Article on Afghanistan

[Captain Don]

Hi, I am wondering what the group has to say about this article.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/02/the-mendacity-o.html

My thoughts are that this would be a massive step in the right direction. While he is still putting the emphasis on the wrong country, and avoiding confronting the more dangerous enemies (Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc.), we need military and political leaders who think like this, putting the focus on killing the enemy and not building a new stronger Islamic state.

[RussK]

I agree with his ranking of his advice on future Afghanistan policy, and agree that we should become better allies with India--something that should have happened a long time ago, well before and during the 1998-99 conflict. My reasons for agreeing are:

1) I think nation building should only be attempted under certain circumstances. Not only that, I'm currently afraid of the course that this country is going; therefore, the funny audacity in US nation building, when people have lost the essence and direction of their own nation. Given this, I agree that:

We needed to smash our enemies and leave. Had it proved necessary, we could have returned later for another punitive mission. Instead, we fell into the great American fallacy of believing ourselves responsible for helping those who've harmed us.

Of course, this also applies to Iraq, which I think from his article, Peters may disagree.

2) The 'Surge' in Afghanistan would be for a different purpose and probably differ in style than that of Iraq; therefore, the effects wouldn't necessarily be similar.

3) Strengthening troop levels in Afghanistan may help the overall mission some what, but I don't think it will make substantial improvements. I personally don't give much credit to the last buildup of troops in Iraq, The Surge, for quelling violence there.

[Zip]

I disagree with the article.

I think that given time an Afghan surge will give the locals (most of whom just want to be left alone) the courage and ability to tell the Taliban to go pound salt.

As it is now the security situation on the ground is too weak. The average Afghan can't declare themselves for a free Afghanistan because next week the troops will be finished the Op, and be gone leaving Ahmed siting there with Johnny Taliban in the village square.

Slowly but surely the ANA and ANP are becoming more professional and more able. OMLT are making a difference in ideals and TTP's (Tactics Techniques and Procedures)

Part of the problem the Russians had in Afghanistan is that they treated the Afghan soldiers like canon fodder, sending them in against the Mujaheddin when they weren't ready. We don't seem to be doing that this time, we are right alongside them in the fighting and giving them bigger parts as they become more able.

I don't think that we will ever get a carbon copy of a western democracy out of Afghanistan but we should be able to get a stable non-terrorist state out of it at the very least.

I agree that Pakistan is the greater threat now, and once (if) Afghanistan is stabilized I expect this to be the next seat of islamofascist power.

Edited March 25, 2009 by Zip