Top officer offers a dire assessment on Afghanistan

The nation’s top military officer, in a deeply pessimistic assessment of the war in Afghanistan, said yesterday that due to years of neglect the United States is basically “starting over’’ in its battle against the radical Taliban movement and its Al Qaeda allies.

‘This is the eighth year, but there is a newness here. There is a starting again, or starting over. Iraq has been the focus, it hasn’t been Afghanistan.’

‘We all believe there is going to be a need to accelerate the training of the Afghanistan security forces, army, and police, and that is going to take additional trainers.’

‘The Taliban is much closer to Al Qaeda than it used to be. They are much more affiliated with each other than they were a few years ago. Call it a federation.’

‘I am one that believes that we need to negotiate . . . from a position of strength. We are not in a position of strength.’

Acknowledging that public support for the war is waning, Navy Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that the US operation needs “12 to 18 months to turn this thing around.’’

“It is doable, but it is going to take some time,’’ he said, urging Americans to be patient.

With the intense focus until recently on fighting the war in Iraq - where the United States plans to keep nearly twice as many troops as in Afghanistan until at least early next year - he said that the Tali ban are far more potent than they were during the US invasion after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Exactly how do you conclude that by my definition England was not TOTALLY defeated?

I understand that you’re a Bushbot. But, the facts are what they are. The War of Independence was not over with the Patriot’s Bunker Hill victory. It had only just begun. The war ended with the British surrender at Yorktown and subsequent withdrawl from British Colonial America. The British were militarily TOTALLY defeated in America.

Similarly, the initial defeat of the Taliban in Afghanistan and Saddam’s army were only the opening battles in the War on Terror. Anyone who thought that would be the end of Islamo Terrorism was (I’m being charitable here) unrealistic. And you’re belief that we should have just packed up and gone home after the initial victories is ludicrous. As Patton once said “I don’t like taking the same real estate twice”.

Pulling American soldiers out of the Middle East and then sending them back to retake ground they had already gained is a concept only a demrat or RINO could endorse.

Oh, by the way, did or do you have a son or daughter soldier? Only someone with no vested interest in seeing the war actually won could think like you do. My son was deployed in harm’s way four times.

I’m OK with first two deployments—Kosovo and Afghanistan. I’m not okay with two subsequent deployments to Iraq. Actually I think America should not have to be involved with the Middle East at all. But we are dependent on it because the left in this country—and, I suspect, people like you—will not permit us to drill for our own oil.

I think a bit more respect is owed csm. If I read his handle correctly, he's a retired Army Command Sergeant Major. You just can't get much higher as a noncommissioned officer.

And I laud and respect you and your family for your contributions to this country.

Back on-topic: I'm withholding judgment until I see what the plan is for Afghanistan. So far, there is no clear objective. Worse yet, there appears to be no political will shown by our leadership to do what's necessary to win in Afghanistan.

Based on my limited knowledge of Afghanistan's history, the odds are stacked against us as it is.

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.