More US troops for Afghanistan?
The Washington Post frets that the Trump Administration might send 3,000 more troops to Afghanistan to reverse recent gains made by the Taliban there;
Earlier this week, after a lengthy review, top Trump administration advisers were reported to be urging an ambitious new military role in Afghanistan, led by the Pentagon, with at least 3,000 troops added to the current 8,400, to halt the country’s deteriorating security and push the Taliban back to the negotiating table. President Trump is expected to make a final decision this month.
Such a policy would dramatically ramp up American involvement in the war, which was systematically cut back under President Barack Obama. By the end of 2014, most U.S. and NATO forces had left the country, leaving Afghan troops struggling to hold off a determined Taliban insurgency, at a loss of life that a U.S. watchdog group recently called “shockingly high.”
Today, Afghan officials and experts agree that the defense forces are desperately in need of both short- and long-term U.S. assistance — more equipment, air support and Special Operations partnerships as the summer fighting season intensifies, and more troop training and leadership reforms so that the defense forces can become self-sufficient.
Yeah, well, tough. President Obama had an opportunity to have a real “surge”, but instead he half-assed it with a political decision, deciding in favor of his political advisors instead of his generals. Then he let the Taliban take over from gains that US troops had made with one hand tied behind their collective back.
“There is more fighting and more ground held by Taliban now than ever before, and increasing the troops can help reverse that,” said Abdul Bari Barakzai, a member of the government’s High Peace Council. “But people have lost their trust in the government. No matter how many troops you bring now, it will have no lasting impact unless there is real reform and good governance.”
Obama’s legacy in Afghanistan. If I was making the decisions at this point, instead of hoping the Afghans would reform their political problems somewhere down the road, I’d make the increase in more US troops contingent on the Afghans’ political reform right now. They’ve been making promises, and now all we get are excuses. Let’s see an investment in their future from the Afghans for a change. Otherwise, we’re gone.
Thanks to Chief Tango for the link.
Category: Terror War
3000 is a small number and is not going to make a huge difference but it may make the job easier for those that are on the ground trying to accomplish the missions they are clearly being under-resourced in accomplishing..
I am just not sure what we are doing there is worth doing if we don’t think it is worth doing right with the resources to succeed.
Why put lives at risk is such a constantly half-assed way?
“Why put lives at risk is such a constantly half-assed way?”
Jonn, can you find any archived examples of this liberal turd lamenting the “half-assed” strategy when it was his half-assed, exalted leader who was conducting this war? It’s less than four months into the Trump administration and other world leaders are beginning to speak up about Obama, Clinton and Kerry totally screwing the pooch when it comes to the War on Terror. Just wait till those world leaders write their memoirs.
I did not like Obama’s Afghanistan strategy. I served in Afghanistan during it.
He focused too much on direct counter terrorism action and insufficiently resourced every other aspect of the war.
If I defended Obama on this forum it would be on the counter terror aspects of his strategy which I think were the ONLY aspect of his strategy her cared about and the ONLY aspect he was willing to fully support resourcing.
I don’t give a fuck what policy our policy makers come up with, as long as it is feasible, adequate to accomplish the end state, and THEY RESOURCE IT SUFFICIENTLY.
The problem with Obama is that we did not roll back too ambitious of an end state, or even clearly define it. We left it as essentially the vague “The Government of Afghanistan is capable of managing its own government and security needs without direct manpower support” end state that we had under Bush but neither Bush or Obama sufficiently resourced the plan to achieve that end state.
And I am not even sure it was achievable.
Iraq is a different circumstance and I have different issues with what happened there.
Nevertheless, there will be no hiding place for Obama and his defenders when the truth begins to be revealed by foreign leaders. He fucked up royally and everyone, including him, knows that to be the truth. Obama’s much vaunted legacy in American history is going to be a much avoided by historians footnote because it exposes the vast inadequacy of America’s first black president.
Someday there will be books that are mandatory reading for business students using Barack Obama as the classroom example of the problems with promoting through affirmative action.
Wow. That is some straight up racist bullshit. You are actually arguing that Obama proves affirmative action is a failure because you claim he was a failure as president and only became president because he was elevated by affirmative action. Further, you make implication that black people make bad presidents and we should be careful about affirmative action because it is why we had a black president. First of all, Obama did not become president because of affirmative action. He was elected. Beating not only one of the most entrenched and at the time still favorably viewed democrats in Hillary clinton in the primary, but also defeating John McCain – an entrenched career politician with an admirable record and a damn war hero. And later Mitt Romney (admittedly a weak candidate). He also received the majority of the popular vote both times. Something both Trump and Bush failed to do. He EARNED the presidency in exactly the way our founders intended; by being the American people’s choice for president. There is no affirmative action at the polling station. In fact numerous studies on voter preferences show that being black or a female is a LIABILITY in executive office elections. And your prejudiced attitude toward Obama because of the color of his skin is exactly why. Obama did not even get into Harvard because of affirmative action. There is zero evidence he did, and his performance proves that he BELONGED at Harvard. He graduated magna cum laude and was elected by his fellow students to be editor of the Harvard Law Review the most prestigious student position in the law school. Your implication of invoking affirmative action in Obama’s case is that he would not have accomplished what he did if is had not been for the the nudge affirmative action gave him. The fact that he graduated among the top of his class and was elected to the most prestigious position in his class indicates he was a well qualified and capable student and EXACTLY the kind of student Harvard admission teams are looking for, regardless of skin color. There… Read more »
You really are an asshole Lars. What percentage of people reported that they voted for that POS because he is Black? Give me a freakin’ break with your bullshit. And fuck you for attempting to lecture Poetrooper you commie, kool-aid drinking twit.
His position is that Obama only achieved what he did because of affirmative action…
And that him becoming president proves affirmative action is bad because his presidency proves black people make bad presidents.
There is no damn way you can claim that is anything but racist.
And what about the dozen or so presidents that were WORSE than Obama.
Right now there is not a historical single ranking that puts him in the bottom 50%. And no matter where he ended up he will never reach the bottom 25% (where Bush Jr. is by the way).
So why is Poe not claiming white guys make bad presidents and we should learn from the Bush presidency not to elect white guys?
And the fact that you think I am a communist proves you are the cool-aid drinking twit. You STILL have no fucking clue what a communist is.
You only know that you are supposed to hate communists and that liberals are communists.
Talk about a fucking kool aid drinking nitwit.
What the hell are you smoking again? The a.h. obozo was elected strictly on a racist basis! The a.h. had NO EXPERIENCE, never held a job, never did anything but play with the boys in the bathhouse…they (liberal morons) elected the maggot because he was black..PERIOD!! Wake up phuck head imo!
There really are too many idiotic racists on this board.
Since you mention admission to Ivy League schools, how did Bush’s unergraduate record compare to Obama’s? How can you be absolutely positively rootin’ tootin’ sure that Obama did not get into Harvard through affirmative action? Or into Columbia for that matter?
As far as being editor of the Law Review, it is my understanding that he wrote no articles for the Review, in contrast to every other editor. Being *elected* President of the Law Review, while perhaps not being affirmative action, nevertheless does not prove he was qualified. I do not think I need to cite examples of elected incompetents; I am sure you can supply your own, and there may even be some overlap between your list and mine.
In any case, I would rather be governed by high school graduates like Harry Truman than by graduates of post-graduate “elite” schools like Harvard or Yale. I had my fill of “The Best And Brightest” a half-century ago and I am no longer impressed.
Wow. That is some straight up racist bullshit. You are actually arguing that Obama proves affirmative action is a failure because you claim he was a failure as president and only became president because he was elevated by affirmative action. Further, you make implication that black people make bad presidents and we should be careful about affirmative action because it is why we had a black president. First of all, Obama did not become president because of affirmative action. He was elected. Beating not only one of the most entrenched and at the time still favorably viewed democrats in Hillary clinton in the primary, but also defeating John McCain – an entrenched career politician with an admirable record and a damn war hero. And later Mitt Romney (admittedly a weak candidate). He also received the majority of the popular vote both times. Something both Trump and Bush failed to do. He EARNED the presidency in exactly the way our founders intended; by being the American people’s choice for president. There is no affirmative action at the polling station. In fact numerous studies on voter preferences show that being black or a female is a LIABILITY in executive office elections. And your prejudiced attitude toward Obama because of the color of his skin is exactly why. Obama did not even get into Harvard because of affirmative action. There is zero evidence he did, and his performance proves that he BELONGED at Harvard. He graduated magna cum laude and was elected by his fellow students to be editor of the Harvard Law Review the most prestigious student position in the law school. Your implication of invoking affirmative action in Obama’s case is that he would not have accomplished what he did if is had not been for the the nudge affirmative action gave him. The fact that he graduated among the top of his class and was elected to the most prestigious position in his class indicates he was a well qualified and capable student and EXACTLY the kind of student Harvard admission teams are looking for, regardless of skin color. There… Read more »
“He was elected.”
He was a sideshow attraction specifically chosen because of his race.
He also had some help from his Chicago “friends”… read up on how he was elected to the Senate – talk about some dirty deeds done dirt cheap.
I’m not saying there weren’t other factors in considering him as well as others, but apparently, the dems were not and are not interested in presenting the most qualified person to be the president of the United States.
Based on his presentation and the reactions since, I’m reasonably certain the final factor of his selection above all else was simply his race.
I’m with you on that, IDC SARC…
And what do we know about the JEF’s academic history, Lars? Nobody seems to be willing to release his grades from Occidental, Columbia or Harvard?
Looks like obstruction to me, doesn’t it?
For someone that claims that he didn’t like Obama as President, you sure spend a great deal of time defending him and his policies, don’t you?
How is it obstruction? Obstruction of what?
And we know he was Editor of the Harvard Law Review we also know he graduated Magna Cum Laude (Harvard confirmed that fact and it is in the Law Class graduation announcement).
That puts him in the top 20% of the class in one of the most prestigious and competitive law schools in the country.
Trying to disparage his academic achievement as though he in unqualified is ridiculous given that class ranking.
Additionally, you don’t seem to give a damn about the academic performance of ANY OTHER PRESIDENT.
But the media did – I believe that if they made GW’s grades an issue, why not Obama’s?
Did I hit a nerve, Commissar?
No, they did not make it an issue because there was not benefit to the GoP to do so because they did not want to draw attention to the fact that he graduated among the top of his class in one of the most competitive and prestigious law schools in the world.
That is why the “media” did not make it an issue. The left had no issue with his academic performance and the right DID NOT WANT TO MAKE IT AN ISSUE because it was a bad strategy to do so.
As for his not releasing his transcripts is probably has to do with classes he likely took as a liberal and how intellectual curiosity can be twisted.
I took a class on Islam for instance. And a class on Wealth and Poverty. A class on War. A class on the Bible.
Any of those classes could be used as fodder for one side or the other to paint a narrative about what I might believe and what I might have “learned” or “indoctrinated” to believe.
Hell, just the fact that I went to Berkeley is enough for most of the nitwits on this board to make dismissive assumption about me being “indoctrinated”.
His graduating Magna Cum Laude says enough about is intellectual capacity. Why give the opposing side ammunition?
And the public figure that first called for Obama to release his transcripts was TRUMP. And Trump never released his.
White males have a better chance of getting elected senior executive position in the US than any other demographic in the US. In fact they are more likely than ALL other demographics in the US combined. White males outnumber all other demographics holding state governorships almost 4-1.
And historically than number is more than 20-1.
We had a 230 year consecutive streak of white male presidents.
And you moron have the insanity to actually argue Obama was only president because he was black?
Then every other president and almost every single governor in history was in their position because THEY WERE WHITE!
And to defend Poe’s claim that Obama’s presidency warns us to avoid affirmative action because it could lead to bad presidents is ridiculous.
Not just because it flat out ignores the fact that Obama is not even close to bottom 50% and will lever be among the bottom 10 presidents. All of whom are white.
It is also insanely racist because it implies black make bad presidents based on HIS opinion of one president. And opinion NOT supported by the historical rankings of presidents by any objective source.
It is flat fucking pathetic that you guys bandwagon and defend this kind of nonsense merely because you see Poe as part of your ideological tribe.
Why do you visit TAH if you get so damn asshurt over just about anything anyone posts here, Lars? You cry to Jonn every fucking time your little special snowflake feelings are even remotely hurt – he even posted a few weeks ago that he’s gotten to the point that he deletes your e-mails when you cry about some slight.
Just go away, Commissar… you’re obnoxious and disliked, that can’t be denied.
Bullshit. First, I only sent about three maybe four email complaints to Jonn in the last 4 years. And I am sure some of you have that number beat since I heard that some have emailed Jonn several times to complain about me. Second, my email complaints were all about the same issue; people using my full name in their posts or even posting using my full name as part of their handle. Often these posts are made without me even being on the thread and I learn they were made days or weeks later, many I am sure I have never even seen, and they too often attribute positions I do not hold, make false assumptions about me but assert them as fact, and associate me with statements or issues I have no desire to be associated with. Particularly by my full name. I used my name originally because I made the HUGE mistake of thinking this board of “veterans” likely had the integrity and courtesy to not pull trollish bullshit like that. They would not want it done to them (which is apparently why they almost all hide behind anonymity), but they have no problem doing to other veterans. Which is part of the reason I suspect most of them have no or relatively short periods of service, because I would not screw with other veterans using their personal information like that and I do not know a single veteran I served with that would be trollish little shits like that. Maybe I was just fortunate enough to serve in better than average units with better than average people. I have discovered the real full names of a few members of this board but I have never “outed” one of them or used their full name in one of my posts. Though I did drop a first name once as warning that they should not be dropping my full name in their posts. I asked Jonn to remove my full name from posts a few times or for him ask a few people that are particularly trollish about… Read more »
Answer the first part of the question – Why do you still come here?
I don’t know. I do like that the passing of veterans is being blogged about here. As a kid I learned that cemeteries were often forgotten and eventually demolished and built over. My grandmother had died and I wondered what happens to her grave over the years. We never visited any graves of any other relatives and wondered why and who does if we don’t. I also wondered “where are all the old grave yards?”. It really bothered me how irrelevant people were once they were gone. They get put in the ground, forgotten, then a hundred years later someone removes the grave stone and builds a shopping mall on it. My mom explained that funerals were for the living. That answer didn’t feel good enough, though it was pretty truthful. Once I realized that a lot of soldiers were buried in “regular” graveyards it really bothered me that their service and sacrifice might be honored with a parking lot. When I joined the army I volunteered for a funeral detail and participated as an honor guard for a dozen or so funerals in West Texas. On weekends we travelled on a military bus to these tiny graveyards in small towns in the middle of nowhere. Sad little scratches of land with chain link fences around them. We had no bugler so we used a boom box hidden in a red cloth covered box to play Taps from a tape recording of it. Usually a family member would approach us and share the military service of their loved one and stories they heard about the time they served. Sometimes it was a lifetime of service, summed up in a moment’s reciting of what they remembered from their loved one’s stories. We usually waited until most of the guest had dispersed. Then we would get in a bus and drive away. Leaving the remaining few grieving relatives standing over a hole in a patch of dry scrub land behind a chain link fence. It always felt so inadequate of a ceremony and resting place for people that served before me. More… Read more »
After reading Commissar’s reply it sounds like he has at least one legitimate reason to complain.
“The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.”
RR
Why bother?
These Islamic countries are ungrateful shitheads and the second Democraps get int office they squander military gains during wars. Time to just unfuck our courts, bring back the rule of law, deny entry to the US from failed states and be done with it. NATO aint doing shit to contribute and we’ll get no where in Islamic shitholes unless we colonize and change their culture from where it starts.
I was in Afghanistan during the Obama administration and the counterterror effort was pretty robust, but the rest of it was half-assed to the point that it seemed like we were just another militia; well-armed and well-trained, but a militia nonetheless. The Afghans mostly fought their civil war around us like we weren’t there.
I spent 2.5 of my 20 years on active duty in Afghanistan. IMO, the true problems with that country can’t be remedied with more troops or funding – ever. Afghanistan completely lacks the necessary preconditions for any real “successful” nation: reliable infrastructure, a legitimate market-based economy, an educated population that can be lead by a competent central government. We have learned the same lesson the Soviets learned in the 80s: there is no true “success” in Afghanistan. The best we can hope for, is that Afghan forces (supported by the US, of course), can maintain some level of over watch on the nation, so that terrorist organizations can’t find safe haven in Afghanistan and plan/launch attacks on the West. Beyond that, we are just hoping for an Afghanistan that can and will never exist.
This is starting to remind me of the deranged Col. Hessler in the movie “The Battle Of The Bulge”.
…
Col. H—“The best thing possible is happening; the war will go on”
Sgt.—– “For how long?”
Col. H.—“Indefinitely—on, and on, and on”
……
https://youtu.be/A7IxwOlr2PY