Afghanistan, more troops?

[Excaliber]

WHAT would we do with 40,000 more troops? Win the hearts and minds of the people, perhaps, or not...

This principle of winning the hearts and minds of the people goes back 1,000's of years. History shows over and over that "winning" a war militarily will not stand the test of time without the will of the people.

If we secure that will based on a better lifestyle, more security, money, etc. it is not as important as securing it in the first place. There is AMPLE reason to believe the Afghans DO want all of the above. For many years the Taliban was despised there, the people fundamentally DO NOT want them in power. But what choice do they have? The Americans cannot defend them and they cannot defend themselves.

I support the request for additional troops, with an understanding of the goals to be achieved. Otherwise, we could be there for decades and accomplish nothing. If it is not possible to win the favor of the people then we should pull out the majority of troops and rely more heavily on "drone" missle strikes to kill the Taliban leadership. This will NOT result in a victory but it will buy time. The drone attacks kill many civilians, that really pisses off the people. But if we don't care about the people, no problem, nuke 'em (not a good idea).

[392cobra]

Did we win The Hearts and Minds of the Japanese & Germans ?

Or was it a Combat Boot on their throat ?

[Excaliber]

Not all wars can be fought the same way. But ALL victories can be assured in the long run by doing exactly what we did following the world war. The Afghan conflict cannot be compared to WW2, it is fundamentally different and requires a different approach.

Seriously, do you think "nuking" the Afghans will result in any kind of sustainable victory? For the US, for the world?

[392cobra]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

Seriously, do you think "nuking" the Afghans will result in any kind of sustainable victory? For the US, for the world?

I'm not saying that two nukes will do the job.....It's just a good start though.

[tcrist]

Ernie,
You seem to forget that we are not at war with the Afghans. We are at war with the Taliban. They are the SOB'S that attacked us. If the Afghans are hiding the Taliban then they get what they get.
There are always going to be causalities of war. There are people that want nothing to do with it but it is being fought in their back yards. I hate it that innocent people are being killed and will continue being killed.
It is the Taliban, Iraqi and who knows who else's way to attack, hide among the civilians and then blame us for innocent people get killed. We can't walk away from this until Bin Laden is captured or dead.
Our problem is that our hands are tied. We are expected to fight a war within the rules of humanity and the opponents do not.

As always, we can agree to disagree. Nothing personal, end of my rant.

Terry

[Excaliber]

This is close to a case where disagreement isn't the problem, it's the complexity of the war itself. Like you said, no easy solution, we can't walk away, without a solid game plan we can't win. WHAT to do?

Where the people are hiding the Taliban, we need to ask, "Why?" They did not always support them, what has changed? They have little choice but to go along with those in power, currently that is the Taliban and they seem to be gaining ground.

We need to offer the people a better way of life, more security. More focus ON the people, training the Afghan army and stabilizing the Government. This is not a convential war, we CANNOT win with conventional tactics.

[Fordzilla]

Originally Posted by tcrist

Ernie,
You seem to forget that we are not at war with the Afghans. We are at war with the Taliban. They are the SOB'S that attacked us. If the Afghans are hiding the Taliban then they get what they get.
There are always going to be causalities of war. There are people that want nothing to do with it but it is being fought in their back yards. I hate it that innocent people are being killed and will continue being killed.
It is the Taliban, Iraqi and who knows who else's way to attack, hide among the civilians and then blame us for innocent people get killed. We can't walk away from this until Bin Laden is captured or dead.
Our problem is that our hands are tied. We are expected to fight a war within the rules of humanity and the opponents do not.

As always, we can agree to disagree. Nothing personal, end of my rant.

Terry

Terry you are Spot on!!

[Excaliber]

Well we've tried that for 8 years, hasn't worked yet. How about another decade of futility with no end in sight?

...we need a better game plan. Step 1, what the hell ARE the goals there? Iraq is a good example. While there is no promise "we won" anything there, we have given the Iraq's a chance to build a new life, govern themselves. If THEY pull it off THEN it will be job well done.

The same should apply to the Afghan's. It is THEY who ultimately will decide the long term stability of that country and increase our security here. The Taliban will forever keep coming, like in Vietnam, the body count won't mean squat, you simply cannot kill enough of them. Bin Laden, there are plenty moreto take his place, his capture would be little more than a political hat feather.

[Dan40]

Once you establish a VERY firm grip on their 'nads', their hearts and minds soon follow!

[Dan40]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

Well we've tried that for 8 years, hasn't worked yet. How about another decade of futility with no end in sight?

...we need a better game plan. Step 1, what the hell ARE the goals there? Iraq is a good example. While there is no promise "we won" anything there, we have given the Iraq's a chance to build a new life, govern themselves. If THEY pull it off THEN it will be job well done.

The same should apply to the Afghan's. It is THEY who ultimately will decide the long term stability of that country and increase our security here. The Taliban will forever keep coming, like in Vietnam, the body count won't mean squat, you simply cannot kill enough of them. Bin Laden, there are plenty moreto take his place, his capture would be little more than a political hat feather.

Liberals and their complete disregard for actual history! In 8 years we defeated the Taliban and Al Queda. Driving them out of control of the country and into hiding in the mountains on the Paky border. We also helped the Afgans to establish a much better Government than they ha under the Taliban. A great Government? Not claiming that, bur one better for the people of that country. Right or wrong the majority of extremist fighters were in Iraq. Then we did the surge in Iraq. It proved to be and still is successful BECAUSE the extremist saw that their good times were OVER in Iraq. Where did they go? Afganistan. They got their "Surge," now we must meet it with our surge.

[tcrist]

To me, we should not have had to go into Iraq a second time. We were right to go there in Desert Storm and the UN was behind us. Our allis asked us to help them and we could have finished it once and for all then. We had that SOB in our sights and when we asked to finish him off we were told "NO, DO NOT FIRE".
We are there again but under differant conditions. No UN approval. Little Bush was trying to prove how big of a man he was and that he could do a better job then his dad. He got his d!ck stepped on instead. Sure, we have maybe done some good there for some of the people. But if they will not fight for themselves, it might be a waste of time. Hope not.

Terry

[Excaliber]

Fact is the Taliban are gaining strength. It's encouraging to see Pakistan wake up and smell the coffee. It's the people in the VILLAGES and TOWNS that are taking action against the Taliban. Now if we could expand that into Afghan we might have a chance of doing something good. Besides tread water...

I like Bidens idea as well, keep up the heat with the drone missile attacks. Thats a delicate one though, we HAVE to get a handle on the number of civilians killed/injured. If we don't work with the people we will just be breeding more resentment and increasing the number of Taliban.

In 8 years we defeated the Taliban and Al Queda.

Uh, no, we didn't. We bought some time, trimmed the numbers, made them move. Well, therrrreeee baccckk and growing.

Here's the bottom line:
Were loosing in Afghanistan. Increasing the body count, killing more insurgents is NOT going to win the war. Taking the "gloves off" and doing a "surge" may be necessary in the short term to get a handle on a desperate situation right now. But it is not a sustainable long term solution. We need a better game plan...

[SPF2245]

The Russians can tell us a little about Afghanistan...there is no end to this war, hit the training camps, keep some troops in country to establish intel for future strikes, but putting more basic combat troops on the ground in that country isn't a solution which will result in anything more then additional casualties. Afghanistan is a country where the battle will never end...you can't get the tribes to agree on anything and as a result they've been fighting for centuries and we're just another bump in their history.

[BeanCounter]

Obviously the guy in there now didn't read "The Art of War" either. What has been done this past nine months is what has endangered the entire mission there.

From the leftist MSNBC

In Iraq's Anbar, a deep sense of abandonment

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


updated 2:37 a.m. CT, Sat., Oct . 3, 2009
RAMADI, Iraq - There was once a swagger to the scotch-swilling, insurgent-fighting Raed Sabah. He was known as Sheik Raed to his sycophants. Tribesmen who relied on his largess called him the same. So did his fighters, who joined the Americans and helped crush the insurgency in Anbar province.

Sabah still likes his scotch -- Johnnie Walker Black, with Red Bull on the rocks -- but these days, as the Americans withdraw from western Iraq, he has lost his swagger. His neighbors now deride him as an American stooge; they have nicknamed his alley "The Street of the Lackeys."

"The Americans left without even saying goodbye. Not one of them," Sabah said in his villa in Ramadi, the capital of Anbar, once the cradle of Iraq's insurgency. "Even when we called them, we got a message that the line had been disconnected."

Nowhere is the U.S. departure from Iraq more visible than in Anbar, where the 27 bases and outposts less than a year ago have dwindled to three today. Far less money is being spent. Since November, more than two-thirds of combat troops have departed. In their wake is a blend of cynicism and bitterness, frustration and fear among many of the tribal leaders who fought with the troops against the insurgents, a tableau of emotion that may color the American legacy in a region that has stood as the U.S. military's single greatest success in the war. Pragmatism, the Americans call their departure. Desertion, their erstwhile allies answer.

[cobra de capell]

If the child cannot make up his mind to support our fine military men and women in the theater, THEN BRING THEM HOME IMMEDIATELY and suffer the consequences of YOUR loss. Join the Dem party of Viet Nam fame.

[Excaliber]

The question is:

What kind and how much support? Or, indeed, pull out completely. The later is not a viable option. SPF2245, that's one possible solution, a small contingent to monitor and strike when appropriate. Not unlike Bidens idea of using the drones more, the troops less.

Like Iraq, the Afghans will eventually need to defend themselves. When that time comes and the troops begin to withdraw en masse I'm sure there will be plenty of Scotch drinking Afghans woefully sad at their departure.

[computerworks]

Originally Posted by BeanCounter

What has been done this past nine months is what has endangered the entire mission there.

Gen'l Bernie...when you get a chance, remind me what the mission was?

[cobra de capell]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

The question is:

What kind and how much support? Or, indeed, pull out completely. The later is not a viable option. SPF2245, that's one possible solution, a small contingent to monitor and strike when appropriate. Not unlike Bidens idea of using the drones more, the troops less.

Like Iraq, the Afghans will eventually need to defend themselves. When that time comes and the troops begin to withdraw en masse I'm sure there will be plenty of Scotch drinking Afghans woefully sad at their departure.

You do have bubbles in your think tank! Why on earth would anyone listen to Biden and not the Generals in the field?

Either, more boots on the ground or pull out completely.

[Excaliber]

Biden is a pretty intelligent guy, I take his advice seriously (when he's not busy sticking his foot in his mouth).

I think the more drones less troops idea is short sided. That MIGHT maintain a status quo, but it would never end the conflict. It is also comes with inevitable civilian deaths. THAT is a huge problem. Even if it risks troops lives or there is a cost in troop lives because of a policy to limit civilian deaths, so be it. While that obviously sounds harsh in THIS conflict it is imperative. It's simple really, keep pissing of the locals and we will have NO chance of achieving our goals (what ever they are). The ONLY hope for a long term solution lays with the Afghans themselves. In the end it will cost MORE American lives if we deny our responsibilities to the locals.

Options in life are rarely a one or a zero, get in or get out.

[SP01715]

Originally Posted by Excaliber
I take it you have never read the "Art of War". This principle of winning the hearts and minds of the people goes back 1,000's of years. History shows over and over that "winning" a war militarily will not stand the test of time without the will of the people.

Now if that will is based on a better lifestyle, more security, money, is not as important as securing it in the first place. There is AMPLE reason to believe the Afghans DO want all of the above. For many years the Tabliban was despised there, the people fundamentally DO NOT want them in power. But what choice do they have? The Americans cannot defend them and they cannot defend themselves.

I support the request for additional troops, with an understanding of the goals to be achieved. Otherwise, we could be there for decades and accomplish nothing. If it is not possible to win the favor of the people then we should pull out the majority of troops and rely more heavily on "drone" missle strikes to kill the Taliban leadership. This will NOT result in a victory but it will buy time. The drone attacks kill many civilians, that really pisses off the people. But if we don't care about the people, no problem!

MODS: I had been thinking about starting a new thread on this subject, Afghan. Perhaps this post could be the start of that? Some editing of course required...

First I have read Sun Tzu's The Art Of War, and I actually have my paperback copy on the shelf right next to me. It has been there for years. I suggest you read the chapter "Waging "war". It talk about troop levels and protracted campains. That said, I don't base my knowledge on a book.

I served a combat tour in Iraq with the 1st Cav in a combat MOS (military Occupational Skill). I have actually been on the ground in the Middle East. You abviously don't understand the thinking of the culture there. The people do not respect weakness. From the guys I know that have served in Afghanistan, they say this is even more true than in Iraq. You are never going to build a nation in Afghanistan even close to Iraq. We need to concentrate on killing the enemy, and we need to expect a troop presence there for a long time.

You need to listen to the General on the ground in charge of operations. He is the expert. As Sun Tzu refers to him "The Respected One". "If wise, a commander is able to recognize changing curcumstances and to act expediently"." If courageous, he gains victory by seizing opportunity without hesitation" . The general on the ground has "recognized" the "changing curcumstances" in Afghanistan, and he has asked Obama for more troops so he can "gain victory without hesitation".

Obama needs to listen to the guys in the military on the ground. They are the experts, and have the best knowledge of what they need. My.02