Rethinking Strategy in Afghanistan

U.S. Officials Want More Afghan Forces to Fight Alongside Marines

(CBS)  Four thousand U.S. Marines pounded into Afghanistan's hostile Helmand province this month to take back territory from the Taliban.

But they only had 600 Afghan troops fighting alongside them, reports CBS News correspondent Kimberly Dozier.

The Marine commander there said he cannot hold this territory unless he gets more Afghan forces to help win the people's trust.

The top U.S. General in Afghanistan, Stanley McChrystal, agrees, according to defense officials in Washington. He's told the Pentagon he needs to create even more local forces than now planned to provide Afghans security.

"We must protect them from violence, whatever its nature," McChrystal said.

U.S. officials tell CBS News that General McChrystal hasn't decided how many extra troops he's going to need, U.S. or Afghan. They say this is simply a snapshot of his ongoing review, which he's due to report to the White House by early August.

There is currently a surge of 21,000 U.S. troops, which will bring the total to 68,000 in country by the fall. That includes 4,000 U.S. forces devoted to training more Afghan security forces. That training brigade is supposed to boost Afghanistan's army from 85,000 to 134,000, by 2011, at a cost of $7.5 billion a year.

Some of those now advising McChrystal say that's not enough.

"General McChrystal's going to have a tough time figuring out how he's going to protect as much of the population as possible," said Andrew Exum, with the Center for New American Security. "We simply don't have enough troops to surge into all areas."

In an interview with Britain's SKY TV from Africa, the President Barack Obama said depending on how Afghan elections go next month, he hopes to focus on a different type of surge.

"It may not be on the military side, it may be on the development side," Mr. Obama said.

Another group of experts advising McChrystal says you have to have both.

"The problem is you can't have economic development and you can't have good governance if you don’t have security," said Arturo Munoz with the Rand Corporation. "They are all interrelated."

[babooph]

This mess started as a Bush idea-that means it is idiotic from every angle-lets go home & cut our losses,anything that horses ..... touched must be undone.

[YuSoWrong]

Where do you call home, exactly?

[GovernmentControl]

Why doesnt obama provide american troops the support they need to prevail in the war on terror?

Obama is the enemy.

[HGOODGUY]

AMERICAN POLITICS AND PARANOIA QUESTIONS

WHY WERE IN THE KOREAN WAR??--40,000 DEAD
WHY WERE IN THE VIET NAM WAR??--50,000 DEAD
WHY ARE WE IN THE IRAQ WAR??--4500 DEAD
WHY ARE WE IN AFGHANISTAN??--DEAD YET TO BE TOTALED!!

IN ANY OF THESE WARS--WAS THERE EVER ANY REAL AN DIRECT DANGER TO THE USA??

AS 9/11 SHOWED US--IT CAN COME FROM ANYWHERE AND EVERYWHERE IN THE WORLD.

THESE PAST TRAGEDYS HAVE BEEN A RESULT OF AMBITIOUS POLITIONS AND MISGUIDED GENERALS.

WHEN ARE OUR LEADERS GOING TO LEARN THAT WE JUST CANNOT "PARACHUTE" INTO ALL THE WORLDS HOTSPOTS. IT IS LIKE TRYING TO NAVIGATE THROUGH SWISS CHEESE!!!

[CB_Brooklyn]

For those interested in knowing what actually happened on 9/11, see Dr Judy Wood's forensic examination of the evidence. Dr Wood is a former professor of mechanical engineering from Clemson University who received her PhD in materials engineering science from Virginia Tech.

Dr Wood's examination was submitted to NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) in the form of a Request For Correction and is also the basis of her Qui Tam case in NYC Federal Court. Dr Wood, represented by mainstream attorney Jerry Leaphart, is suing the sub-contractors hired by the government for the NIST investigation of the WTC claiming, at minimum, "willful blindness" in their contributions to the NIST Report. Dr Wood was already successful in getting NIST to confirm that they did not analyze the "collapses", even though they were mandated to do so by Congress.

Dr Wood's analysis shows, very clearly, that directed energy weapons (DEW) were a causal factor in the destruction of the World Trade Center. In Dr Wood's legal documents, she also notes that some of the defendants in her court case, such as Applied Research Associates (ARA) and Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), are founding sponsors of the Directed Energy Professional Society.

Dr Wood has been in contact with the US military's Directed Energy Directorate, located at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico, and they do not deny that DEWs destroyed the WTC. Instead they claim "phenomena that we cannot explain here". Their representative also finds ?Dr Wood's investigation interesting and worthy of further consideration?.

See Dr Wood's website for full information, including that of exotic weaponry, the Hutchison Effect, and Hurricane Erin which was mysteriously parked outside NYC on the morning of 9/11 and headed back out to sea afterwords:
http://www.drjudywood.com


Also, one must be aware of the propaganda that has spread through the "truth movement". See the following article and remember to keep an open mind:
9/11: Distinguishing The Propaganda From The Smoking Guns
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=199&Itemid=60


Those interested in knowing the truth of things are encouraged to check the evidence for themselves instead of believing what they are told to believe.

[YuSoWrong]

Come in from the stoop, the sun's getting to ya.

[Benton09]

These wars in Afghanistan and Iraq will go on forever unless to end it you are willing to do what was done to defeat the Japanese in WWII.
The use of Nuclear Weapons to inialate the enemy, breaking their will.
In this age, that will never be done unless humanity is ready for it's entire destruction. Besides, war makes money, that's what the bottom line is. Sad but true. Bush always talked about spreading Democracy throughout the world, which meant more money for corporations.... the rich get richer.

[curiously1]

The Iranian regime obviously has a hand in this rash of insurgency in Afghanistan. At some point, we must swing the shovel at the head of this snake, which again, is the Iranian regime.

[hagar39]

The Agfhan war is just like the Iraq war, the Vietnam war, Korean war, etc. You fight for 5 to 10 years and then you come home. The object of wars is to make money for the people and companies that sell weapons, supplies etc. to the military. Simple as that.
These days all of our troops are volunteers. Don't like war and the militay? Don't join. Simple as that.
The bad thing about? The places where these wars take place. Civilians are killed, buildings are destroyed, some time historic buildings. Old saying from the Vietnam days. The Vietnamese would say, Why should we fight, we have the American to fight for us. You good guys.

[kerry4ever]

Before the first world war Churchill said that "the whole of the Balkans is not worth the life of a single British bombadier (soldier)". Ditto Afghanistan.

[despido]

U.S. Officials Want More Afghan Forces to Fight Alongside Marines...
------------------------------
Why are ANY Marines there? Why do we constantly sacrafice our sons and daughters to save Islam from itself? WE have always moved to protect muslims; in Somalia, Bosnia, Croatia, Iraq, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc, etc. Yet muslims hate the West. Let them kill each other, just bring the kids home. Obama's just another murderer.

[sean58z]

Hey CarlR609, save your perverse paranoid schizophrenia. Insipid remarks are not needed on the CBSNews board.

[robinspp]

We should come home. Why we are there, for what?

[hagar39]

Why are we there? You make money for the people and companies that sell weapons and supplies to our military. The same for Bush's iraq war and Vietnam.
Wars are fought to make money. Guess what? it works.

[YuSoWrong]

Interesting theory, read all-over these blogs. Therefore the other side is also fighting for profit? If so, and they are opposed to the US in every possible way, should the US lose money by allowing their enemy to be the only one fighting? Or does the US earn money for its enemy by continuing the fight? Please explain.

[sean58z]

Afghani Children are killed by the Enemy in bomb blasts to euphorize the blood lust. The Marines should not resort to their level. The explosives inspire further violence and lewd sexuality from the Criminals. Technology and tactics develop a good method for their extermination. The Marines must establish a policy with Kabul on operations instead of the barn storm strategy without strong lead.

[kerry4ever]

"He's told the Pentagon he needs to create even more local forces than now planned to provide Afghans security.

"We must protect them from violence, whatever its nature,"

The problem is that the local forces will gladly accept the US Dollar as long as they don't have to get their hands dirty in any fighting, but will sell themselves to the first Kharzai drug baron who buys them off once the Americans and British have gone.

[MaiwandHabibi]

Re-thinking a strategy it is better to develop a new strategy to Strengthen governament. The corruption in governamnet offices are at the peak and it needs to be first eliminated or controlled instead of asking more afghan forces. The warlordisim at provincial level has made it difficult. Therefore, it seemds that first of all the courrption and security at provincial adn district level fule of war lords needs to be finshed(finish the warlaordism ) will help you think of a strategy for development

[hower4]

In order to rethink a strategy, you first have to have one to rethink! Can anyone remember the reason why we invaded in the first place?

[babooph]

The last "strategy"the Russians had there was best for them ,as was the US after 10 years in Nam.

[YuSoWrong]

The last strategy the Afghanistanis have is mysticism and heroin. I'll be stoned here all week! Don't forget to tip the Taliban, they're working hard for ya.

[YuSoWrong]

Reading what others post here is like a bong hit. But I can take the heat, can only imagine what some folks take and like it.

[Nikos_Retsos]

The American re-thinking of Afghan strategy doesn't fit the thinking of the Afghans. It is more like the proverbial American square peg that won't fit the round hole of the Afghan culture, religion, tradition, and history. The problems?

a) Assign more Afghan army units to fight the Taliban. Afghan recruits don't want to kill their countrymen for the U.S. They serve
for an occupying power for the meagre salary it pays because the only
economy now in Afghanistan is the U.S. salaries - nothing else.

b) The U.S. bombing of villages with B-52 and killing hundreds of civilians, or forcing Afghan villagers to become lookouts for the U.S., is a bedlam strategy. If the villagers don't cooperate with the U.S. their villages are bombed; if they do they are executed by the Taliban as American spies! It is a lunatic thinking for U.S. commanders, and it shows their desperation for their inability to subdue ragtag insurgents with all the modern weaponry in their disposal. Well, Afghanistan is not called the "graveyard of the empires" for nothing!


The elections next month are a joke. Hamid Karzai is just a cosmetic
U.S. appointed figurehead who is too busy complaining about U.S. air-strikes than kill innocent civilians rather than straightening out his corrupt bureaucracy. He was told to shut up by the U.S. - if he wanted to be re-elected- and he did. But he has no credibility in
Afghanistan as a leader. He just put the Afghanistan's stamp on U.S. decisions, and if he refuses, the U.S. will replace him immediately.
His salary, and the salaries of his government and his army are paid by the U.S. He, therefore, acts as an agent of the U.S. - not as a leader elected freely by his people, nor as a president who has any say or control on the operation of foreign forces in his country.

Rethinking of U.S. policy in Afghanistan? That's impossible - unless the U.S. decides to forget about and pull out. Everything else will be just a "re-labeling" of the same strategy - something akin to put the same wine in a different bottle. But that will not change the fortunes in the Afghan battlefield.

Baraq Obama accused the Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin recently of keeping "One Leg" in the Cold War era, and the "Other Leg" in the present. But Obama is blind to see that he doing worse by still standing on George Bush's policies, and still cannot decide which way to go. I hope the "Re-thinking" doesn't last until 2012!
Nikos Retsos, retired professor

[hermitdave]

by speakinup22 July 11, 2009 8:08 PM PDT
WOW I bet you believe Osama and Ron Jeremy planned 9/11/01. I bet you believe steel buildings start falling down several stories above where a plane hits in some magic way. I bet you believe large airliners crash leaving less parts than a Piper Cub. By the way Osama has been real dead for many years. All those CIA tapes are fake. For sure the government does not fear YOU.

[payasyougo]

"Rethinking Strategy in Afghanistan
U.S. Officials Want More Afghan Forces to Fight Alongside Marines"
----
Seems like DeJa Vu but this strategy was attempted by the previous administration in another region.

I'm not having DeJa vu regarding the press's response however.

[IThoughtItWasFunnyNOPE]

Don't ya think you should've thought about that before you escalated?

And WHY did you put troops in Afghanistan and give them orders:

Not to shoot...shoulder your gun under attack...

Don't disturb the poppy bulbs...the Afghani's need them to support terroist activity....we don't want to pixx off the poppy farmers they might vote wrong..

Don't even so much as look at person wearing a burqa....much less stop them for questioning....

Before you arrest any of these terrorists...Mirandize them and tell them what rights US citizens have under our Constitution...

Now please, these orders make about as much sense as electing a man who has never run so much as popsicle stand to our White House....

IT'S NONSENSE!