Pentagon pushes Prez for 10k troops in Afghanistan
Chief Tango sends us a link from The Daily Beast which reports that the military is asking for ten thousand troops to remain in Afghanistan after the withdrawal date later this year;
These commanders were concerned that if the numbers went much lower than that, the U.S. would have to shrink its mission to perhaps just Kabul and Bagram, leaving the countryside to Afghan security forces that still struggle to get ammunition, equipment, fuel, and food, to their troops.
They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were worried that the White House would perceive any publicly expressed doubts or recommendations as an attempt by the military to box Obama into a specific number of troops, as it was when Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s recommendations for Afghanistan were leaked ahead of Obama’s decision on troop numbers in his first year in office.
Since this administration determined a long time ago that they aren’t interested in winning this war against terrorists in any measurable fashion, ten thousand is about 100% more than what I’d accept. All we’re going to hear about are “the last” troops to leave Afghanistan this year and the mission will move even further back in the news than it is already.
I’d like to hear how those ten thousand troops will be employed, you know, other than their own security forces;
[Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., the commander of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force]’s predecessor, Gen. John Allen, recommended in 2013 that Obama leave 20,000 troops in Afghanistan past 2014 and said 10,000 troops would represent a “high-risk option,” according two U.S. military officials who worked on the planning documents.
Allen’s recommendations were also made before a massive, 61,500-pound truck bomb headed for a U.S. forward operating base on the Pakistan border was intercepted this fall by Afghan security forces. The bomb was the largest one U.S. officials had seen for the entire war. First reported by ABC News, U.S. military officials tell The Daily Beast that the truck bomb forced U.S. military planners to increase their estimates of the troops needed just to protect U.S. bases in Afghanistan after 2014.
In 2009, the President was told by the CIA and the Pentagon that he would need an additional 60,000 troops. He was told that any fewer folks would greatly impact the success of “the war that mattered” negatively, so he sent 30,000 troops. The predictions of the experts were borne out. Now he’s faced with another decision – but I wonder what he expects the troops to accomplish.
If the answer isn’t “victory” we should abandon the mission immediately.
Category: Terror War
“ten thousand is about 100% more than what I’d accept.” I completely agree. If we are going to get out, we should have done it yesterday. Leaving 10K troops is no more than what it would take to keep secure and defend their small AO. Leaving the countryside to fill with Taliban right up to the gates. Since we will never be able to count on Afghan security forces to do much of anything. Well except to give their weapons cache to the Taliban, take off their Kevlar and put on a rag.
Nuke them…no…..scratch that….pull every swinging dick (or vagina) out of there….
Stop any payments to nations not submitting to our bidding (yes I said it that way)
THEN Nuke them.
Weren’t they also advising 10K to stay in Iraq? I wonder how they arrive at those estimates.
Is this going to become another Guard mission like Kosovo?
Pull ALL US forces out now. Take ALL of the inmates at Gitmo and drop them off. Nuke that shithole from orbit.
A good day’s work done well.
If the answer isn’t “victory” we should abandon the mission immediately.
Absolutely on point, when the mission is to teach the guys who were sponsoring and supporting the people who flew planes into buildings how to police their nation we’re already wasting our time and resources to zero benefit.
The Afghan military was and will be a host organization for AQ sympathizers and members until the nation ceases to exist.
With no plan to wipe out the enemy there is no reason to stay in Afghanistan. The Pentagon is putting people in harm’s way for no useful purpose and catering to their WH masters in a fashion that borders on careless in its’ execution.
If we don’t intend to fight the nation that harbors our enemies then we can’t say we ever intended to achieve a victory over those enemies. We killed many of them to be sure, but not forcing your enemies and the nations to host them to their knees begging you to stop killing them means those enemies can state their efforts worked and they forced the US to leave due to weakness. They are correct, the problem is the weakness lies in the leadership in the WH and the Pentagon, not with those on the ground doing the work.
There is not a single American life worth losing over the people of Afghanistan. Stone age barbarians whose existence is a testament to the inability of some humans to achieve any level of progress beyond tribal subsistence living. There is nothing in a land of that nature worth saving or embracing. There is only misery, before we arrived and after we leave, and our enemies living in relative safety thanks to two administrations without any real plan to kill those enemies and drive the nations that harbor them to submission.
Nuking that place would be doing the entire world a favor, a radioactive wasteland that would continue to contribute nothing to the world or the nations of the world much as it has done for its’ entire existence.
Bombing that shithole into the Stone Age would be an improvement.
They have never left the Stone Age, Sparky.
If it’s advice the gov’t needs, how about using the telehone? There is also some great teleconferencing programs available. For a face-to-face, their people can get with our people, say, at Kharzi’s brother’s restaurant. I think it’s still a going concern in Baltimore. But leave any of opur people there to serve as captive targets? F that.
This is what happens when one party (republicans) does something (invade Afghanistan) and then another party (democrats) takes over. It was bought with cheers and calls for war, and now this is the price you’re paying.
The political shortsightedness of the average American voter never fails to astound.
TL:DR: you broke it, you’ve now bought it.
Hey Hussar. I don’t want to be rude, right off the bat, anyway, so I’ll be nice. You say, “…and now this is the price you’re paying.” Are you an American?
I am. However I fail to see what that has to do with anything. Even if I wasn’t, that changes nothing as far as the truth in what I posted.
Air Cav was too kind to be rude, but I’m in just the right mood for it. Hussar, I strongly suspect that you’re a liberal come to rub our noses in the war our nation has fought for the last twelve years. We will verbally hand you your ass if you try. We might be winding down in Afghanistan, but we’re not done with the terrorists WHO WERE THE ONES WHO STARTED ALL THIS, and they’re not done with us. And THAT’S the only truth that’s going to matter in the end.
I’m not a liberal, nor a conservative for that matter. Actually, I don’t prescribe to any political ideology other than fact, reason and logic.
Now, do you have something to contribute, or are you going to mire in the ignorance of name calling?
You haven’t seen me call names yet. I guessed you were a liberal…does that offend you? And what fact, reason, and logic do you uphold? Believing in nothing and blaming everyone else for everything you don’t happen to like? That’s a cop out.
If I were a liberal, how would you calling me one be an insult? Where’s the sense in that?
It was explained in my first post on the topic. You, assuming you voted for the politicians that brought us in to the invasion of Afghanistan “bought” the war. Regardless of party in charge, and what their subsequent actions (such as in this case) may be, YOU bought it.
It’s like with the TSA, NDAA, etc..etc..The American voter gave the government the power to spy, whatever on us. Now, you may have given the party you particularly agree with that power, but you may not have accounted for the time when another party comes into power, and abuses those tools, such as how the Obama admin has.
Politics is chess, not checkers.
and you are a mental midget. 9/11, does that even ring a bell with you? Or are you one of those truther douche bags as well?
Nahh, you are just a douche bag in general.
My question arose from the words I quoted from your first comment. You didn’t say “We’re paying” but “you’re paying,” as if you are unaffected by the American blood and treasure being spent in that shithole.
My “escape” plan, such as it is, is in full swing. And I didn’t vote for any of the politicians in this current ongoing mess, thus I’m absolved from any responsibility.
Oh really? By not exercising your franchise you bear a lot of the responsibility for the current administrations mess. By staying home you got the poser in chief elected, twice. I’m glad you plan on bugging out, good riddance. Now un ass my AO, slacker.
Hussar’s comment is indicative of the amazingly short attention spans of many people in this age of social media, and consequently illustrative of a wider problem. Hussar, like many others, completely ignores and/or forgets that the Afghanistan invasion was precipitated by al Qaeda’s attack on 9/11 (the Taliban harbored al Qaeda as well). It’s easy to debate the strategy of the invasion and its aftermath, but to blame the Republicans for the invasion is absurd. I think al Qaeda deserves that distinction. Completely ignoring 9/11 for Afghanistan is “shortsighted.”
And exactly how do you know my age? Again, we’re devolving into BS and things that don’t relate to the topic at hand.
Which usually means there’s no substance to what you have to say.
You also completely missed the point.
edit:
I misread the “age” thing. My mistake.
We didn’t miss any point. You came here to rub our noses in something you feel no responsibility for. Now what did I miss?
Rub noses? No. I made of statement of fact that you bought this, so don’t act surprised when someone else comes in and piles on what is already in motion.
“…so don’t act surprised when someone else comes in and piles on…”
If you have no investment in what’s going on, why do you even care? If you think you’re going to walk away without any skin off your nose or dirt on your hands, why are you taking time out of your day to splash around in the muck with the likes of us? Laying down with dogs, getting up with fleas…that kind of thing, don’t you know.
1)I have my reasons (investment.) for having the “right” (as if that’s even needed.) to comment and care.
2)I don’t think any of you are flea ridden dogs.
Hussar. There is something about you that is quite repugnant. Perhaps it’s the self-righteous and holier-than-thou attitude your words convey. (O, and speaking of words, the word you meant to use was subscribe, not prescribe.) You aren’t one to see your hands soiled are you? You aren’t one who employs empathy are you? You sound like a spoiled child (and perhaps you are) whose lofty opinion of himself is miles higher than the opinions others have of you. But, hey, these are just my impressions. I could be wrong. So, what grade are you in?
So basically, you have nothing to add?
Got it.
Cheers.
oh….
pre·scribe [pri-skrahyb] Show IPA
verb (used with object), pre·scribed, pre·scrib·ing.
1.
to lay down, in writing or otherwise, as a rule or a course of action to be followed; appoint, ordain, or enjoin.
2.
Medicine/Medical . to designate or order the use of (a medicine, remedy, treatment, etc.).
verb (used without object), pre·scribed, pre·scrib·ing.
3.
to lay down rules; direct; dictate.
4.
Medicine/Medical . to designate remedies, treatment, etc., to be used.
5.
Law. to claim a right or title by virtue of long use and enjoyment; make a prescriptive claim. (usually followed by for or to ).
Hussar, again, appears to be blaming the victim rather than engaging in an meaningful debate of any tangible substance. He argues that “YOU bought it,” in reference to Afghanistan. But again, makes no reference to 9/11 and the follow-on plots against American civilians. It’s such a myopic world view. Hence my citation to social media… it’s all on the surface with no intellectual, unbiased, or reasoned position. Instead, he/she relies on mere platitudes.
Blaming the victim? Hardly. I never said, “we shouldn’t have invaded Afghanistan.” You assumed that.
I merely pointed out that no one should be complaining when the current doofus in office does something stupid, because you “bought” this by electing leaders who took us to war.
That doesn’t make sense. You argue that I “assumed” your position on the invasion, but then continue to blame the American voter for electing politicians “who took us to war.” My position is that the politicians were forced into invading Afghanistan by al Qaeda’s actions. So I am merely stating that the voters did not “buy” Afghanistan, although the voters did “buy” its current strategic trajectory by re-electing Obama. But you take it a step further by blaming those who “called for war.”
I’m sorry, but that is incorrect.
There was a choice. Whether it be right or wrong (which isn’t the topic at hand.), there was a choice.
x2 when Bush was reelected.
Of course there’s always a literal choice… If some guy is punching me in the face, I can choose to let him keep hitting me. But that is not what you are saying. You blame the voters for “buying” the invasion. You appear to be changing your tune, to the extent you had one to begin with, but you never were really clear to begin with.
I’m not changing my tune at all. The entire point is this…again…
This wasn’t a war we were forced (and since I have to apparently be crystal clear that I’m not some transvestite, commie libscum..I do actually think we should have invaded. Completely bungled or not)into.
The US had the absolute choice to invade or not.
The point is, that you cannot set something into motion, ESPECIALLY when it comes to the US government, and then act shocked, surprised or dumbfounded when a new party comes in, even one you may not particularly agree with, and does dumb things. Like with the TSA. Like with the NDAA. Etc..etc..
You/we/us/whomever GAVE the government the permission, and they are riding that pony all day long.
And it was corrected.
Holy shit. You did a cut and paste from a dictionary? Ah, that’s quite telling. The one thing that you keyed in on was the error you made in your word choice. Even Cheese Dick, PhD could read that one. Hey, here’s an escape plan you really ought to avail yourself of: It’s that X in the top right corner of your screen. Go ahead and click on it. And what’s that “cheers” shit? I recall another asshole who used that here but, for the life of me, I can’t remember his tag. Is “Hussar” a new tag?
I have no idea what you are talking about. I guess you’re assuming I’m some other poster, but I can assure you I’m not.
I know it’s a stretch for more than one person to use that word.
Lol…anyway, we have nothing further to discuss, as I’ll not lower the conversation to insults and BS.
So, Socrates, what grade ARE you in?
Hussar…You come of as an intellectual version of the 22 year old seeking a degree in “Communications”. When asked, they can hardly tell you who the President is much less anything about his policies. More importantly, when asked they will say, if you can get them to stop Tweeting long enough, “I don’t vote, I’m not into the whole politics thing”. Their way of absolving themselves of any responsibility to or for anything happening in our nation or of even having to interrupt their shallow lives to think of such things. If we take them and add some English skills to them, we get you. Absolved of all that happens because you hold no political position and vote for no one. Much as Pilate, in your self righteous attitude, you can, in your mind, turn and “wash your hands” of your lack of care and concern. It is “us”, “we”, who vote and have political positions who are to blame. We got what we deserved, in other words, according to your posts. I disagree. America did not get what it deserved on 9-11 or since from terrorists around the globe. Who will stand in the gap to stop them Hussar, you? I think not. It is after all not your fight or concern. You have your “exit” plan. As for the lives lost to stop terrorism at home and abroad, they are the “price we pay” in your view. Yesterday was a day when we remembered those who gave their lives for you, me and all of America. They stood in the gap to maintain your freedom to be apolitical and holier than thou. Nothing I write here will change you. I have met and talked with people like you before. You cannot be reached through the reason and logic you profess to have a corner on in this discussion. We here on the other hand do have dirty hands and have put skin in the game for you and all in this country. So pardon us, if we are a bit put off by your “position” or should I… Read more »
As one of the future 9,800 that has to deal with the inevitable attack and/or aftermath during 2015, I welcome flicking off every light switch that I can. Maybe I can frame light switches and donate them to veteran groups.
Rochambeau, just know that we don’t like any of this one bit, and that you and the others left over there will be in our thoughts constantly. Please keep in contact with us, and stay safe.
Rochambeau…Thank you for serving and you will be in my thoughts and prayers when you deploy. God bless and keep you.
Does the Queen approve of this? She is finally out of costume now. Poetrooper will probably have a field day with her latest news-making outburst. It seems her don’t-let-them-eat-cake dietary re-education camp program is running into opposition from those elected guys in Congress. And the Queen says, “This is unacceptable!” I kid you not. The First Bitch now thinks she has the power to tell Congress a thing or two. I need a cold compress or something.