Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

tired troops

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • tired troops

    General: far more US troops needed in Afghanistan

    By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
    Published: September 16, 2008

    KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) -- Even after an extra U.S. Army brigade joins the fight against the insurgency here in January, three times that many reinforcements will be needed shortly thereafter, the highest-ranking U.S. general here said Tuesday.

    Gen. David McKiernan, commander of NATO-led international forces in Afghanistan, told reporters traveling with Defense Secretary Robert Gates that the brigade arriving in January is an urgent requirement based on an assessment that fighting in eastern Afghanistan is tougher than believed six months ago.

    ''There are an additional three brigade combat teams'' that have been validated by the Pentagon as a requirement, McKiernan said. He would not say exactly how many extra soldiers that entails, but said that it was more than 10,000 -- beyond the roughly 3,700 in reinforcements that are scheduled to arrive in January.

    There currently are about 33,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan and about 146,000 in Iraq.

    Gates arrived in the Afghan capital Tuesday evening after presiding at a ceremony in Baghdad where Gen. Ray Odierno took over for Gen. David Petraeus as the top U.S. commander in Iraq. Gates was meeting over dinner in Kabul with McKiernan and was to hold talks with senior Afghan officials on Wednesday.

    More U.S. forces have been killed in Afghanistan so far this year than in all of 2007 as a resurgent Taliban-led insurgency has adopted bolder and often deadlier tactics. U.S. officials say the insurgency cannot win a conventional war, but its persistence has left U.S. and NATO leaders seeking reinforcements and has eroded the credibility of Afghanistan's fragile elected government.

    McKiernan said he had no doubt that the insurgency could not win in Afghanistan, but he did not say U.S. forces are assured of victory, either.

    ''We are not losing, but we are winning slower in some places than others,'' he said.

    In the interview, McKiernan also disclosed that he recently issued a revised order meant to govern the tactics and procedures followed by U.S. forces when engaging in air and ground fights against the insurgents. The revision, issued Sept. 2, was in response to a series of attacks that resulted in civilian deaths -- most notably the highly publicized allegations that a U.S. attack on an Afghan village compound on Aug. 22 killed as many as 90 Afghan civilians, including women and children. The U.S. military has disputed the allegation but also has launched a new investigation in light of emerging evidence.

    McKiernan said 90 percent of his new directive is meant to re-emphasize existing procedures.

    ''We've put an increased focus on partnering with Afghan security forces,'' he said in explaining the main change. ''In other words, we want to run more and more operations that are combined operations with the Afghan army and/or the Afghan police. That's probably a new emphasis on this tactical directive.''

  • #2
    Its my impression that the country is pretty exhausted by the Iraq War. And its not done yet.

    Are we going to draw-down troops in Iraq, and just keep the military in overdrive mode in Afghanistan? The few military families I have contact with are already maxed-out. Afghanistan/Pakistan could be hot for far longer than it took to pacify Iraq.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Harlan Huckleby
      Its my impression that the country is pretty exhausted by the Iraq War. And its not done yet.

      Are we going to draw-down troops in Iraq, and just keep the military in overdrive mode in Afghanistan? The few military families I have contact with are already maxed-out. Afghanistan/Pakistan could be hot for far longer than it took to pacify Iraq.
      Barry want's none of it. He says they all must stay until HE says it's okay to come home.
      Lombardi told Starr to "Run it, and let's get the hell out of here!" - 'Ice Bowl' December 31, 1967

      Comment


      • #4
        Perhaps if our troops had not been sent to Iraq......instead gone to Afghanistan......

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Harlan Huckleby
          Its my impression that the country is pretty exhausted by the Iraq War. And its not done yet.

          Are we going to draw-down troops in Iraq, and just keep the military in overdrive mode in Afghanistan? The few military families I have contact with are already maxed-out. Afghanistan/Pakistan could be hot for far longer than it took to pacify Iraq.

          I just don't see how we can keep fighting conventionally. The cost in lives, and dollars is not sustainable. And screwing around like this only serves to embolden our enemies. If you're going to fight a war, obliterate the crap out of them in 2 weeks, or don't fight at all.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by packinpatland
            Perhaps if our troops had not been sent to Iraq......instead gone to Afghanistan......
            Leaving Hussein in power, followed by his sons, carried great risks. He had essentially beaten sanctions and diplomacy, the argument that he was contained is not true.

            I'm not saying your point is wrong, but its not so simple.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Scott Campbell
              Originally posted by Harlan Huckleby
              Its my impression that the country is pretty exhausted by the Iraq War. And its not done yet.

              Are we going to draw-down troops in Iraq, and just keep the military in overdrive mode in Afghanistan? The few military families I have contact with are already maxed-out. Afghanistan/Pakistan could be hot for far longer than it took to pacify Iraq.

              I just don't see how we can keep fighting conventionally. The cost in lives, and dollars is not sustainable. And screwing around like this only serves to embolden our enemies. If you're going to fight a war, obliterate the crap out of them in 2 weeks, or don't fight at all.
              How exactly do you propose to "obliterate the hell out of them" when you're talking about partisan warfare where the enemy doesn't wear uniforms or stay in one place?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Harlan Huckleby
                Its my impression that the country is pretty exhausted by the Iraq War. And its not done yet.

                Are we going to draw-down troops in Iraq, and just keep the military in overdrive mode in Afghanistan? The few military families I have contact with are already maxed-out. Afghanistan/Pakistan could be hot for far longer than it took to pacify Iraq.
                And then you suddenly noticed you have a nose between your eyes? This is not exactly earthshaking news, my blue friend.

                Comment


                • #9
                  what is the answer, hoosier? what do you suppose Obama intends to do?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by packinpatland
                    Perhaps if our troops had not been sent to Iraq......instead gone to Afghanistan......
                    Ratified by congress and the UN. That's a representative of every breathing human on the planet. History will show after we're long gone that it was the right thing to do, no matter much the left wants to politicize it.
                    Lombardi told Starr to "Run it, and let's get the hell out of here!" - 'Ice Bowl' December 31, 1967

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Wait a minute...we've won right? The surge worked to perfection in Iraq and the Taliban and Bin Laden were defeated in Asia long ago.
                      C.H.U.D.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by sheepshead
                        Originally posted by packinpatland
                        Perhaps if our troops had not been sent to Iraq......instead gone to Afghanistan......
                        Ratified by congress and the UN. That's a representative of every breathing human on the planet. History will show after we're long gone that it was the right thing to do, no matter much the left wants to politicize it.
                        All lemmings feel they're doing the right thing............as they fall over the cliff

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by sheepshead
                          Originally posted by packinpatland
                          Perhaps if our troops had not been sent to Iraq......instead gone to Afghanistan......
                          Ratified by congress and the UN. That's a representative of every breathing human on the planet. History will show after we're long gone that it was the right thing to do, no matter much the left wants to politicize it.
                          As far as UN1441 I don't think it authorized an invasion of Iraq. (Was 1441 the 2002 resolution? )
                          C.H.U.D.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by packinpatland
                            Perhaps if our troops had not been sent to Iraq......instead gone to Afghanistan......
                            the corrupt UN would still be stealing from the world thru the oil for food program???
                            The only time success comes before work is in the dictionary -- Vince Lombardi

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by hoosier
                              Originally posted by Scott Campbell
                              Originally posted by Harlan Huckleby
                              Its my impression that the country is pretty exhausted by the Iraq War. And its not done yet.

                              Are we going to draw-down troops in Iraq, and just keep the military in overdrive mode in Afghanistan? The few military families I have contact with are already maxed-out. Afghanistan/Pakistan could be hot for far longer than it took to pacify Iraq.

                              I just don't see how we can keep fighting conventionally. The cost in lives, and dollars is not sustainable. And screwing around like this only serves to embolden our enemies. If you're going to fight a war, obliterate the crap out of them in 2 weeks, or don't fight at all.
                              How exactly do you propose to "obliterate the hell out of them" when you're talking about partisan warfare where the enemy doesn't wear uniforms or stay in one place?
                              You use the military to cripple their economy then you don't care....oh wait..we need oil.
                              The only time success comes before work is in the dictionary -- Vince Lombardi

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X