Reinforcing failiure?

[observer]

Can't really understand the view of senior military folk that we need to send ever more troops to Afghanistan, other than a natural tendency for them to have more soldiers to play with. Obama is now reviewing the strategy to either commit more troops or to scale down our commitment and concentrate on Al Quaeda. It would seem (given the corrupt nature of the Karsai Gov), that we should be seeking a political agreement with the Taliban to share power, providing they disown Al Quaeda - thus allowing the international intelligence community to concentrate on the surgical elimination of terrorists.

[Paul Kennedy]

As I recall the Soviets had 120,000 troops there, in the end they gave up and went home.

[observer]

.... with lots and lots of top of the range, heavy lift helicopters; tanks and APCs too.

[Rifles]

Doesn't matter how many troops we have there, there will never be enough. We cannot win.... We will be there for a few years then throw a few backhanders to the tribal leaders and Afghan government and whichever government is in power, will all be rejoicing on what a wonderful job THEY have done.

 

The next stage will be they will pass on this successful campaign to the Afghan government to police.

 

Waste of money, time and more importantly lives.

[observer]

Fair summary Rifles. It's interesting though that Gen Dannat, tries to undermine Brown on the basis of his request for more troops (2,000 in a NATO Force of over 60,000; less the 700 he was actually given = 1,300 he didn't get). Either, he's wedded to the tactics of a WW1 General OR he's acted "politically" to embarrass the Gov in his "impartial" military role. The later sems to be the case, as the Chiefs of Staff are said to be embarrassed and enraged by this indermining of the military's political neutrality. With both his military judgement and loyalty allegedly in question, it seems Dave's judgement in appointing him to the Lords and as an advisor to Gov, is equally in question.

[observer]

Seems the big idea of training an Afghan Army has taken a bit of a blow: reports suggest that senior Afghan military chiefs are as corrupt as their politicians and there's suspected enterism into it's ranks by the Taliban - no wonder Ombama is thinking long and hard about sending reinforcments.

[observer]

Well he's thought long and hard, and decided to send an extra 30,000, bringing the total US component in Afghanistan to around 100,000, with another 120,000 still in Iraq. In his speach, Obama expects to draw down on troop numbers in 18 months - excuse me Mr President, but that can't fill the Afghans with any notions of siding with NATO, knowing they intend to pull out; all the Taliban have to do now, is remain in existence for that period and maintain a steady stream of body bags back to the US - so what's the point?

[disgusted]

So I guess the Nobel Peace Prize committee must be feeling pretty bloody stupid right about now eh? They gave him the award based (seemingly) on what he promised to do, and now he's doen the opposite, and started sending even more troops overseas than GW. Love it.

[observer]

Think they gave him the award on the basis of what they hoped or expected him to do; unfortunately the military industrial complex in the US is a powerfull lobby.