Posted on 12/08/2009 11:30:35 AM PST by markomalley
Under President Barack Obama’s new strategy, the ability of American troops to withdraw from Afghanistan will depend heavily on training the Afghan army and police to defend their country. I support the president’s determination to devote more resources to this critical task, but meeting the objective will require more than additional trainers.
A report sent to Congress at the end of October found that the number of trained Afghan army battalions capable of operating independently had actually fallen in the previous three months by about a third. Then there is the attrition rate — roughly one in every five soldiers leaves each year. Conditions are worse for the police. We have spent $6.2 billion on police and the Ministry of Interior since 2002, but only about a third of recruits can read and write, and roughly one in 10 trained units is capable of operating independently.
Despite the dismal statistics, the president and his military commanders are counting on a dramatic acceleration in training the army and police. The ambitious goal of expanding the Afghan National Army from its current level of about 90,000 to the target of 134,000 in the next year will require thousands more American and NATO trainers. But numbers alone won’t solve the problem.
A major hindrance to standing up a professional army and police force in Afghanistan is the lack of competent leaders in the middle and upper ranks of both institutions. Without significant reforms and expanded leadership, the rapid increase could erase our fragile gains and actually weaken the Afghan security forces by growing them beyond the control of their own commanders. In a worst-case scenario, the forces could simply switch sides.
We should insist on quality over quantity.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
IMHO, this is a Cultural battle, not a national one.
Why? Because the average Afghani considers himself a member of a particular clan, from a particular village. They do not consider themselves a nation under any modern understanding of the word. They are only concerned about what happens in their immediate vicinity. Are the women wearing their burkas? Then all is fine with the world.
Problem with terrorist next door? So what? As long as their family is unaffected, they have no concern or care; as that is their neighbor’s problem.
Until the Afghani’s begin to think of themselves as a nation, with a national identity - this problem will never go away.
According to Teresa’s b**ch, we can’t send help from those already in Iraq, because they are failures who got stuck there.
“Problem with terrorist next door? So what? As long as their family is unaffected, they have no concern or care; as that is their neighbor’s problem.”
Maybe if the terrorist camp in the next valley picks up a tactical nuke they’ll see how interconnected they all are.
You give them too much credit.
“They are not bothering me, or mine; why should I bother them?” This mentality is what allowed the Taliban to roll in and take over every village, as they are unwilling to join hands and work across clan and territorial boundries - and the Taliban had no problems with either of those limitations.
Can’t go so far as to call them cowards, as they fiercely defend their home; but thier understanding that what is more than a day’s walk away, can and certainly does impact their daily lives.
Which is why Karzai recently talked about how much aid money he would ultimately need.
How do you describe a tactical nuke to an uneducated person living in a mud hut, that is more concerned about his next meal than anything else.
How do you describe a tactical nuke to an uneducated person living in a mud hut, that is more concerned about his next meal than anything else.
Let me know if I'm mistaken in my research.
I strive for accuracy.......
Open a history book. Afghanistan is made up of a large number of Tribes. Some interrelated. Each tribe holds the allegiance of its tribal members. No one can be trusted. Farmers carry their guns to the fields with them. In this case . . . poppy fields.
No one can turn a Drug Growing Tribal Mentality into a Democracy. It’s always going to end up being a Dictatorship or Oligarchy BY FORCE. They only understand the weak and the strong and they want to be the strong.
What the USofA failed to do before WWI was to EXPORT our Entrepreneurial Spirit and create a Middle Class in other Countries. A strong Middle Class is necessary for Governmental change from Dictatorship to Democracy/Republic.
Think about what Africa could be with a strong middle class. Think about the Middle East.
It’s not too late . . . but as long as we have Liberals in control, no one is going to suggest exporting the American Entrepreneurial Spirit.
Of course you are not mistaken, but your research is somewhat lacking. Let me suggest you look in a couple of places for the supporting arguments.
First, there are those who are opposed to the counterinsurgency mission but support a counter-terror mission. They have all the data and facts.
Second, there are those who are opposed to both counterinsurgency and counter-terror. Spend a little time over at Antiwar.com. They have lots of data and facts.
If you want to hear the military men discuss it, go to the Small Wars website or the Abu Muqawama blog.
If you want to listen to the top COIN proponants, they are found under COINdinistas.
The mere fact they approved a constitution and organized a government so quickly is a miracle in itself.(it took the US twelve years to do it)
The challenges are great but if we can keep the fight over there and not over here, it is worth it.
A before and after picture of Paghman Gardens, Kabul Afghanistan taken 40 years apart:
http://pixdaus.com/single.php?id=65437
And Sharbat Gula as seen in 1984 and 2002:
http://media.npr.org/programs/morning/features/2002/mar/girl/thennow_lg.jpg
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.
