Afghanistan Sinking
Here’s what the president said last night:
“Make no mistake: We will fight this … with everything we’ve got for as long as it takes.”
Notably, that is NOT the approach the United States is taking in Afghanistan, where the president’s strategy is more like:
“Make no mistake: we will fight this with as much as we can spare, for a least another year.”
I’m getting a sinking feeling about Afghanistan, and I’m not the only one. There seems to be a rising tide of pessimism. You could hear it on Capitol Hill yesterday. You can hear it in the measured words of Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who is cautioning abut the need to make significant progress by the end of the year.
“Significant progress.” I’ve heard those words before. And they have a hollow ring to them that doesn’t sound anything like “victory,” or even “success.”
Here’s a real sign things are going south. When the Pentagon sees the problem as the media not reporting enough of the “good news.” Reuters quotes Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell as frustrated that reporters are spending too much time on the front lines, and suggesting they should visit some of the more quiet, stable areas of Afghanistan to get a more complete picture. Uh.. Reporters are going to go where the fighting is. That’s where the war is being won or lost.
As I once told a general complaining about negative coverage of early operations in Iraq in, “If you want better war coverage, you should run a better war.”
I’ve been around along enough to know that sometimes things work out despite all the missteps and roadblocks. NATO’s air war on Kosovo comes to mind. But I’ve also been around long enough to recognize the same shopworn excuses about why we haven’t yet turned the corner.
I’m not saying we should stay un Afghanistan forever, (because that’s how it could take). I’m saying a open-ended strategy the only way to successfully build a functioning nation, which seems to be the linchpin of current U.S. strategy. And I think secretly, President Obama knows he may soon have to adjust that goal, or change the strategy to match it.
The question is, “Are we making America safer, and is it worth the cost?”
Tags: Afghanistan, Obama, Strategy
Comments (28)
+2
Al Pessin · 156 weeks ago
Or, as Petraeus once said about Iraq, 'we don't have a communications
problem, we have a results problem.' They clearly have the former.
Gates' point is that it's not fair to claim the latter until the end of
the year. It does have echos of Iraq. Question is whether it's Iraq
2005/06 or, as Gates said today, Iraq 2007.
+2
Spc. Edward Swale · 156 weeks ago
When President Bush was in office the media didnt care about
Afghanistan. Now that we are drawing down here in Iraq the MEDIA has all
the answers to winning the war in Afghanistan? To disrespect a general,
who the hell do you think you are? You are a news reporter not a
warrior. Media should stay out of the frontlines period. Remember
Geraldo holding up a map on CNN stating "we are here and we are going
this way." Yeah and they want to tell us how to fight a war.
+2
Mark Gish · 155 weeks ago
It's not what the media reports to we viewers/readers, it's what gets
reported to the DoD from commanders in country. It remains to be seen
what the Iraq government can do when we leave it to them vs. what the
Afghans can do, when we leave. The media has little to have an affect on
these situations. The cyber world we live in gives us access to a lot
more info than just TV sources. Our governement has access to far more
than we citizens have & that's how strategies/decisions are based.
The media are just "strap hangers"/"ambulance chasers". Just show
pieces!
0
Kate · 155 weeks ago
Winning the war in Iraq has as much or more to do with what has gone on
away from the 'front lines'. Keeping 'ground won' is done by the civil
affairs guys who work with the locals to see what they need such as
electricity that stays on more than 4 hours a day, clean water, safe
useable schools, up to date clinics and hospitals. These things do as
much or more to achieve success in Iraq. My husband spent half of a 15
month tour working on such civil structure projects, running clinics and
special medical needs events, and helping Iraqis to learn how to
operate small businesses to help them improve their lives.
0
Kate · 155 weeks ago
There is very much a battle for the hearts and minds of Afghanis as
well, but will be a little different because their country is so much
farther behind in development than Iraq as well as the matter of the
people who are still very attached to their cultural customs and tribal
affiliations. We cannot force villagers to be loyal to us, we must earn
their loyalty and protect them from the terror held over their heads by
the Taliban, or meet their needs that the Taliban is currently meeting
because the Afghan government does not. People want to say that the
Soviets and before them the Brits failed and floundered to win
Afghanistan. But they both assaulted the population to subdue it by
force. Other than the Taliban who are shooting at us and are in cahoots
with AlQueda, we are not applying forceful assaults on the Afghan
citizenry. I think we will have a positive effect on the country, even
if we never catch BinLaden or completely erradicate the Taliban. I hope
that eventually the people of Afghanistan will come to the same
realization as the Sunni tribesmen in Iraq that AlQueda/Taliban is more
of a poison than a remedy and turn on them as the Sunnis did and work
with us and the tide will turn.
0
Kate · 155 weeks ago
lMy husband asked an Iraqi during one of his civil affairs projects
what he thought it would take to bring peace to his country. His answer:
"Take every child under the age of 2 out of our country and nuke the
rest of us" because he said there is so much bitterness between all the
groups passed down generation to generation. Though some in our country
have suggested a similiar solution, it is the not the way of Americans
to do so. Only once have we used such force and have done well to not do
so again for 60 years, and have since rebuilt and made an ally of that
country. The world is not as it was 60 years ago, the enemy does not
stay an ocean away, its soldiers do not wear a uniform and follow a
political philosophy that they can be convinced of its incorrectness.
The current enemy has wrapped his power seeking in the guise of a major
religion and can be only 19 men on airplanes who kill over 3,000 people
in a single day. We cannot surrender the battle, we must keep the battle
on the lands of the enemy and show to his neighbors that he is a liar.
0
Greg · 155 weeks ago
You'd think they would spell check these things, or at least hire someone who knew English grammar well.
+2
mond5004 · 155 weeks ago
Ummm....spell check? Ever hear of it?
Also, wars are won in the political arena today. The politicians will not stick with a war that needs to be won if it kills their career. If the news would actually report the entire story, including facts about what good is coming form this (such as new hospitals, schools, businesses for local people, etc.) maybe the public would have a better opinion of the war. But because the media report the blood and guts, the casualty rates, the bombings, the failed missions (ours and theirs), the public lose faith and so therefore do the politicians. Solution: Ban reporters from the front lines or mandate that they tell the WHOLE story and not just their opinion of what is "newsworthy." Maybe then we would have the popular support to force the political big wigs to actually see this through. PERIOD. END OF STORY.
Also, wars are won in the political arena today. The politicians will not stick with a war that needs to be won if it kills their career. If the news would actually report the entire story, including facts about what good is coming form this (such as new hospitals, schools, businesses for local people, etc.) maybe the public would have a better opinion of the war. But because the media report the blood and guts, the casualty rates, the bombings, the failed missions (ours and theirs), the public lose faith and so therefore do the politicians. Solution: Ban reporters from the front lines or mandate that they tell the WHOLE story and not just their opinion of what is "newsworthy." Maybe then we would have the popular support to force the political big wigs to actually see this through. PERIOD. END OF STORY.
+4
JOSEPH · 155 weeks ago
Obama does not care about the military ,unless it is for his benefit.
Make sure you vote all the Liberal Democrats out of office. They hate
us. JOSEPH R.. KIEFFER, SSGT, USAF Ret.
+2
A few month's ago I read an article that said Gen McChrystal could be tempted to run for POTUS. Hmmmm
+3
RICHARD · 155 weeks ago
Your right JOSEPH . obama ( he doesn't rate caps ) doe's not give a
rats ass about our servicemen and women or our flag and country. He is
only interested in the next party and how he can tell someone how great
he is............. Other than the wars. How long did it take him to
comment and respond to the BP and Gulf issues. ??????????? Wake up
AMERICA If missles were coming at us from anywhere. Would we have to
wait to see where they were going to hit . And then decided what our
responce would be. We have sleepers in AMERICA ,waiting for there phones
to ring . "Attack your target" will be there call. And because there
religion tells them to kill they will. They are a sick people, ruled by
bullies that will kill there own as an example if needed.........Need to
stop 'my blood is boiling . Ret. Navy BMCS ( 65-93 )
+1
David · 155 weeks ago
In my view the war in Afghanistan is being conducted by people making
the same mistakes that were made in Vietnam. You cannot defeat an enemy
by allowing him to have safe haven's in our so called allies country.
You cannot defeat an enemy by propping up a corrupt government that the
people have no faith in. I am sick of seeing our young people in body
bags while the Afghan's cheerfully go about growing Poppies.
The problem in the Gulf of Mexico is there is no one with the authority and the balls to say this is what we are going to do and then kicking enough ass to get it done. Where is General Honore when we need him.
The problem in the Gulf of Mexico is there is no one with the authority and the balls to say this is what we are going to do and then kicking enough ass to get it done. Where is General Honore when we need him.
0
panfisher · 155 weeks ago
Lawyer Lawyer Lawyer, arrogant with power. great story teller about his
???? accomplish ments. Talks a big action to get every one else to do
and if it fails it eveyone elses fault. That is what happens when the
rest of the people give up and let the "others" do the voting. Their are
people who die to vote and like a lot of other things here no body
wants to be bothered. I think the drug culture is soo rampant that
reallity escapes what is really happening, Freedom is not Free some one
paid all for it and like any thing else if you do not work for it it is
not appreciated or respected, The feel good generations, if it feels
good do it. When the cells turn loose, it aint gonna feel good any more.
A rude awakening, And I am not paranoid. Don't own a weapon, do know
how to use one, guess if the **** hits the fan I will aquire one real
quick from a cell member. Probably have to butcher them, but if he is
the aggressor, soo be it. The final stand wil be close up guns and
knives and what ever else works.
+1
Cindy · 155 weeks ago
Support our General, support our troops! I am ever so grateful for the
freedoms we enjoy each and every day because our military defends those
freedoms.
This war is not easy for civilians to understand given the distant nature and the poor press reporting.
This war is not easy for civilians to understand given the distant nature and the poor press reporting.
0
sam s. · 155 weeks ago
I have to sadly disagree with the statement that the war in afghanistan
will be won or lost on the front line. See there are no front lines
over there no matter what you think. as a veteran of the war in Iraq, it
was brought to my attention that we are "winning" in iraq because we
win the hearts and minds of the people. From what I have seen they are
applying the same tactic in Afghanistan. so where is the front line of
that type of warfare. oh yeah its back in the rear where things are a
little calmer. but it seems that none of that gets reported on national
news stations. where its CNN or FOX because its not a ratings grabber.
well sadly it is part of the war and is an essential part of the reason
we will "win" or "lose" in Afghanistan
0
Will · 155 weeks ago
While he makes some good points: staying the course, all or nothing, etc; Kate's points are even more valid.
Yeah, and wouldn't it be nice if he had proofread the thing before posting.
Yeah, and wouldn't it be nice if he had proofread the thing before posting.
0
panfisher · 155 weeks ago
The man in charge is only interested in complying with the wishes of
the people who altimately supplyed the money, the support and anything
else involved in him being elected the leader. The "Leader" nomenclature
infures just that. Go where He is told to go and make the discission
needed to lead the rest to follow, an other words telll them what they
think they want to here and make evrybody feeely feeely goood.
0
panfisher · 155 weeks ago
hearts and mind nomenclature is to make the sponsers feel good, the
fighters can be damned. Publicity to qwell the grand pubba in what ever
country we get involved. It all means how much the sponsers of the
desire to take over a countries are willing to have the people on the
ground pay. It boils down to how much profit is available to the prever
of the conflict. I believe the milantants envolved are only interested
in who will pay the biggest bribe or payola fortheir efforts to not kill
the soo called invaders. That area of conflict now has done the switch
side game for a few thousnd years, because they have full control of THE
MINDS AND HEARTS of their fellow tribes men. So goes the minds and
hearts game, pay enough to the controllers and you get the mind and
heart end game settled.
0
Michael · 155 weeks ago
All of you should read President Eisenhower's warning. As a veteran who
appreciates the sacrifices so many have made, I still worry about all
the jingoistic, racist nonsense I'm reading here. We're not winning
ANYTHING, just giving the taxpayers money, human lives, etc. to a
military-industrial complex that is a complete waste. Just look how they
treat our veterans, shipping jobs overseas, fighting not to raise the
minimum wage while executives make 500+ what workers earn. And only the
rich can afford health care. Please...stop..and THINK!
0
Retired MSgt · 155 weeks ago
I really have a hard time taking many of you seriously. My eight year
old son can spell better. Afghanistan is a sad commentary on how
politics can disable the best military strategy, which is more than just
shooting bad guys. The posts in this segment are a sad commentary on
the educational system where many of you acquired your writing and
spelling skills.
Even the most insightful commentary reeks of ignorance when it is misspelled or poorly written. Improve your communication skills if you want your political or social comments to carry any kind of weight.
Even the most insightful commentary reeks of ignorance when it is misspelled or poorly written. Improve your communication skills if you want your political or social comments to carry any kind of weight.
I would not mind so much declaring victory and pulling out of
Afghanistan if we were equally willing to go back again should
circumstances dictate. If History provides any example, victory will be
declared in 2011 and we will promptly leave. Unfortunately, it is also
equally likely that we will find ourselves having to return to
Afghanistan, within five years, to fight the Taliban all over again. We
should plan for such a prospect. Not a criticism, just an observation.
No comments:
Post a Comment