Naturally, the military wants more troops for Afghanistan. Have they ever advocated a REDUCTION in troop levels? We need to get OUT of Afghanistan before we lose hundreds more troops and spend tens of billions of dollars that we didn't have in the first place. One way or another, the military is going to LOSE in Afghanistan. Will it be NOW or LATER? Even our top military guy says that "resources will not win this war."
Someone recently said that Afghanistan is where empires go to die. Looking at history, it's hard to dispute that. We in the U.S. are a staggering, tottering, decaying empire, overextended and deep in debt. We need to pull out of Afghanistan AND many of the over 700 military bases we have scattered across this planet and COME HOME. We have MANY needs to focus on at home.
For Afghanistan and Pakistan and al-Queda, we should leave a small force behind to train the local police and military AND to infiltrate al-Queda and gradually disrupt their operations. We should have handled al-Queda from the beginning as a police and intelligence operation. This is how most countries seem to most successfully battle their terrorist pests. Shortly after 9/11, our country was in shock and outraged, and a military strike against SOMEONE was inevitable. One might think that cooler heads would have prevailed by now and a constant pouring of troops and money into Afghanistan is not going to do the job. Wake up America. Come home, America.
Report: More troops needed for Afghan war success
Associated Press
WASHINGTON — The situation in Afghanistan is growing worse, and without more boots on the ground the U.S. risks failure in a war it's been waging since September 2001, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan says in a confidential report.
“Resources will not win this war, but under-resourcing could lose it,” Gen. Stanley McChrystal wrote in a five-page Commander's Summary. His 66-page report, sent to Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Aug. 30, is now under review by President Barack Obama.
Details of McChrystal's assessment were first reported late Sunday by The Washington Post. The newspaper posted a link to the report on its Web site, with some operational details withheld at the request of the Pentagon.
“Although considerable effort and sacrifice have resulted in some progress, many indicators suggest the overall effort is deteriorating,” McChrystal said of the war's progress.
While asserting that more troops are needed, McChrystal also pointed out an “urgent need” to significantly revise strategy. The U.S. needs to interact better with the Afghan people, McChrystal said, and better organize its efforts with NATO allies.
“We run the risk of strategic defeat by pursuing tactical wins that cause civilian casualties or unnecessary collateral damage. The insurgents cannot defeat us militarily; but we can defeat ourselves,” he wrote.
In his blunt assessment of the tenacious Taliban insurgency, McChrystal warned that unless the U.S. and its allies gain the initiative and reverse the momentum of the militants within the next year the U.S. “risks an outcome where defeating the insurgency is no longer possible.”
The rest of the story is here.
Never pass up a chance to sit down or relieve yourself.
-old Apache saying
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
remember
Science Links
- Astronomy News
- Carl Sagan Portal
- Dave's World of Space
- Discovery
- Earth Observatory
- Earth Week
- Earth/Sky
- European Space Agency
- FIRST
- Futurism
- Global Volcanism
- Go 100%
- Houston Museum Nat. Sci.
- HowStuffWorks
- I Fucking Love Science
- LiveScience
- McDonald Observatory
- My Science Academy
- NASA
- Nat'l Center for Science Ed
- National Geographic
- Nature
- New Humanist
- New Scientist
- NOAA
- Planetary Society
- Popular Science
- Psychology Today
- Real Clear Science
- Red Orbit
- Science Alert
- Science Blogs
- Science Channel
- Science Daily
- Science Direct
- Science Magazine
- Science News
- Scientific American
- Scientist Magazine
- Skeptic's Dictionary
- Smithsonian
- Solar Direct
- Solar Dynamics
- Space
- StarTalk Media
- Techlicious
- TechRadar
- This Week in Science
- treehugger
- Union of Concerned Scientists
- Wired
deja vu
Blogs, etc.
- All Hat & No Cattle
- Automatic Earth
- Big Think
- Brad Blog
- Daily Kos
- Democurmudgeon
- Digging
- Dr. David Perlmutter
- Driftglass
- The Fix
- Gallery of Regrettable Food
- Graham Hancock
- Greg Palast
- I Love Science
- John Fugelsang Podcast
- Juanita Jean
- Lowering the Bar
- Mark's Daily Apple
- Muck Rack
- Oatmeal
- Rachel Maddow
- Rude Pundit
- Sam Harris
- Sideshow
- The Signal Press
- Steven Gundry, MD
- Stonekettle Station
- Wall of Separation
- Why Evolution is True
- Wonkette
- xkcd
No comments:
Post a Comment