I don't know.
70,000 troops into Afghanistan.
Ouch !
We haven't finished the mess in Iraq, although in my opinion it should have been over on Inauguration Day. Iraq is no threat to the USA and we are not in Iraq as Peacekeepers, nor should we be. We need to leave Iraq, the sooner the better.
Afghanistan? 70,000? You know its the kind of thing where I feel punched in the gut enough over "W"rong headed wars. In 2001, the USA literally waltzed into that country and took over. Now, with so many years of USA focus diverted to Iraq the problem has become one of enormous consequences. Afghanistan today is more complex, it involves Pakistan and we can't afford to 'just leave.' But at the same time, is 70,000 troops enough? Why not go in with 200,000 or more and remove any doubt about the victory. To send in too few is to garantee high levels of USA troop deaths and injury and do the Generals actually want that?
An article from "Military Times" appears somewhere on this blog. In it, Representative Murtha states the USA would need 600,000 troops to be successful in Afghanistan. IS THAT THE TRUTH?
Seriously.
It seems to me that the approach to the Afghan/Paki issue has to be swift and conclusive, however, it should not be conducted without a complete plan, benchmarks and an exit strategy. Does it make sense to 'piece-meal' Afghanistan as was done in Iraq. War and war and war while rebuilding only to have the reconstruction be destroyed? It doesn't make sense to conduct a 'small' war because it feels comfortable for the American people to accept.
When General Shinseki was asked about an Iraq invasion he didn't pussy-foot around. He stated it like it should be and he was right. We cannot afford a long and protracted war where 1000s of our troops die. As an American, I've had enough already. I don't want more troop deaths. If NATO won't commit more troops then we are supposed to twiddle our thumbs and look on while our people die? I don't think so.
It seems to me the country has to have a discussion with their President. President Obama is capable of such a discussion and I don't mean over the net or any of that mess. He is capable of engaging the country in a discussion to the 'conclusion' of Afghanistan. Literally, we hand over that country to The Taliban or we destroy their regime.
In the video below Ismail Kahn gives a candid opinion regarding the Taliban (I don't care if it is Al Jeezera, they can't lie about an interview.) and he states, "They will never accept the current government." I believe him. I don't believe the 'nonsense' of the propaganda of The Taliban. They are harboring bin Laden and Omar for God Sake.
President Obama went into office promising to end the wars. He never bargained for escalating Afghanistan so much as concluding it. Never in our wildest imaginations did the country expect that Afghanistan was so far gone. Bush and his 'intelligence agency' never alluded to the problems, yet alone actually address them. It isn't right that President Obama has to decide to commit the largest contingency of troops in this nation's history to retake Afghanistan without plenty of reassurances that the USA will be the victor AND we will have minimal casualities.
I want to hear from our generals that we are going to invade that country and annhilate al Qaeda without losing soldiers. I want to hear how we are going to settle this once and for all with the head of Bin Laden on a stick. I don't want to hear how we are going to be at war for the next decade, like we were in Vietnam, loss 50,000 soldiers and exit to the lack of sincere understanding of the theater and its need to victory. I want to hear a strategy to succes, NOT a war that will destroy this country even further.
American Generals should be able to assess the battlefield and give us a guaranteed victory. With all the allies coming to our side to faciliate our victory in anyway they can, we should be able to reassure them and our people of the victory that will prevail. This is 2009, not the turn of the century when the calvary still rode horses. I mean al Qaeda has Mopeds. Hello? Give us something here !
PAKISTAN
Taliban chief vows to strike White House (click title to entry - thank you)
By Ishtiaq Mahsud
Associated Press
Wednesday, April 01, 2009
Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan —- The commander of the Pakistani Taliban claimed responsibility Tuesday for a deadly assault on a Pakistani police academy Monday and said the group was planning an attack on the White House that would “amaze” the world.
Baitullah Mehsud, who has a $5 million U.S. bounty on his head, said Monday’s attack on the outskirts of the eastern city of Lahore was retaliation for U.S. missile strikes against militants along the Afghan border.
“Soon we will launch an attack in Washington that will amaze everyone in the world,” Mehsud said in a phone interview, without providing details....
Taliban suicide bomber kills 50, destroys mosque in Pakistan (click here)
By Bill RoggioMarch 27, 2009 9:20 AM
A Taliban suicide bomber killed more than 50 worshipers and wounded more than 125 in an attack at a mosque in Pakistan's tribal areas along the border with Pakistan. The bombing is the second mass-casualty suicide attack in Pakistan's insurgency-infested northwest in two days.
The death toll is expected to rise, Tariq Hayat Khan, the Political Agent for Khyber said according to a report in The Times of India. "Forty-five to 46 bodies have been retrieved ... up to 70 people could have been killed," Khan said.
The attack took place in the Jamrud district in Pakistan's Khyber agency. Khyber is the gateway to Afghanistan; NATO's main supply route for its forces in Afghanistan passes through the tribal agency.
The suicide bomber detonated his vest in the middle of a packed mosque just as prayers began. "Police, paramilitary forces, and government officials were among the congregation in the mosque," Geo News reported. The two-story mosque was leveled, the news agency reported....
