Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Pentagon Sounds Afghan Alarm

  1. #1

    Pentagon Sounds Afghan Alarm

    From the flaming commie pinkos at the Wall Street Journal...

    [QUOTE]U.S. Sounds Afghan Alarm --- Pentagon Report Says Taliban Resurgent; An Iraq Tradeoff
    By Yochi Dreazen
    896 words
    28 June 2008
    The Wall Street Journal
    A1
    English
    (Copyright (c) 2008, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

    WASHINGTON -- In a remarkable shift, Afghanistan, where U.S. officials were once confident of victory, is now rivaling Iraq as the biggest cause of concern for American policymakers.

    [B][B]According to a new Pentagon report, Taliban militants have regrouped after their initial fall from power and "coalesced into a resilient insurgency." The report paints a grim picture of the conflict, concluding that Afghanistan's security conditions have deteriorated sharply while the fledgling national government in Kabul remains incapable of extending its reach throughout the country or taking effective counternarcotics measures.

    The turnaround poses a dilemma for the Bush administration, which had counted Afghanistan as the pinnacle of its success in the war on terror. U.S. commanders say they need more forces, but they can only be provided through withdrawing troops from Iraq.[/B] As a result, the administration may have to choose between accepting a smaller U.S. presence in Iraq or facing the prospect of turmoil in Afghanistan.[/B]

    Senior Pentagon officials and military commanders have ordered a top-to-bottom review of U.S. strategy in Afghanistan. [B]The review was prompted by high-level concern that the U.S. "was losing ground and slipping backwards," said a senior military official familiar with the review.[/B]

    Friday's report, which will be considered in the broader review, is the Pentagon's first assessment of conditions in Afghanistan since the invasion began in 2001. Taliban activity had once been limited to small portions of Afghanistan, but U.S. officials acknowledge that the insurgency has now spread to once-stable parts of the country. [B]Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Schloesser, who commands the U.S. forces operating in eastern Afghanistan, said this week that attacks there had jumped almost 40%.[/B]

    [B]U.S. combat fatalities in Afghanistan are increasing. The country is now more dangerous for American forces than Iraq. A large roadside bomb Thursday killed three American troops, pushing the June death toll so far for the U.S.-led coalition to a record high of 40. In Iraq, 29 American troops have been killed so far this month.[/B]

    Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday that he had "real concern" about rising violence in eastern Afghanistan and said Pakistan was contributing to Afghanistan's instability by failing to prevent militants from crossing into Afghanistan to carry out attacks.

    Mr. Gates said the problems have grown worse in recent months as the Pakistani government negotiated cease-fire accords with the Islamist militants operating in the country's lawless tribal regions. The deals meant that "the pressure was taken off" the militants, who are now "more free to be able to cross the border and create problems for us," Mr. Gates said.

    The report made a similar point, noting that "the greatest challenge to long-term security within Afghanistan is the insurgent sanctuary" within the tribal areas of Pakistan. The report said that earlier cease-fire accords between Pakistan and the militants there resulted in "substantially" more cross-border attacks.

    In a sign of increasing tensions along the border, earlier this week, an Afghan official blamed Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence agency for an attempt to assassinate President Hamid Karzai during a military parade in April. Pakistan's Foreign Ministry rejected the accusation as "baseless and irresponsible."

    Afghanistan has been at the center of a debate between Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama. Mr. McCain, while acknowledging Afghanistan's importance, believes that Iraq is more important to long-term U.S. security. Mr. Obama says that Iraq is a costly diversion from Afghanistan, which he sees as a more critical struggle.

    Mr. Obama has proposed sending at least two additional combat brigades -- or 7,000 to 10,000 troops -- to Afghanistan, while deploying more Special Operations forces to the Afghan-Pakistan border. He has also proposed increasing non-military aid to Afghanistan by at least $1 billion per year. Mr. McCain has called for building permanent bases there, increasing the number of NATO troops, and expanding U.S. training efforts for the Afghan national army.

    The Pentagon report highlighted some good news, noting that the country's gross domestic product, per capita income and direct foreign investment had all increased sharply since 2001. It also praised the Afghan government for adopting a new constitution and holding elections.

    But most of the report was a gloomy recitation of the problems facing the country. It noted that narcotics remains a serious problem in Afghanistan, the world's largest supplier of opium and heroin. It said that "overall counternarcotics efforts in Afghanistan have not been successful" and that opium production "increased substantially in 2007."

    The Taliban, the fundamentalist Islamist movement that ruled Afghanistan from the late 1990s until 2001, is now challenging the government's authority in rural areas of the country, especially in the south and east, according to the report.

    The group carried out a record 2,615 roadside-bomb attacks in 2007, up from 1,931 in 2006. The roadside bombings -- along with a wave of suicide bombings and other types of attacks -- killed more 6,500 people in 2007, also a post-invasion record.

    "The Taliban is likely to maintain or even increase the scope and pace of its terrorist attacks and bombings in 2008," the report concluded.[/QUOTE]

    Among the many reasons invading Iraq was dumb was that it clearly detracted from our efforts in Afghanistan against people who were actually responsible for attacks against us, with a solid international consensus behind us.

    The surge, whatever short-term security gains it may have secured in Iraq, has doubled down on the foolishness by pulling needed troops out of a more important, necessary fight.

  2. #2
    Moreover, the surge has not helped the Iraqi's take back their nation.

    Just more blunder and waste by the worst president in US History. By December we could be in three nations (Iran) and oil could be $400 USD per barrel.

    Who supported this administration again?

  3. #3
    [QUOTE=Jetdawgg;2605877]Moreover, the surge has not helped the Iraqi's take back their nation.

    Just more blunder and waste by the worst president in US History. By December we could be in three nations (Iran) and oil could be $400 USD per barrel.

    Who supported this administration again?[/QUOTE]

    the ones who want $400 a barrel oil

  4. #4
    Hey now we can only focus on AQ in Iraq. Afghanistan? Come on now, only one "we think we are going to win" at a time. Keep it real.

    [QUOTE=nuu faaola;2605829]From the flaming commie pinkos at the Wall Street Journal...



    Among the many reasons invading Iraq was dumb was that it clearly detracted from our efforts in Afghanistan against people who were actually responsible for attacks against us, with a solid international consensus behind us.

    The surge, whatever short-term security gains it may have secured in Iraq, has doubled down on the foolishness by pulling needed troops out of a more important, necessary fight.[/QUOTE]

  5. #5
    On Afganistan, it was a strategic error to engage elsewhere before Afganistan was finished and U.S./Allied troops could be withdrawn. I said it then, have said it all along, and say it still today. It was a mistake will have, are and will pay for.

    Beyond that, there is no point is discussing your circle jerk of negativity on Iraq. We've been there so many times, we can all likely post each others replies beforehand at this point. Sufice it to say, if your man wins in Novermber (and I would all but guarantee he will) then unless he is an outright baldfaced liar, we'll be out of Iraq soon enough.

  6. #6
    what a legacy... let's name a sewage treatment facility after him...

  7. #7
    [QUOTE=Press_Coverage;2606077]what a legacy... let's name a sewage treatment facility after him...[/QUOTE]

    [IMG]http://irregulartimes.com/pumpkindumpbush.gif[/IMG]

  8. #8
    [QUOTE=Jetdawgg;2605877]Moreover, the surge has not helped the Iraqi's take back their nation.

    Just more blunder and waste by the worst president in US History. By December we could be in three nations (Iran) and oil could be $400 USD per barrel.

    Who supported this administration again?[/QUOTE]

    I did. Don't you feel so much smarter than me?

  9. #9
    [QUOTE=pauliec;2606140]I did. Don't you feel so much smarter than me?[/QUOTE]

    no... just more humanist, pluralist and morally sound... .

  10. #10
    [QUOTE=Press_Coverage;2606143]no... just more humanist, pluralist and morally sound... .[/QUOTE]

    Wow, those are big words. You must be [I]really[/I] smart.

  11. #11
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    23,190
    The Pentagon is building full of anti-American liars.

    Seriously...f*ck them and anything they have to f*cking say. Our country would be twice as better if DC somehow slid into the ocean...

  12. #12
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan;2606304]The Pentagon is building full of anti-American liars.

    Seriously...f*ck them and anything they have to f*cking say. Our country would be twice as better if DC somehow slid into the ocean...[/QUOTE]

    Just the politicos:D

  13. #13
    Let me guess the same people who call Bush a war monger for going into Iraq would support a 6 year 200K troop battle in Afganistan and Pakistan with no tangible results.

    What makes anyone think we have the political will, army and treasure to beat the Taliban?

    Time to bail out of both wars and let the chips fall. The US is broke and doesn't have the political will to sustain the effort that might be needed.

    The Democrats are not going to risk their new political power in a protracted debacle in AG and Pakistan no matter what anyone says. The country is tired of the battle regardless of the rational or the results.

    It's over folks unless the Democrats are going to institute a draft and raise taxes to rebuild and refund the military. It's not going to happen.

  14. #14
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;2607214]Let me guess the same people who call Bush a war monger for going into Iraq would support a 6 year 200K troop battle in Afganistan and Pakistan with no tangible results.

    What makes anyone think we have the political will, army and treasure to beat the Taliban?

    Time to bail out of both wars and let the chips fall. The US is broke and doesn't have the political will to sustain the effort that might be needed.

    The Democrats are not going to risk their new political power in a protracted debacle in AG and Pakistan no matter what anyone says. The country is tired of the battle regardless of the rational or the results.

    It's over folks unless the Democrats are going to institute a draft and raise taxes to rebuild and refund the military. It's not going to happen.[/QUOTE]

    "Cut and run?"

  15. #15
    [QUOTE=Jetdawgg;2607817]"Cut and run?"[/QUOTE]

    Practical reality in fighting a war in a Democracy. Without public support wars can't be fought for long periods of time and the public doesn't support putting their sons and daughters and their treasury in harms way for very long.

  16. #16
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;2607879]Practical reality in fighting a war in a Democracy. Without public support wars can't be fought for long periods of time and the public doesn't support putting their sons and daughters and their treasury in harms way for very long.[/QUOTE]

    Willpower is key to any war, which is one key reason why both wars were doomed to fail from the get-go.

    You can't wage successful war in a democracy with a 51% majority and think that's gonna be enough.

  17. #17
    [QUOTE=bitonti;2607894]Willpower is key to any war, which is one key reason why both wars were doomed to fail from the get-go.

    [B][COLOR="Red"]You can't wage successful war in a democracy with a 51% majority and think that's gonna be enough[/COLOR][/B].[/QUOTE]

    That's what this admin did:D

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us