Posted on 08/20/2017 9:57:10 AM PDT by lodi90
Amman (AFP) – US Defence Secretary Jim Mattis confirmed Sunday that the Trump administration had decided on a new strategy for Afghanistan after “rigorous” debate, but said President Donald Trump would be the one to announce it.
Mattis refused to hint at any details of the decision, which came after months of speculation over whether Trump, frustrated with a stalemate after 16 years in Afghanistan, would allow the Pentagon to boost troop numbers on the ground in the country.
However Mattis appeared satisfied after what he described as an in-depth review of the policy by much of the president’s cabinet and top security officials at Camp David on Friday.
“I’m very comfortable that the strategic process was sufficiently rigorous, and did not go in with a preset condition in terms of what questions could be asked and what decisions could be made,” he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
How about we surround Afghanistan, no one in and no one out and let them fight it out
What no leaks yet!!!
I sure hope not. Afghanistan is a combination tar-baby and bottomless pit. We can’t leave altogether, but a “surge” will get us nothing but grief and wasted resources, unless we kill basically everyone there and in Pakistan.
I hope Trump announces a “small footprint” approach, using our resources to bribe regional warlords to deny space to the more radical jidahis. The larger the force we maintain in Afghanistan the more anti-foreigner opposition we attract, the more casualties and bitterness for all, the more wasted billions for nothing. This isn’t a situation where conventional “winning” is an option; we have to manage it long term to avoiding disaster without exhausting ourselves.
Should not have put the first boot on the ground.
Afghanistan will never be tamed.
“Rockets! I wanna see more ROCKETS !!”
Cross-off what hasn’t worked in sixteen-years. To such a shortlist add; more cowbell.
Yeh the choices are go big or go home.
What’s the goal here. Complete nation building, or not letting terrorists have a state where they can freely without interdiction export terrorism to western nations?
The later should be the nation security objective.
I was thinking 146 B.C.
And these young people will never have children. It’s a great loss for now and the future.
Want to eliminate the Taliban in Afghanistan? Then you’d better be prepared to kill all the Afghans. It’s in their blood. Not even the Soviets - who were shackled by the media and politically correct terms of engagement - could subdue Afghanistan. That country needs to be walled up and told that if it ever again exports terrorism it will be nuked.
Sorry. Meant to say the Soviets were not shackled. They were ruthless and still couldn’t smoke the Afghans out of their caves.
They decided we should lose more slowly? /half sarcasm
Your right if we use current US military doctrine. I am certain that the Mongols, if brought to our time, would be able to pacify Afghanistan in under a year with ruthless, lethal, efficiency. Every village that resisted would be put to the sword, most males would be enslaved and castrated, the women would be either married to or concubines of the Mongols and in 10 years the populace would be genetically half Mongol.
We need to fight them in the winter which is when fighting usually quiets down as travel in the mountains becomes extremely difficult. That is when villages that are Taliban strongholds are very vulnerable. the US should form packs of attack and troop helicopters and focus on one mountain valley at a time. At nightfall helicopters would transport small combat units to blockade strategic trails and passes to seal all escape routes with snipers.
Once that was done the starting at the lower elevation, open end of the valley invade several villages at a time and kill every taliban that can be found. Every man in the village should be identified, photographed and issued a picture ID that they must have on them at all times or face execution. The leaders of the village, the Khan, the elder, and the Mulla should be taken as prisoners and removed for several weeks for intense but mostly human interrogation and reeducation. Then onto the next village up the valley.
Any leader found to be a militant should never be allowed to return anywhere near their home village for at least 5 years. When freed these militants should never be able to associate with one another. If a leader of the village is found back in hi home territory he should be executed on the spot along with the leaders of the village.
Why?
Why would we want to expend that much time and effort?
Nothing good has or will come from Afghanistan. Even it’s refugees do not want to go back there. It is a long fractured society that cannot, and will not be able to sustain a non-Taliban government, ever, without too much continued U.S. support.
“a stalemate after 16 years in Afghanistan”
160 years would not straighten out that place. Stalemate is the default position for Afghanistan.
True, just carpet bomb them and move on.
Debate my azzz...will this strategy win? Will 4 or 5 thousand more troops win?
And the answer in my opinion is that it will prolong with a slight improvement.
So, no, it won’t win.
And the only way to end Islamic terrorism is to destroy Islam. All this effort to fight ISIS and the Taliban will have no effect. Islam is terror.
And the only way to end Islamic terrorism is to destroy Islam. All this effort to fight ISIS and the Taliban will have no effect. Islam is terror.
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.