Posted on 10/01/2009 5:04:06 AM PDT by Pinkbell
Another American died in Afghanistan on Wednesday, the final day of September--and exactly one month after the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan sent a confidential war assessment to the Obama administration, warning that more forces are needed--soon.
The as-yet-unnamed American serviceman who died on Wednesday was caught in a suicide attack in Khost Province, in eastern Afghanistan, press reports said.
On August 30, Gen. Stanley McChrystal sent Defense Secretary Robert Gates a war assessment in which he said more U.S. troops--and a new U.S. strategy--are needed if the U.S. is to defeat the insurgents in Afghanistan.
Since that Aug. 30 date, a total of 43 soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines have died in a war that is now the subject of much discussion--and apparently some confusion--in Washington. Forty-two of those casualties have been identified by name in U.S. Defense Department press releases (see below), while the 43rd casualty, which occurred today, has been confirmed in press reports, but not by name.
In his confidential report, which was leaked to the Washington Post on Sept. 21, Gen. McChrystal warned that defeating the insurgents will not be possible if the United States fails to "gain the initiative and reverse insurgent momentum" over the next 12 months.
McChrystal reportedly has prepared a separate request for tens of thousands of additional U.S. troops to be sent to the 68,000 already in Afghanistan.
Since Sept. 21, when the Washington Post leaked information from McChrystal’s confidential report, the White House has been on the defensive over its Afghanistan strategy.
As CNSNews.com reported on Tuesday, Barack Obama campaigned on a promise to reinforce U.S. troops in Afghanistan, which he described as war we “have to win.”
As president – in March 2009 – Obama announced a “comprehensive new strategy” for Afghanistan: “I want the American people to understand that we have a clear and focused goal to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat Al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan and to prevent their return to either country in the future,” he said. (See story)
But last week, Obama said he was not willing to send troops “beyond what we already have” until he was sure the United States is employing the right strategy in the region.
Then on Sunday, Gen. McChrystal told “60 Minutes” that he has talked to Obama only once in the past 70 days. At a briefing on Tuesday, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs noted that President Obama “receives a memo every week from General McChrystal.”
And on Wednesday, President Obama was “meeting” with McChrystal and other military officials in a video conference to discuss future plans for Afghanistan. The White House said President Obama’s national security team will also attend the video conference.
“But first, Obama welcomes golfing great Arnold Palmer to the Oval Office,” the Associated Press reported on Wednesday. Palmer is in town to receive the Congressional Gold Medal.
On Thursday, Obama plans to fly to Copenhagen to pitch Chicago as the venue for the 2016 Olympics. (See related story)
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, says it would be a mistake for President Obama to reject McChrystal’s call for an additional 40,000-or-so troops for Afghanistan.
"Time is not on our side, so we need a decision pretty quickly,” McCain told ABC’s “Good Morning America” on Wednesday.
McCain said failure to send more U.S. troops to Afghanistan would “put the United States in much greater danger,” because insurgents would turn Afghanistan into a base for attack on the U.S. and its allies.
On the other side of the coin, Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) is urging President Obama to take weeks or even months to review the U.S. mission in Afghanistan, the Boston Globe reported on Wednesday.
“I am arguing that the president has the time and we have the time,’’ Kerry told the newspaper. Kerry, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, indicated that he is not sure more troops are needed in Afghanistan.
I used to see the tally of fallen soldiers in the newpaper every day under Bush. The tally they used to keep mysteriously disappeared the day Obama was sworn in.
media doesn’t care anymore since Bush is out
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Without-Bush-media-lose-interest-in-war-caskets-8310113-62427012.html
What? A head count during a democrat presidency? The AP is slipping!
How many have died all together under Obomas watch? (You'd think we weren't even in a war.)
zero doesn’t give a damn
We could add 500,000 more troops, unless the ROE change it won’t matter.
The MSM ignored the story last month of 3 Marines, a Corpman and several Afghani soldiers on a joint training exercise with the Army being denied air support despite being promised that support would be no more than 5 minutes away. Over an hour AFTER being ambushed was help on the way!
As far as I’m concerned that is despicable!!
So, according to John effeng Kerry(he was in Vietnam, in case you didn’t know), we have lots of time to decide what to do in Afghanistan, but we have to have socialized medicine & save the environment with Cap N Trade this month!!!
What a maroon!!
how many of those 46 died because they did not get artillery or air support? I know of at least 4. Anything this general says means nothing to me. He left a squad of Marines to die because the ROE would not allow him to give support. He chose his stars over his mens lives. He should suffer the same fate as those Marines. Put him up against a wall and shoot him.
OBAMA LIED 43 MORE DIED. . . . . .
If the general was at all concerned about those Marines, he would have provided the arty / air support when they requested it. And THEN let bho fire him for disobeying the order. NO PRINCIPLES, general!
Semper Fi, USMC
The only way Obama is going to meet with Gen. McChrystal is if they are both booked on Letterman for the same night. Obama may even exchange a few niceties with the general in the green room. Obama is sorry ass Commander in Chief.
From Times Online October 1, 2009 "White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel and Gen. James Jones, Obama's national security adviser, appeared to be less supportive, the official said. Vice President Joe Biden, who attended the meeting, has been reluctant to support a troop increase, favoring a strategy that directly targets al-Qaida fighters who are believed to be hiding in Pakistan." 
Yes this is despicable
BUT don’t forget McChrystal is the one, in the memo WaPo leaked that criticized the previous strategy as being “ PREOCCUPIED WITH PROTECTION OF OUR FORCES>”
and it is McChrystal strategy that denied air support to our troops . Troops denied that support got killed.
What the h are you talking about??? Seriously. General Stanley McChrystal should be put up against a wall and shot? Do you have any idea who he is? Are you out of your freaking mind?
Well? I don’t want him shot, but when I saw him on that interview the other night, I was NOT impressed. At all. He seemed overly concerned with alot of warm/fuzzy things and it really disturbed me. But, I’m trying to put that aside as so many here alot more knowledgeable than me say that he is a great general. I’ll go with that. For now.
The Rules Of Engagement of a COIN mission are different than old school “killing folks and turning cities to rubble”. Anyone who observed the Anbar awakening, and subsequent “surge” in Iraq, should have learned that lesson. Seems some here have not.
OBAMA LIED - SOLDIERS DIED
According to thr mrdia once President Bush left office, the deaths of American Servicemen/women no longer had any significance. In other words, when they get killed during a Democrat administration it is o.k.
My guess is John is too busy bent across the aisle.
what i am talking about is a squad on a mission, being told that air support and artillery support were only minutes away...they were ambushed, and denied artillery support because civilians were bringing ammunition to the enemy fighters....air support took over an hour to arrive....4 soldiers were killed because they were denied support due to the interpretation of the ROE...and this general is in charge...i support our military, and served my time, but politcally oriented officers and non coms i have no patience for...this guy could have ordered support for these men anytime he chose to, and he did not....he left them there to die...he put his stars ahead of his men, therefore he should suffer their fate, he should be shot
I hate to tell you this, but Generals don’t personally schedule close air support. If you think it is a standing order from McChrystal that Marines don’t get close air support when under siege you are hopelessly uninformed. Read a little of Michael Yon, he has copious reporting on the air support that coalition forces get in Afghanistan. COIN demands messy ROE. Good God, some people at this place ...
I suppose I guessed wrong, but I’m glad he is.
I guess i am confused...something about this “chain of command” thingie, ya know. that you have to follow orders given to you by someone of a higher rank....he is in charge, it is ultimately his decision, wheather made by him directly or on of his subordinates.....somewhere in the chain of command this decision was made. it was HIS decision and orders that allowed this to happen. jeez, the non military people on this thread trying to justify things military.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.