U.S. "Running Out Of Time" In Afghanistan

Chairman Of Joint Chiefs "Not Convinced We're Winning," Says It Will Take More Than Military Might

(CBS/AP)  Even with American troops headed soon from an increasingly quiet Iraq to a more turbulent Afghanistan, defeating extremists in Afghanistan is growing more complex and more urgent, President Bush's senior defense advisers say.

"Frankly, we are running out of time," Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the House Armed Services Committee on Wednesday, referring to the international effort to stabilize Afghanistan.

"I'm not convinced we're winning in Afghanistan," said Mullen, adding quickly, "I'm convinced we can."

What is needed, he said, is better Afghan governance, more foreign investment, a viable alternative to poppy farming, greater cooperation with Pakistan and more U.S. nonmilitary assistance.

Mullen and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, testifying together one day after President Bush announced that one Marine battalion and one Army brigade would be shifted from Iraq to Afghanistan this fall and winter, both stressed the futility of relying too much on military power in Afghanistan.

"We cannot kill our way to victory," Mullen said.

Gates did not address the issue of whether U.S. forces are winning, but after the hearing his press secretary, Geoff Morrell said Gates sees the conflict as an ill-fated attempt by the Taliban to overthrow the government.

"The secretary believes we won the war in Afghanistan back in 2001-2002 when we drove the Taliban from power," Morrell said. "They no longer run the country. They no longer control any significant territory within the country; however they are trying to reassert themselves ... and they will not be successful."

U.S. commanders in Afghanistan say they need another 10,000 troops - about three times as many as they will receive this winter under the troop deployment Bush announced. The commanders also urge more nonmilitary aid and say the Afghan government must perform better.

Gates said the insurgency in Afghanistan has gained "greater ambition, sophistication and coordination" since 2006, and he underlined the importance of denying them haven in neighboring Pakistan.

"As in Iraq, until the insurgency is deprived of safe havens, insecurity and violence will persist," Gates said. He was alluding, at least in part, to the effect of having eliminated Iraq's Anbar province as a haven for Sunni Arab insurgents - a key to recent overall security improvements in Iraq.

Mullen, who has visited Pakistan frequently since he became Joint Chiefs chairman last fall, made a similar point.

"Until we work more closely with the Pakistani government to eliminate the safe havens from which they operate, the enemy will only keep coming," he said.

He lauded the efforts of U.S. and allied troops to hunt down the Taliban and other insurgent forces and their progress in training and expanding the number of Afghan security forces.

"But until those Afghan forces have the support of local leaders to improve security on their own, we will only be there as a crutch - and a temporary one at that," said the four-star admiral.

Meanwhile, Pakistan's military chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, lashed out at the U.S. Wednesday, saying the cross-border military raids executed in the last week were not in keeping with any military agreement between the two nations.

The House committee hearing was remarkable in its lack of partisan debate over U.S. strategy in Iraq and for its sharp focus on what more can be done to stabilize Afghanistan, the launching pad for al Qaeda's terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. In response to those attacks, U.S. forces invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 and drove the Taliban out of power in a matter of weeks.

The Iraq war began in March 2003 and has consumed vastly more U.S. military resources.

Meeting with Bush in the Oval Office on Wednesday, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani praised the president's military buildup, saying, "There is no inch of Iraqi land under the control of terrorists."

Bush told Talabani - who recently had knee surgery and a shunt placed in an artery at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. - that conditions remain difficult in Iraq, but security gains were allowing him to pull out troops.

"The Iraqis want there to be fewer U.S. troops," Bush said. "The United States wants there to be fewer U.S. troops. But both of us want to realize that vision based upon success."

Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., the committee's chairman, applauded "the military's successes" in Iraq while also arguing that the Bush administration has failed to do all that is necessary in Afghanistan.

"When will the conditions in Iraq be good enough, and when will the conditions in Afghanistan have deteriorated enough to warrant the re-prioritization of focus and resources that's required to ensure the long-term success of the Afghanistan mission?" Skelton asked in his opening statement.

Neither Gates nor Mullen had a precise answer. Both made clear that Iraq will remain a priority, and Gates said he hoped the next U.S. administration takes a "cautious and flexible" approach to Iraq.

"I would also urge our leaders to keep in mind that we should expect to be involved in Iraq for years to come, although in changing and increasingly limited ways," Gates said.

Republican presidential nominee John McCain has said he would keep U.S. forces in Iraq as long as it takes to achieve victory, and that he would not withdraw forces until security conditions allow. Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama, meanwhile, proposes to withdraw U.S. combat forces within 16 months.

Gates hinted at possible further troop cuts in Iraq next year, but he also said a go-slow approach is justified by several circumstances, including slow progress on the political front.

"I worry that the great progress our troops and the Iraqis have made has the potential to override a measure of caution born of uncertainty," Gates said. "Our military commanders do not yet believe our gains are necessarily enduring - and they believe that there are still many challenges and the potential for reversals in the future."

[lasercat-2009]

Your 12 MPG vehicle is funding the terrorists every time you fill up.

[lasercat-2009]

Ever wonder why nobody else cares about Afghanistan and the Tali ban but the U.S.? Ever wonder why the sun rises and sets. Probably not. Use your brain it''s that fat thing between your ears.

[tbweb]

The real question is why is it that only the U.S. cares about what happens in Afghanistan? You get the feeling that if the U.S. didn`t care what happened in Afghanistan no one else would! Oh sure, everyone cares with lip service but its always the U.S. sacrificing with action and then dragging others along.

[claydowner]

We have been in Afghanistan far too long. The local Afghans no longer want us in their country. Americans never have bothered to learn enough about the culture to really fight an effective counterinsurgency war. In these small brushfire wars you have to win the locals over to your side politically. We have failed to do this. We never had enough troops in Afghanistan because of the Iraq war. Our Army with only 500,000 troops was never made for these kinds of wars of occupation and nation building. We need to leave Afghanistan in the next couple of years. We need to leave Iraq even sooner.

Senator Kent Conrad gave a press conference this week concerning our budget deficits. Our national debt is going to increase this year by over $800 billion. Our budget deficit is over $407 billion for fiscal 2008. Our trade deficits are getting worse at nearly $70 billion this last month. We can not afford to keep spending $12 to $15 billion on these stupid wars unless we want to become a nation of paupers.

[olfishgut]

Sarah Palin will get that Afgan pipeline for us, no how many people we have to sacrifice to get it. All these liberals are a bunch of cry babies.

[samsel3]

More than a year and half before 911 the CIA Special Activities Division was conducting operations in Afghanistan, trying to topple the Taliban regime for the TAPI Caspian Sea Oil & Gas Pipelines...........We now call such activities terror.



February 12, 1998 John J. Maresca vp of UNOCAL oil appeared before a House sub committee. The purpose of the meeting was to gain support for exploitation of oil & natural gas resources, for the rights purchased by BIG OIL in the Caspian Sea area.

In his testimony he stated, "The key question is how the energy resources of Central Asia can be made available to nearby Asian markets ". The exploitation option stated : "One obvious route south would cross Iran, but this is foreclosed by American companies because of U.S. sanctions (with Iran ) . The only other possible route is across Afghanistan, which of course has it''''s own unique challenges. " He continued saying, " the pipeline we have proposed across Afghanistan could not begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments,lenders (world monitary fund & world bank ) ,and our company "......"

UNOCAL and other American companies are prepared to undertake the job ". Aconsortium of oil & gas companies have taken over where UNOCAL left off.

[samsel3]

The Israel Turkey pipeline has been in the works for some time now. In April of 2006 Israel & Turkey made their announcement which included four pipelines which will bypass Syria & Lebanon. The source of the oil is the BTC pipeline from the Caspian Sea Region. Shareholders in the BTC pipeline are: British Petroleum, AzBTC, Chevron, Statoil, TPAO, ENI, Total, Itochu, INPEX, ConocoPhillips & Amerada Hess. Another very important factor on the war with Lebanon is that Israel will have a strategic role in protecting the pipeline and transportation corridor out of Ceyhan Turkey. The strategy will weaken Russian oil s role in central asia and also isolate Iran.

[samsel3]

Since the Port sits on the Mediterranian it already has the capability of bypassing Iran and Lebanon to supply the Israelis more securely through the Suez Canal than any land-locked pipeline could.
Posted by realpatriot1 at 03:59 PM : Sep 11, 2008

Israel will be protecting air space from Ceyran, Turkey to Ashkelon down the coast for the four new oil & gas pipelines being built. Product will be piped through Israel to the Red Sea and exported to Asian markets.

[labrat9999]

Hot off the press at ABC..On the anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history, Gov. Sarah Palin took a hard-line approach on national security and said that war with Russia may be necessary if that nation invades another country.

[ajmarine111]

Maybe YOU want 4 more years of that type of Incompetence... for me? I''''m voting Democratic top to bottom.


Posted by skyk239 at 05:25 PM : Sep 11, 2008



The orginal question was "Who is financing the insurgents?" I tried to provide an answer.


What did my answer have to do with your statement above?

I''m an Independent, but everytime I run into a Dem like you,...you are just driving me away from Obama.

Think about it.

[skyk239]

If this "war" is costing the U.S. $12 billion dollars a month, how much is it costing the insurgents and where does their money come from?

Posted by tibu987 at 04:39 PM : Sep 11, 2008

I do believe that''s our Money as well... LOL

[skyk239]

I''m not convinced we''re winning in Afghanistan. I''m convinced we can.
Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

For those of you who don''t know much about the Military and the Brass, this means we''re flat out losing and if we don''t change our thinking, that a Gun is the ONLY solution, we WILL loose.

[skyk239]

The defeat of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan and the elimination of al Qaeda%u2019s bases and safe haven there have caused al Qaeda to splinter into scores of independent cells increasingly responsible for their own funding and maintenance. There are increasing indications that these groups have turned to small local businesses, petty crime and the drug trade to sustain themselves.[6]


http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/si/200
5/Jan/comrasJan05.asp


Posted by AJMarine111 at 05:14 PM : Sep 11, 2008

I do believe the cells existed BEFORE the attack on this nation. As for the Taliban, which is NOW, according to our intel, back and as strong as ever they were NEVER defeated. When you leave the enemy alive and free on the Battle Field they are NOT defeated. An old Top Sgt taught me that in ITR Training. Lets face it, because of BUSH''s INCOMPETENCE we now must fight and defeat those who we walked away from to invade a Nation that had NO Al Queda nor posed ANY threat against us. Maybe YOU want 4 more years of that type of Incompetence... for me? I''m voting Democratic top to bottom.

[ajmarine111]

Who is financing the insurgents?

Posted by tibu987 at 04:34 PM : Sep 11, 2008



There is considerable less certainty with regard to other possible sources of al Qaeda funding. The 9/11 commission said that it had received no credible evidence to substantiate allegations that bin Ladin used his own funds, or that al Qaeda was funded by foreign governments, or that it ran its own businesses, or that it dealt in conflict diamonds or that it profited from the international drug trade.[3] However, many other international experts and observers believe that al Qaeda has drawn on such multiple sources.[4] The 9/11 Commission itself, has admitted that the lack of credible evidence regarding such activities might be due to a continuing lack of hard intelligence regarding al Qaeda finances.[5] Many experts continue to believe that al Qaeda and its disparate cells will use whatever means are at hand to generate the funds they need.

The defeat of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan and the elimination of al Qaeda%u2019s bases and safe haven there have caused al Qaeda to splinter into scores of independent cells increasingly responsible for their own funding and maintenance. There are increasing indications that these groups have turned to small local businesses, petty crime and the drug trade to sustain themselves.[6]


http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/si/2005/Jan/comrasJan05.asp

[starleo146]

Who is financing the insurgents?

Where are they getting the money to outfit themselves with state-of-the-art weapons.
Osama Bin Laden, Saudi Arabia, Russia, China??????????
If this "war" is costing the U.S. $12 billion dollars a month, how much is it costing the insurgents and where does their money come from?
?????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by tibu987 at 04:34 PM : Sep 11, 2008
+ report abuse


Part of the money comes from the opium trade in Afghanistan

[iphyt4u]

If the republicans can nationalize a couple of huge mortgage insurers, can the democrats nationalize big oil companies?

[tibu987]

Who is financing the insurgents in Iraq, Afghanistan,
Iran, and Pakistan?

Where are they getting the money to outfit themselves with state-of-the-art weapons, Osama Bin Laden, Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, Syria, Libya?

If this "war" is costing the U.S. $12 billion dollars a month, how much is it costing the insurgents and where does their money come from?

[tibu987]

Who is financing the insurgents?

Where are they getting the money to outfit themselves with state-of-the-art weapons.
Osama Bin Laden, Saudi Arabia, Russia, China??????????
If this "war" is costing the U.S. $12 billion dollars a month, how much is it costing the insurgents and where does their money come from?
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????

[jibberjab22]

realpatriot1
You''re a genius. You must be a general or something.

Now tell us something we don''t already know. What do you think we have been trying to do for the past seven years.
First you would have to find their financial, technological, logistical and training resources. Good luck since The border region and an extremely large portion of A-stan is extremely rugged and easy to hide in. I guess you never had to climb any of them.
And second, given the tradition and culture of the Pashtun people, they are loyal to whoever they are talking to at that point in time. Also, when their families are threatened they will side with the aggressor. I guess you never talked to an Afghani either.

If it is so easy, issue the plan and us on the ground would be more than happey to execute it.

[realpatriot1]

Samsel3,

The Pipeline to the Port of Ceyphan has been operational since last November. Since the Port sits on the Mediterranian it already has the capability of bypassing Iran and Lebanon to supply the Israelis more securely through the Suez Canal than any land-locked pipeline could.

Russia has its own pipeline projects in the works(and so does China) so they won''t be weakened significantly by this. Russia has deals with Kazahkstan, Turkmenistan, & Kyrgistan that will feed oil from the Caspian Sea into the Russian system of pipelines where it will be funneled to Europe and China through secure roots, so they don''t need to worry about what we''re up to.

China & Pakastan are the ones who need to worry about their pipeline project from Western China to the southern coast of Pakastan. A widening of hostilities between NATO & Al Quaeda forces spreading into Wiziristan could prove very costly to both the Chinese & Pakastani governments.

Maybe we need to play this card to apply pressure on the new Pakastani government to help us rid them of the Bin Laden problem.