Posted on 09/08/2009 8:47:02 AM PDT by IbJensen
America is losing the war in Afghanistan. Rather than change course, President Obama is sending 21,000 additional U.S. troops. This will bring the total to 68,000 American soldiers fighting in Afghanistan, bolstering coalition forces to 110,000.
The troop surge, however, will not work. Afghanistan has become Mr. Obama's Vietnam -- a protracted quagmire draining precious American blood and treasure. August was the deadliest month for U.S. forces, with 47 soldiers killed by Taliban insurgents. More than 300 coalition troops have died in 2009. This is the highest toll since the war began in 2001, and there are still four months to go.
The tide of battle has turned against the West. The Taliban is resurgent. It has reasserted control over its southern stronghold in Kandahar. The Taliban is launching devastating attacks in the western and northern parts of the country -- formerly stable areas. U.S. casualties are soaring. The morale of coalition forces is plummeting. Most of our allies -- with the exception of the Canadians and the British -- are reluctant to engage the Islamist militants. American public support for the war is waning.
The conflict has dragged on for nearly eight years. (U.S. involvement in World War II was four years, World War I less than one.) Yet, America's strategic objectives remain incoherent and elusive.
The war's initial aim was to topple the Taliban and eradicate al Qaeda bases from Afghan territory. Those goals have been achieved. Washington should have declared victory and focused on the more important issue: preventing Islamic fundamentalists from seizing power in Pakistan, along with its nuclear arsenal.
Instead, America is engaged in futile nation-building. Mr. Obama, like President George W. Bush before him, believes Afghanistan must be transformed by erecting a strong central government, democracy and a modern economy. Washington argues this will prevent terrorism from taking root and bring about lasting "stability." Advertisement
Hence, following a recent reassessment of the war by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, U.S. commander in Afghanistan, the Obama administration is contemplating deploying 20,000 to 40,000 U.S. troops -- on top of the 21,000 already pledged. Moreover, billions have been spent building irrigation canals, schools, hospitals and factories. Civilian advisers are being sent to encourage farmers to grow other cash crops besides opium poppies. Western aid money has been used to establish a massive Afghan army, a large police force and a swollen government bureaucracy.
Gen. McChrystal said this week that the situation is "serious," but not impossible. He still believes victory is within reach. His new strategy is to protect Afghan civilians from Taliban attacks. He also wants to create a lucrative jobs programs and improve local government services. The goal is to win the "hearts and minds" of the Afghan people. Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, says we must combat Afghanistan's "culture of poverty." Call it humanitarian war through social engineering.
Mr. Obama's policy will result in a major American defeat -- one that will signal the end of America as a superpower and expose us to the world as a paper tiger. Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires. The mighty British and Russian armies were humiliated in drawn-out guerrilla campaigns. The country's mountainous geography and primitive tribal culture are ideally suited for insurgent warfare. By sending in more troops, Washington is playing right into the Taliban's hands: We are enabling the Taliban to pick off our forces one by one as they wage a campaign of attrition.
The Taliban blend with the local population, making it almost impossible for U.S. forces to distinguish combatants from civilians. American counterinsurgency efforts are thus alienating some of the locals. Initially welcomed as liberators, we are now viewed in some quarters as occupiers. Moreover, much of the West's aid money is siphoned off by greedy politicians in Kabul.
President Hamid Karzai's government is corrupt, venal and ineffective. It barely controls one-third of the country. It is despised by many Afghans for its brutality and incompetence. In addition, Mr. Karzai's vice-presidential running mate is a drug trafficker.
The West's efforts to forge a cohesive national state based on federalism and economic reconstruction have failed. Warlords are increasingly asserting power in the provinces. The country is fractured along tribal and ethnic lines. The center cannot hold: Afghanistan remains mired in anarchy, blood feuds and weak, decentralized rule.
U.S. troops should be deployed to defend U.S. national interests. Their lives should never be squandered for an experiment in liberal internationalism. In fact, such a policy is morally grotesque and strategically reckless.
Mr. Obama should quickly withdraw most U.S. forces from Afghanistan. American air power and small, flexible Special Forces units are more than enough to wipe out al Qaeda terrorists. The Taliban is too hated to reoccupy the country -- unless our huge military and economic footprint drives numerous Afghans into the evil, welcoming arms of extremists.
Afghanistan has been ungovernable and impoverished for centuries. No country -- including America -- can conquer or heal this strange, cursed land.
While building a nation in Afghanistan, the current America-hating, communist administration is destroying this nation!
Giggity....
Obama said. "I will make the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban the top priority that it should be. This is a war that we have to win."
Speaking at a town hall meeting in Albuquerque, McCain retorted:
"Sen. Obama will tell you we can't win in Afghanistan without losing in Iraq. In fact, he has it exactly backward. It is precisely the success of the surge in Iraq that shows us the way to succeed in Afghanistan.
I think we lost sight of our goal even under Bush.
The goal was not to build a stable, democratic nation. It was to eliminate the ability of the taliban (and other terrorists) to use the country as a base of operations (including training.)
We should have learned from the Russians’ experience that the geography and culture of the country makes dominating it militarily difficult (to impossible.)
The type of victory Obama is pushing for can not be achieve (imho.) This is the same as what the Russians tried, and it failed.
The US needs to sweep through the NW parts of Pakistan that are not really Pakistan (as admitted by Pakistan - “autonomous areas”), but under local control and root out Islam.
Not going to happen.
Furthermore, how do you root out Islam in an area that is surrounded by Islam? Again, not going to happen.
Look to see who the American contractors in Afghanistan are. They are the ones making money. I would bet that many of them are friends of the Administration or members of Congress.
Remember, Robert E. Lee thought he could win the Civil War also.
No victory then.
Funny, but this reminds me of what I read two years ago about the surge in Iraq. Afghanistan is a different country, with different terrain and a different culture, but more troops can help IF we use them correctly. I just hope the Community-Organizer-in-Chief is willing to listen to lesser mortals, such as his generals, and that he has an advisor smart enough to tell him WHICH general to listen to.
Obama: Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk some more. The man is so far in over his head it is unbelievable. How could a man who has never run anything in his entire life expected to run the number one country in the world? Let’s just hope we survive the coming insanity as he finishes his (hopefully) one and only term.
Come on...he was running his election campaign..-sarc
Someone looking for me?
1. Get Obama gone, clean away.
2. More and better intelligence.
3. Fewer large units on the ground while . . .
4. using more surgical strikes from the air (and saturation bombing if and when necessary) based on the better intellignece, and
5. more precise and meticulous special forces operations.
6. Don’t set any deadlines for stopping operations.
7. Keep going after them as long as it takes to keep their bases and trainning facilities cleaned out.
8. When we do strike, be merciless.
This reads like something the left would have published about Iraq a couple of years back.
And it assumes that victory is optional.
The same general who turned the tide in Iraq is now leading the charge in Afghanistan, and he asked for more troops. I say we give them to him.
The Taliban doesn’t waste any time worrying whether or not they are in a quagmire. They just get up in the morning and do what they do. We need to do the same. We need to avoid putting an artificial timetable on it. This is bandit country; it will always be bandit country. The war is won when we’ve built an Afghan force capable of policing its own territory. Same as in Iraq.
Have you seen this?
Continuing to expend monies on Afghan 'nation building' and other assorted niceities will result in American's demise. Perhaps quicker than Obama's Deathcare program.
I know you're right. What should have ensued after 9/11 would have been the immediate bombing of Saudi Oil fields, the destruction of Iraq's nuclear facilities and, just for the hell of it, Libya's 'presidential palace'.The order to begin exploration in our own land would have been immediately given and if the supply of oil would have a glitch....the American People would have understood.
Unfortunately, there was a weeks long lag after the butchery in New York. Nobody, outside of the inner circle, knew what was going to happen. Then, when the attack began, I knew that the wrong target had been selected.
I'm not a Bush hater, but I realize that he was either misguided, or he, himself, hadn't a clue as to which evil arab nation he should have dealt punishment.
Our
Middle East enemies’ main strategy is to outlast us. That means we need to outlast them, which means that we need to remain permanently in the various hot spots using our brains and weapons to make life rough on the bad guys. The locations of the hot spots shift over time but we must be there. Otherwise we will be proven weaker than our enemies. Nation building, containing the enemy, fighting the war over there rather than in our own country, assuring access to necessities like petroleum — we can debate individual objectives but meanwhile we need to show courage and speak the enemy’s language. The world is watching.
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.