Over at Human Events, Richard Tomkins is delivering on the scene reporting from Afghanistan.
The young Army captain lit a cigar, inhaled and took in the night sky. It had been a vexing week. His outpost had been attacked by extremists using rocket propelled grenades, a platoon had been fired upon while on an intelligence-gathering mission and people in the nearby market place, once friendly, were unusually stand-offish following an earlier pro-Taliban harangue by an unidentified visitor.
“The bad guys are very good at intimidating people and controlling what they do,” he said in reply to a reporter’s question. “They come and go. Some stay but many move back and forth to neighboring districts which makes them hard to track and target.
“We’re new here and trying to make inroads with the local people, build relationships. But many are scared or just plain ambivalent and building trust takes time.”
"building trust takes time"
itdiehard Tuesday, October 27th at 11:36AM EDT (link)Unfortunately, POTUS is not willing to make the investment!
Not sure it's worth it..
illinoisconservative Tuesday, October 27th at 12:20PM EDT (link)I have nothing but respect and praise for our men and women serving in Afghanistan, but what the heck is the mission there?
Should it be the job of our military to “make inroads with the local people,” and “build relationships. “??
We removed the Al Quaeda training camps there. As far as I’m concerned that should spell “Mission accomplished”. Let’s get our people out and keep a small presence to monitor the region to make sure Al Quaeda doesn’t creep back in.
It’s not our job to re-make the whole world into our image.
A Small Presence
itdiehard Tuesday, October 27th at 12:28PM EDT (link)will signs death warrants for those troops left behind. When politics dictates the war game it time to pullout.
It doesn't have to..
illinoisconservative Tuesday, October 27th at 12:41PM EDT (link)The presence can be offshore..it can be as remote as need be to keep our troops safe.
It really depends what the mission is. What is our war with the Taliban? Why are we there and what do we hope to accomplish?
Does the Taliban pose an immediate threat to American citizens? That, to me, is the purpose of American troops..
Is the Taliban our enemy?
reason60 Tuesday, October 27th at 12:55PM EDT (link)You hit the nail on the head; we are at war with the Taliban for no other reason than that they sheltered Bin Ladin;
But now that we have given up on capturing Bin Ladin, we have become entangled in a war of trying to destroy the Taliban, and create from scratch a civil democracy in a nation that has never known one.
No one seems to be asking if there isn;t a better way to protect America than trying to perform social engineering on a grand scale, in a country 9,000 miles away.
Read this letter of resignation from former Marine Capt. Matthew Hoh, who was senior civilian representative in the Foreign Service in Afghanistan.
He has become convinced that we are not making headway, and that escalation will only make things worse.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/hp/ssi/wpc/ResignationLetter.pdf?hpid=topnews
This isn’t about partisan politic; this isn’t a Left/ Right issue. We have been in Afghanistan for 8 years and we are further behind than we have ever been. The only way to “win” is to build a nation from scartch, to do Obamacare on a gargantuan scale, to buld hospitals, roads, schools, create a corruption-free government and and effective military, recreate political parties, introduce the ideas of liberal democracy……
This is exactly what conservatives know can’t be done- even the US military cannot do social engineering of this scale, no matter how many troops we throw in there.
Worse, this is unnecessary; the Taliban poses no threat to America, and never has. Al-Quaida is our enemy, and we can deter terror attacks without needing to build nations.
this is frikkin nonsense
Streiff Tuesday, October 27th at 1:02PM EDT (link)Afghanistan doesn’t have a shore. If you don’t trust me just check out a map.
“A man does what he can and endures what he must.”
Attacks from the Gulf
illinoisconservative Tuesday, October 27th at 1:12PM EDT (link)as needed if we detect Al Quaeda setting up new camps.
This can be in the form of long-range missiles or bombers.
this is frikkin nonsense
Streiff Tuesday, October 27th at 1:21PM EDT (link)unless you’re claiming that this strategy worked well under Clinton. The 9/11 Commission Report didn’t think it did but 2001 was a long time ago and things change.
“A man does what he can and endures what he must.”
Well, consider the alternative..
illinoisconservative Tuesday, October 27th at 2:23PM EDT (link)The alternative to remote monitoring and strategic strikes is having massive on the ground presence in every country we deem “dangerous” or likely to harbor Al Quaeda. It is not sustainable. And as soon as we leave, they will filter back in. No centralized government in Afghanistan, no matter how friendly they are to us, is going to completely prevent that.. not in a country like Afghanistan given its size and terrain. (not to mention the tribal nature of its people)
So, the question still remains on the table.. What is our mission? Are we at war with the Taliban? And, if so, why?
actually it isn't
Streiff Tuesday, October 27th at 2:28PM EDT (link)There are very few countries which harbor al Qaeda, Pakistan being the closest thing to an example.
There is no such thing as a country with a functioning central government and a transnational terrorist organization unless the country is giving the terrorist organization sanctuary.
I wen through this same argument with a different bunch of idiots beginning in 2003. The facts on the ground have proven me to be correct and them to still be idiots.
“A man does what he can and endures what he must.”
No countries in Africa?
illinoisconservative Tuesday, October 27th at 3:31PM EDT (link)The al-Qaeda Organization in the Islamic Maghreb (northern Africa) is no problem?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda_Organization_in_the_Islamic_Maghreb
What about the Saudi and Yemen factions that recently united into “Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula” and operating out of Yemen?
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/05/21/monitor/entry5032478.shtml
They are also operating out of East Africa..
We can’t be everywhere… at least not with boots on the ground.
reading comprehension is your friend
Streiff Tuesday, October 27th at 3:39PM EDT (link)and you need one
“A man does what he can and endures what he must.”
I thought they harbored Al Qaeda? isn't that why we...
penguin2 Tuesday, October 27th at 2:29PM EDT (link)went into Afghanistan to begin with. I would like us to be decisive one way or the other. Either stay in with adequate military support or come home.
BTW, illinoisconservative, once again you seem to be taking devil’s advocate position here. Maybe I’ve missed it, but I can’t recall an issue on site, that you don’t do this. Why are you making the Taliban the issue here?
Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God.
Benjamin Franklin
Why am I making the Taliban the issue?
illinoisconservative Tuesday, October 27th at 3:03PM EDT (link)Because that is who we are fighting over there. Al Quaeda is wiped out. Estimates are there are 100 Al Quaeda in the whole area.
And while I have been known to take the devil’s advocate position to elicit discussion, I am not doing that here.
I am saying we have a mission that is not defined or ill-defined. I do not approve of our young men and women dying in a war with the Taliban. Our fight was with Al Quaeda. If that is finished there, then we should leave and keep vigilant.
That is wrong-headeed on so many levels
E Pluribus Unum Tuesday, October 27th at 3:20PM EDT (link)I’m not sure I can hit every point but:
(1) Al Queda down to 100 members in Afghanistan. According to who? John F-ing Kerry? And regardless, in light of #3 below, it really does not matter if 2900 out of the 3000 Al Queda people have “Taliban” on their deskplate.
(2) I don’t know which “ill-defined” mission we are fighting under, but the first one was just fine, the Bush Doctrine, paraphrased. “We will make no distinction between terrorists and those who harbor them”. Whatever *other* mission Obama does or does not declare, THAT one declares the Taliban as an enemy to be defeated.
(3) The relationship between the Taliban and Al Queda is akin to that between ACORN and SIEU. They share office space, they cross-employ, they have all the same names on their Rolodex. There is no particular point in making a distinction.
(4) If the Taliban retakes the government and the US leaves, are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that Al Queda will not veritably spring forth from the rocks and take the exact same global role they had in the 1990s?
Carthago delenda est
So, just define the mission then.
illinoisconservative Tuesday, October 27th at 4:04PM EDT (link)What is it? To defeat the Taliban?
Or, are you suggesting we just need to stay there forever because as soon as we leave, Al Quaeda will spring forth from the rocks?
I'm not your research service
Streiff Tuesday, October 27th at 4:10PM EDT (link)the whole time the left was sniveling about not understanding the mission in Iraq, it was clearly posted on the White House website. I’m sure a smart guy like yourself, one astute enough to suss out Afghanistan’s shoreline, can find it.
“A man does what he can and endures what he must.”
If I get to define the mission
E Pluribus Unum Tuesday, October 27th at 4:40PM EDT (link)(which would be nice, because I don’t even play golf that much, I could come to a decision in probably under 9 months, methinks)
Then it’s this. We’re going after terrorists, WHEREVER on the planet they are. We’re going after those who harbor and support terrorists, and we won’t even think twice about a**-f***ing whoever stands up and volunteers to be our enemy in that endeavor.
As it applies specifically to Afghanistan, our mission is to eradicate both Al Queda and the Taliban, since the former is the world’s premier terrorism organization and their home ir in Afghanistan, and the latter is for all practical purposes the political front of the former.
Since you asked, that’s what my mission would be. It’s not particularly different from the Bush Doctrine. Eradicate. Salt the ground they live on. Burn the stumps.
It’s not my fault, nor is it General McChrystal’s, that our Moron-in-Chief can’t stick to the current mission.
Carthago delenda est
BTW - It was General James Jones
illinoisconservative Tuesday, October 27th at 4:36PM EDT (link)who said:
“The Al Qaeda presence is very diminished,” he said. “The maximum estimate is less than 100 operating in the country, no bases, no ability to launch attacks on either us or our allies.”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/04/obamas-adviser-afghanistan-imminent-danger-falling-taliban/
If you know better than the former Supreme Allied Commander of Europe then I’ll just sit down and shut up.
Clearly, there is disagreement on all of this.. McChrystal seems to think it is “winnable” with enough new troops.. others disagree.
I don’t know the answer, nor did I want to imply I did. But I’d rather not see hundreds more Americans lose their lives in a conflict that will only arise anew as soon as we leave in 3 or 5 or even 10 years.
You should ask Streiff what he thinks of General James Jones
E Pluribus Unum Tuesday, October 27th at 5:03PM EDT (link)I think the terms “unserious”, “desk jockey”, and “nose so far up Obama’s butt he can’t even see daylight” might come into play.
So, FWIW, yeah, I think I know better than that particular former Supreme Allied Commander of Europe (current NSA, last I checked).
In light of what I’ve been saying (Taliban by day = Al Qaeda by night), I suppose it enters the realm of possibility that there may be only 100 people with “Al Qaeda” on their business card. I seriously doubt that, though.
But regardless, the number of officially Taliban and de facto Al Qaeda guerillas is a bit more like 25,000. That’s full-timers, and that’s armed warriors, not even counting the part-timers.
Can we declare them the enemy yet? I mean who exactly laid siege to the base in Kamdesh base a few weeks ago with something like 200 fighters? Was that the Taliban or Al Qaeda, you suppose? Does it really matter what they call themselves?
Carthago delenda est
Aspirin factory anyone? (nt)
Neil Stevens Tuesday, October 27th at 1:22PM EDT (link)Want to run for conservatives? Give.
There Is No Crisis
I know it sounds like
mom2oneson Tuesday, October 27th at 1:34PM EDT (link)they are there to build schools and churches and teach Sunday School.
OBAMA DITHERS, AMERICANS DIE
Dr. Botkin Tuesday, October 27th at 1:51PM EDT (link)http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091027/ap_on_re_as/as_afghanistan