• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

McChrystal: More Forces or 'Mission Failure'

Whitewing

Well-known member
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/20/AR2009092002920_pf.html

The top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan warns in an urgent, confidential assessment of the war that he needs more forces within the next year and bluntly states that without them, the eight-year conflict "will likely result in failure," according to a copy of the 66-page document obtained by The Washington Post.

Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal says emphatically: "Failure to gain the initiative and reverse insurgent momentum in the near-term (next 12 months) -- while Afghan security capacity matures -- risks an outcome where defeating the insurgency is no longer possible."

His assessment was sent to Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates on Aug. 30 and is now being reviewed by President Obama and his national security team.

McChrystal concludes the document's five-page Commander's Summary on a note of muted optimism: "While the situation is serious, success is still achievable."

But he repeatedly warns that without more forces and the rapid implementation of a genuine counterinsurgency strategy, defeat is likely. McChrystal describes an Afghan government riddled with corruption and an international force undermined by tactics that alienate civilians.
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
I suppose obama will need to approach other NATO members again?

I recently read elsewhere that Obama's resisting efforts to send more troops than he's already comitted to sending for the year. If that's the case, I'm sure the left will be all over his case for not listening to his generals.





Gawd I crack myself up sometimes. :lol:
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
"Until I'm satisfied that we've got the right strategy, I'm not going to be sending some young man or woman over there -- beyond what we already have," Obama said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/20/AR2009092002878_pf.html

And I agree with the president in this case.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Whitewing said:
"Until I'm satisfied that we've got the right strategy, I'm not going to be sending some young man or woman over there -- beyond what we already have," Obama said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/20/AR2009092002878_pf.html

And I agree with the president in this case.

Admiral Mullen testified to Congress last week- that within the month the Joint Chiefs and Gates will have been able to get the report examined and make recommendations to the President....
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
August 31

Jones said that “we are seeing results that indicate more captures, more deaths of radical leaders and a kind of a global coming-together by the fact that this is a threat to not only the United States but to the world at-large and the world is moving toward doing something about it.”

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/08/abc-news-exclusive-national-security-adviser-says-president-obama-is-having-greater-success-taking-t.html
 

Broke Cowboy

Well-known member
Unfortunately this war will not be won - as it is being fought with fear of reprisal on the home front.

To win it must be fought in a manner similar to the Second World war - total war - and that will not happen.

This will not happen as the will is not there and the enemy is well entrenched in our own lands which lends fear to most decisions being made.

Negotiation only delays long enough for the enemy to consolidate and then it commences again.

I know there are a few arm chair types here who would believe it can be brought about to a peaceful end - and would consider my talk "war mongering" but that end will never come.

Time will bear me out. We will lose - and I have a vested interest in that not happening - so it is not a pleasant thought.

BC
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Broke Cowboy said:
Unfortunately this war will not be won - as it is being fought with fear of reprisal on the home front.

To win it must be fought in a manner similar to the Second World war - total war - and that will not happen.

This will not happen as the will is not there and the enemy is well entrenched in our own lands which lends fear to most decisions being made.

Negotiation only delays long enough for the enemy to consolidate and then it commences again.

I know there are a few arm chair types here who would believe it can be brought about to a peaceful end - and would consider my talk "war mongering" but that end will never come.

Time will bear me out. We will lose - and I have a vested interest in that not happening - so it is not a pleasant thought.

BC

BC HERE is a good read on where Americais headed and actions that should be taken.

http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=39198
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Broke Cowboy said:
Unfortunately this war will not be won - as it is being fought with fear of reprisal on the home front.

To win it must be fought in a manner similar to the Second World war - total war - and that will not happen.

This will not happen as the will is not there and the enemy is well entrenched in our own lands which lends fear to most decisions being made.

Negotiation only delays long enough for the enemy to consolidate and then it commences again.

I know there are a few arm chair types here who would believe it can be brought about to a peaceful end - and would consider my talk "war mongering" but that end will never come.

Time will bear me out. We will lose - and I have a vested interest in that not happening - so it is not a pleasant thought.

BC

I agree. I've mentioned that I think that once you politicize it you are bound to get bit in the a$$
 

Steve

Well-known member
One official questioned whether McChrystal had already gone beyond his writ with public statements describing the protection of the Afghan population as more important than killing Taliban fighters.

for a society to grow it often needs stability and security. a strategy often referred to negatively as nation building..

to me anything short of leaving a secure stable government in Afghanistan after the war is like shooting a bear in the ass with a BB gun and then pulling up a chair and waiting around to see what will happen... :roll: :roll: :wink:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Whitewing said:
"Until I'm satisfied that we've got the right strategy, I'm not going to be sending some young man or woman over there -- beyond what we already have," Obama said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/20/AR2009092002878_pf.html

And I agree with the president in this case.

Admiral Mullen testified to Congress last week- that within the month the Joint Chiefs and Gates will have been able to get the report examined and make recommendations to the President....

People are dying, do you think they could get together over some dinner, and add some expediency to the debate?
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Whitewing said:
"Until I'm satisfied that we've got the right strategy, I'm not going to be sending some young man or woman over there -- beyond what we already have," Obama said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/20/AR2009092002878_pf.html

And I agree with the president in this case.

Gawd, I hate to admit it, but I agree, too. I'd like to know exactly what our plan is over there.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
I hope this mission isn't being screwed up by an incompetent CIC?


MILITARY: Marines await word on deployment

Troop assignments not yet clear


In a little noticed development last week, Defense Secretary Robert Gates ordered 2,500 to 3,000 more troops to Afghanistan as soon as possible to meet imminent threats from roadside bombs.

Gates was responding to a request from the overall U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, for more bomb disposal and route clearance teams, medical rescue units and intelligence specialists. All are needed to combat the rising use of roadside bombs, the No. 1 troop killer in Afghanistan.

Which troops are getting those assignments remained unclear Monday. But as military officials and the Obama administration debate the next steps in the fight for Afghanistan, more local Marines and sailors are preparing to be sent to the front lines.

Maj. Eric Dent, at Marine Corps headquarters at the Pentagon, said it is unclear if more Marines will get the call to join the more than 11,000 leathernecks already in Afghanistan.

"We still don't know if the Marine Corps is going to get tasked with this or not," Dent said.

Camp Pendleton officials also said they were awaiting word to see if some of the immediate needs McChrystal has identified will be filled by Marines and sailors from the base.

Camp Pendleton's 1st Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment has been deployed in the country's volatile Helmand province since the spring.

More than 200 members of the base's 1st Marine Special Operations Battalion are heading to Afghanistan in the coming days to take over management of special forces missions in western and northern Afghanistan.

By year's end, the U.S. is expected to have 68,000 troops in Afghanistan, along with 32,000 from NATO countries. The U.S. now has about 62,000 troops there.

The additional 2,500 to 3,000 anti-roadside bomb troops are not expected to increase the troop level beyond the 68,000 now authorized because McChrystal has indicated he may send a like number home.

But military advisers have been suggesting in recent weeks that a troop surge is needed to tame a recalcitrant insurgency. President Obama is weighing that option, among others.

Several thousand Camp Pendleton Marines and sailors will be aboard ships in the Middle East in the coming weeks as the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit sails from San Diego in the next few days.

Throughout the height of the Iraq war, local troops on similar cruises were often ordered into battle. That could happen to the 11th MEU troops if President Barack Obama orders a buildup beyond the already approved 68,000.

So far this year, 211 members of the U.S. military have died in Afghanistan compared with 155 total U.S. deaths in all of 2008, a figure that was the highest annual death toll since the war began in fall 2001.

http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/military/article_74e22595-54ca-505d-99c2-60c105a247b3.html
 

Cal

Well-known member
I just find it a bit two-faced that the left were parroting how Afghanistan was the one that was so important to win.....not Iraq.....when Bush was in the White House. Now it looks like the whole Middle East will soon be a worsening powder keg under this incompetent administration.
 

Cal

Well-known member
Oh yeah, what happened to the daily death tolls of service men and "innocent" civilian.....taliban....whatever that were drummed so diligently for the Bush Admin?
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Cal said:
Oh yeah, what happened to the daily death tolls of service men and "innocent" civilian.....taliban....whatever that were drummed so diligently for the Bush Admin?

I was thinking same thing, Didn't Afghanistan just have the worse death month in history of the whole war?

Seems things have fell apart pretty fast once Obama took over! The enemy was encouraged by a week Commander and Chief. Much like the terrorist did while Clinton was President. We had more Terrorist attacks against America under Clinton than anyone!
 
Top