I hope Trump is right (and I’m wrong) on Afghanistan

NY Post ^ | August 21, 2017 | Ralph Peters

[Oshkalaboomboom]

In outlining his vision for applying “principled realism” to the war in Afghanistan, President Trump Monday night insisted there will be no precipitous American withdrawal. Though he didn’t specify the number, Trump will be sending additional troops — likely up to 4,000 — to Afghanistan. That would boost our commitment to just above 12,000 men and women in uniform.

And they’ll be expected to accomplish what 140,000 US and allied troops couldn’t achieve at the peak of our engagement, when the Taliban was considerably weaker.

We all must hope that, by a miracle, the new strategy of enhanced training for the Afghan military (and a slap on Pakistan’s wrist) somehow defeats the Taliban. But miracles are in short supply in Kabul. One suspects that this new initiative springs less from rigorous analysis than from the emotional attachment felt by senior officers who’ve seen their troops bleed and can’t bear the prospect of a meaningless sacrifice, of simply walking away.

We have a magnificent, well-led military, but rare is the general who understands the economic principle of “sunk costs,” that you can’t redeem a bad investment by investing even more. When money is gone, it’s gone. The same applies to lives.

A fundamental problem in Afghanistan is that Americans have been dying for a woefully corrupt succession of governments in Kabul for which young Afghans have been unwilling to die. Our new strategy includes a tougher line on corruption, but the damage has been done. What seemed expedient to ignore turned fatal.

[WMarshal]

There will be issues with the airframe handling the recoil of a three round burst.

It could be handled with software or for simplicity's sake it could fire from three barrels at once.

[TADSLOS]

...and will be again next year and thereafter.