohammed-ibn-abdallah, the nefarious bandit and murderer in the 7th century in Mecca. What makes this world view a calamity is the fact that Muslim have started acquiring WMD capability off late. While all these centuries, they could carry on with their murder and mayhem only with swords from the 7th century up to the 16th century. So they could be defeated by those who could wield swords better and more so by those who in addition to this managed to recognize the mortal threat to all non-Islamic civilizations that Muslims represented. There have not been very many on this planet who could see through the murderous message of the Quran, that the Muslims robotically believe is the message from some god, to be divinely followed by placing their swords on the necks of all their defeated victims and giving them the choice Islam or death.
http://www.historyofjihad.org/globaljihad.html
http://www.historyofjihad.com/sitemap.html

[observantx]

They usually only interview troops who are far-left. - singingrick

Huh?

rick: Honestly, do you believe reporters go around and ask soldiers, "Oh, by the way, do you consider yourself a liberal wussy wimp, or a he-man righteous conservative?" before they interview them?

I'd advise you to read the postings of the troops that you can find all over the "internets". The opinions and experiences are many and varied. Many support the war and many believe they are being suckered.

The real point is that the fight is finally happening where the REAL terrorist threat is, not in the sideshow in Iraq.

[truth_reason]

Progress is being made. Thats great, glade to hear....read it. It is a little funny that NATO is more motavatid then the Afghan's.

[macusweil]

PRESS PLAY | To resume the real war on terra.

The action you have selected was placed HOLD for the past for years so that your government could waste countless lives and dollars in Iraq.

[mbcsmith]

GRUMPY

Typical LIB hoping for U.S. military failure in Iraq. I hope the next plane attack flies right up your a**. GOOD JOB U.S. MILTARY! Keep up the good work!

[notblue]

On CBS news this morning they interviewed a Seargent on the ground in Iraq in the middle of his third tour of duty there. He, not Bush, reiterated that progress was being made so all you defeatists can call him a liar. Look, what makes you people more qualified than this soldier at the seen to know the real truth. Or do you just blindly believe everything you here in the mainstream media? I listen to all news and try to find the truth in a jungle of agenda driven crapp. It's our responsibility to listen to it all. I was surprised CBS even ran that story.

[grumpas]

"If you would actually read the article it does say there is progress being made." posted by notblue! I have a bridge in Brooklyn I would love to sell you dirt cheap! You will obviously buy into about anything notblue! How many times have we heard the same thing coming out of Iraq????? More than I care to remember! Only to discover it was all a figment of the Bush Administrations imagination. Most of us have grown very cynical about anything this Administration reports in the news! There might be a grain of truth there but it's very doubtful!

[notblue]

bluestardad, do you even read the articles or is it your job to just critisize? If you would actually read the article it does say there is progress being made. Don't you think the men and women deserve more support from the citizens they are protecting. To believe Iraq is not part of an all encompassing war of ideology is blind indifference to the truth in the name of politics and your ideology. How can you disregard what the terrorist leaders are saying about Iraq? What qualifies you to know better than the people managing this war and the people we are fighting. Are you some all knowing clarvoyant entity that sits on some high mountain of truth?

[karlimhof]

I sure hope Afghans are all either Shia or Sunni - this is the real war - good to see NATO there.

[musty2u]

This is a good bet; call your state Representative or Senator, both, at the U S Capitol Switchboard 202-224-3121. Let 'em know you are behind this action and to put the money up front.

[crater7]

LETS SEE: 4500 NATO TROOPS, AND 1000 AFGHAN, TROOPS. HMMMMMM, AFTER FIVE YEARS THE AFGHAN GOVERNMENT CAN ONLY MUSTER 1000 TROOPS FOR THIS OFFENSIVE. SHOULD IT READ, 4500, AFGHAN TROOPS AND 1OOO NATO TROOPS? I GUESS THE OTHER AFGHAN TROOPS ARE GAURDING THE POPPY FIELDS? AT THIS RATE OF SUCCESS IN AFGHANISTAN, WE WILL BE THERE FOR ABOUT ANOTHER 20 YEARS. WELL, AT LEAST A LOT OF OUR KIDS WILL HAVE A JOB FOR THE NEXT TWENTY YEARS.