Showing posts with label troop increase. Show all posts
Showing posts with label troop increase. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
10 populous locations in Afghanistan to be Protected by U.S. Troops
Although President Obama has yet to make a formal decision, sources say that more U.S. troops will be sent to Afghanistan. Increased pressure in 10 of the most populous areas and Taliban strongholds are the locations which the U.S. troops will be sent to. To read more, click here NYTimes.
Labels:
Afghanistan,
MN,
Taliban,
troop increase,
troops
Friday, October 23, 2009
NATO Commanders Endorse McChrystal Plan
NATO's defense ministers have collectively and publicly expressed wide support for General Stanley McChrystal's revised Afghanistan strategy and request for 40,000 more troops. However, they declined to discuss the resource implications and what role NATO member nations might play as such.
At this point, it seems that most military and academic leaders who support troop increases believe Gen. McChrystal's plan is the best strategy, and that 40,000 more troops is the aproximate number needed, if not more. Great Britain recently increased troop commitments by a few thousand. Other than that, no one, including the U.S., has been bold enough to speak publicly on willingness to contribute a new influx of troops despite vocal support for Gen. McChrystal. President Obama's decision, expected in the coming weeks, will be telling.
If the leaders who speak out in support of McChrystal ultimately fail to contribute greater support, does that mean public sentiment has triumphed over a potential winning strategy? Most participating countries appear to be on the verge of committing more troops, but less than the amount called for; frustrated populations are simultaneously eager for success and withdrawal. Is the public so fickle that they will accept an increase of 20,000 troops, but not 40,000, at the risk of ultimate failure? And are our leaders so trepidatious of stepping outside the middle road to follow that logic?
The choice in Afghanistan has never been clearer. Give McChrystal what he wants or adopt a strategy to begin reducing troop deployments and begin preparation for majority withdrawal. An "almost surge" seems to be both wasteful and unwise. Literally, go big or go home. While the middle road is the political place to be, it's the place you're most likely to get killed in battle.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8322486.stm
At this point, it seems that most military and academic leaders who support troop increases believe Gen. McChrystal's plan is the best strategy, and that 40,000 more troops is the aproximate number needed, if not more. Great Britain recently increased troop commitments by a few thousand. Other than that, no one, including the U.S., has been bold enough to speak publicly on willingness to contribute a new influx of troops despite vocal support for Gen. McChrystal. President Obama's decision, expected in the coming weeks, will be telling.
If the leaders who speak out in support of McChrystal ultimately fail to contribute greater support, does that mean public sentiment has triumphed over a potential winning strategy? Most participating countries appear to be on the verge of committing more troops, but less than the amount called for; frustrated populations are simultaneously eager for success and withdrawal. Is the public so fickle that they will accept an increase of 20,000 troops, but not 40,000, at the risk of ultimate failure? And are our leaders so trepidatious of stepping outside the middle road to follow that logic?
The choice in Afghanistan has never been clearer. Give McChrystal what he wants or adopt a strategy to begin reducing troop deployments and begin preparation for majority withdrawal. An "almost surge" seems to be both wasteful and unwise. Literally, go big or go home. While the middle road is the political place to be, it's the place you're most likely to get killed in battle.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8322486.stm
Labels:
A.G.,
Afghanistan,
troop increase,
US foreign policy,
War on Terror
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
The US Cannot Wait for Runoff Elections in Afghanistan
While on his way to Tokyo today, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said that NATO/ISAF members should not wait on a runoff election in Afghanistan to increase troop levels, nor, he said, should they expect the US to provide all additional troops. RFU/RL reported today that Gates said that he did not need a US decision about increasing troop levels to talk to NATO allies about increasing their support in Afghanistan.
It is believed that General McCrystal, top US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, told president Obama that he needs somewhere between 10,000 and 40,000 additional troops to avoid failure of the NATO mission.
Labels:
Afghanistan,
CMF,
McChrystal,
NATO,
troop increase
Monday, October 19, 2009
Karzai Likely to Face Runoff Election, "Furious" Over Report
BBC is reporting that the Electoral Complaints Commission (EEC) will report that Afghan President Hamid Karzai did not receive enough votes to avoid a runoff election. Initial election results gave Mr. Karzai 55% of the votes while his nearest rival, Abdullah Abdullah, received 28%. The Independent Election Commission, to which the EEC will submit its report, is controlled by Karzai supporters and has indicated that it will not accept these findings.
The United States recently announced that they will delay a decision on troop escalation until after the report has been submitted. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has suggested that any augmentation of troop levels may be dependent upon the legitimacy of the Afghan government. Mr. Karzai's regime has been fraught with accusations of corruption by international observers over the last year.
The United States recently announced that they will delay a decision on troop escalation until after the report has been submitted. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has suggested that any augmentation of troop levels may be dependent upon the legitimacy of the Afghan government. Mr. Karzai's regime has been fraught with accusations of corruption by international observers over the last year.
Labels:
Afghanistan,
EEC,
Election Fraud,
IEC,
Karzai,
Rahm Emanuel,
SLN,
troop increase
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Troop Increase Decision Will Wait for Fraud Report
BBC is reporting that President Obama will postpone his decision regarding troop increases in Afghanistan until claims of fraud in Afghanistan's presidential election have been investigated. The UN-backed Electoral Complaints Commission will submit its report to the Independent Electoral Commission regarding the legitimacy of Hamid Karzai's August victory in the next few days.
Labels:
Afghanistan,
American University,
augmentation,
ECC,
IEC,
SLN,
troop increase
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)