U.S. General Sees "Slow" Afghan Win

Key Commander Says Less-Than-Decisive Approach Must Be Accelerated

(AP)  U.S.-led forces are achieving a "slow win" in Afghanistan, but the less-than-decisive approach must be accelerated soon, a key American commander there said Friday.

Maj. Gen. Jeffrey J. Schloesser, in a video conference with reporters at the Pentagon, said he remains hopeful that the Bush administration will send him more combat troops and other resources by winter.

He mentioned that Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has said the U.S. effort in Afghanistan is by necessity an "economy of force" mission, meaning it is under-resourced because the war in Iraq is considered a higher and more urgent national security priority.

"We need to get away from that, over time," to make a stronger push in Afghanistan, Schloesser said.

The current approach, he said, is making headway, but not at a rate that he considers satisfactory.

"It's not the way that I think ... the Afghans, the international community and the American people would like to see us conduct this war," Schloesser said. "It will take longer the way we are doing it right now, as far as the level of resources that we have. I'd like to speed that up. So it's a slow win. I'd want to make it into a solid, strong win" by committing more resources.

There are now about 33,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, compared with about 146,000 in Iraq.

Schloesser, commander of the 101st Airborne Division, leads a contingent of international forces responsible for an eastern sector of Afghanistan, which includes a volatile area bordering Pakistan.

He predicted that insurgent activity would not fall off as much as usual this winter, when snow usually limits the fighting season.

"I do believe that the level of significant activities, maybe violence, will be higher than any previous winter since 2002," he said. The war began in October 2001 in response to the 9/11 attacks launched by Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network, which at the time used Afghanistan as a haven.

Schloesser declined to say exactly how many additional U.S. combat troops and support forces he thinks are needed in his sector, but said he was optimistic that they would be provided in the next several months.

"The numbers are going to be a couple thousand - some series of thousands," he said.

In addition to combat troops there is a need for more intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance units of the type that currently are being used on missions in Iraq, he added.

In some areas of eastern Afghanistan there simply are too few U.S. or coalition troops to decisively defeat the Taliban, he said.

"I can come in and I can clobber the enemy but then I can't hold it and stay with the people," he said.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Mullen on Wednesday recommended to President Bush that a partial shift of resources from Iraq to Afghanistan be undertaken early in 2009, but it's not clear whether that will provide the help Schloesser says is needed to deal with enemy forces this winter.

"If we don't do anything over the winter the enemy will more and more try to seek safe haven in Afghanistan rather than going back to Pakistan," Schloesser said.

On the other hand, he said, getting additional forces is not a make-or-break issue.

"We're not losing this war, and we won't lose (it) if those troops don't show up in the next several months," he said.

U.S. and NATO officials say militants cross into Afghanistan from Pakistan, where they rest, recruit, train and resupply in tribal areas along the frontier where the Pakistani government has little sway.

Schloesser said he is counting on executing a two-track strategy this winter for further eroding the insurgents' fighting prospects.

The first is an aggressive effort to hunt them down.

"We will pursue them wherever they run," he said. "We will intercept them, and we're going to destroy their resources. My intent is to eliminate the support areas within our sector to diminish the enemies' ability to operate next year."

The second is what Schloesser called a "development surge." That would be a variety of projects, such as construction and road maintenance, designed to keep military-aged males employed who otherwise could be recruited to join the insurgency.

[claydowner]

The problems that NATO is facing in Afghanistan has been a lack of infantryman and supporting units like intelligence, reconnaissance, surveillance and military police troops. Civil administration projects like schools, roads, etc. have also been a huge challenge for the Canadian, British, Dutch, French and Americans on the ground. They have been making up for a lack of infantryman by increased use of tactical air support. Mobility in the mountains has put a premium on helicopter transport which is hugely expensive. The close air support has resulted in many Afghan civilian casualties. President Karzai complains about this and rightfully so. But until such a time that you can get more infantry and support troops on the ground funerals for civilians will be the rule of the day as the war against the narco-funded Taliban goes on for its seventh year. At the rate we are going ten years from now we will still be in Afghanistan. We may end up being in Afghanistan longer than the Soviet Union.

[babooph]

WW 1 gave the British upper class a fairly fast win ,but created a nation of rich & poor ever after.Notice the troops were smart enough not to fight for them again in ww2?[Dunkirk, Singapore-etc.]

[babooph]

A slow win for the military-a sword thru the heart of the once important US middle nlass.

[jgunther7]

The generals will streach the fighting on for as long as they can. Their lively hood depends on it.

[downsteamjim]

To Nancy Naive: The Taliban are perfect. They know how to treat a woman.

[youngjm0]

Russia lost the Afghan war because they have no support, they could not leave their bases without being shot up, blown up an had no idea where that it was coming from. Russia lost over 100,000 solders in a country that has no jungles, few trees, just mountains with caves. It is the Russian leaders that is Russia''s problem, they are still in the WW-? war thinking, they are not the ones fighting an dieing, it''s the dumb-*** that has no schooling and no other life to look forward too!! Most Russians has no running water, they still use out side tolets, The Russian people is still living in a third world life.

[youngjm0]

This wasn''t in the news, but their was over 800 Marines in Georgia when this happen and they didn''t leave, they was just out side of the capital to help get Americans out if Russia did go there, but Russia was told that the US has a Office their and that it was going to stay their!

[youngjm0]

Russia has no aircraft carriers, "NONE" Tanks 20+ years old, still diesels that don''t start, with no power or speed. they still have sights to fire with, if they don''t see you they can''t shoot you. With no air cover, their tanks are sitting ducks. The US can spot their tanks from outer space, an then it''s BOOM! another dead tank crew!!

[youngjm0]

The US is now flying Top Secreat Aircraft from Navada, that''s Vegas baby, we have video games that is killing from over 10,000 miles away. Russia has Generals that sits in Moscow, telling every one that they can do this an that. The US took Baghdad in 19 days, that''s over 1,000 miles of land from Kuwait. If russia tryed this it would take them over 200 days to get there. Iraq was the third largest army in the world, with nothing but Russian tanks, jet fighters an the AK-47. The same equipment that they have now, JUNK!!

[youngjm0]

It took Russia days to get just a few miles in Georgia, they stop because the US was landing over 3,000 Georgins troops, fresh combat troops, in the fight, Russia didn''t know if it was just Georgia troops that was being put on the ground. Russia ran in to a brick wall when these troops landed, and there jet plains started to fall out of the air.

[youngjm0]

I have seen the Russian''s in Kosovo, all they wanted to do their was to shop in our PX-BX, they even wanted to eat at our de-facts, but the General told them no, go eat at your own de-fact, they said that they didn''t have one, that they had to eat Russian-K''s. No support in the field for their solders. Georgia was the same, the solders had to steel from the ones that lived their, no support for them to even eat. Russia is a joke to our military

[youngjm0]

For 15 + years Russia has been doing nothing in their first strike, on the other hand the US has been building super aircraft carriers, plaine that fly that no radar can find, when one of these ships sails in an area, it''s all but in control of this area, they "Russia" can do nothing but to watch an wish that they could do this. Oue sea power alone is all that is needed to fight Russia in anykind of war

[youngjm0]

Russia''s ICBM''s are all but gone, it takes a week of service to keep a missle ready to fire sitting at idle for a month, that is just the missle. The war head is even harded to keep hot, it is always trying to make the connection, it''s only inches that keeps this from happening, an it''s leaking from one to the other all of the time, if you let this happen it will get to the point that it won''t light up, making it a dud, or it''s called "wet" Russia knows better than to try to fire a missle, if it didn''t fly, now they got a dud that will be hot an maybe burning, now they just Nuke them selves. Russia has already Nuke them selves, from power plants, too subs that was on their first sea run, they don''t have much brains in this kind of thing, an they are learning it the hard way

[youngjm0]

Russia has no groung support, their TU-80 tanks are 20+ years old, they have no updates to our weaponds of today, they are sitting ducks even to our rotary aircraft, besides to our attack jets, not our fighter jets, or even our first strike fighter jets. Russia has to burn all of their equipment that breaks down in the fight, again no support in the field, they can only fight a Battle of the Boulge like Hitler did, no support of any kind

[youngjm0]

It would be hard for Russia''s navy to go to war with our Coast Guard, no aircraft carriers "none" no kind of support for a beach landing, again "none" Hitler had more equipment than Russia has today.

[iphyt4u]

How many generals come out and say, realistically, I don''t think will win. Fighting terrorism with uniformed troops is doing nothing but providing targets for our enemies. Our efforts should be covert, under the radar, espionage tactics. Get informers on the payroll, it will be a lot cheaper than feeding and fueling thousands of troops. It''s time to be economically sensible about our national defense campaigns.

[gramto8]

Pershing & Ike-WHERE ARE YOU NOW??

Posted by babooph at 03:43 AM : Sep 06, 2008

Sorry but someone had to do this!! ;-)

AT 1100 AM AST...1500Z...THE CENTER OF HURRICANE IKE WAS LOCATED
NEAR LATITUDE 21.9 NORTH...LONGITUDE 68.8 WEST OR ABOUT 150 MILES...
240 KM...EAST OF GRAND TURK ISLAND.

[youngjm0]

Russia icbm missles is so far out of date an service that they are contracting the tear down to the US, their own workers won''t do it, their are three US companys now doing this work, an russia is standing back looking in maze at the SOP that we use, then they can''t match our work.

[youngjm0]

I can''t figure, russia is not a military force, all it has is numbers, they are still in the days of WW-2 in equipment an brains. They have no aircraft carriers, "none" their tanks are 20+years old an don''t run to well, their fighter jets are 20 years old an don''t fly very well, they was the ones that was to match up to our F-16''s, their military schools is others countrys, they have none, no brains in combat, russia is all numbers nothing else

[dsr57]

Problem is, America has forgot how to conduct a war. To He!l with going in dropping a few bombs and then rebuilding. let them do that themselves. We should just swoop in lay watse to just about everything in sight then leave a post-it saying that if you EVER mess with us again we''ll be back. That would get the point across. The whole thing takes 5 days and then it''s over and we have money for our school system again