| Submit your comments on this article | ||
| Afghanistan | ||
| Afghanistan: more troops may not be the answer, says Obama adviser | ||
| 2009-11-08 | ||
| More troops may not be the answer to Nato's Afghanistan problems, a key adviser to President Barack Obama has said. National security adviser James Jones warned that extra troops could just be "swallowed up" in the deserts and mountains where troops are fighting. He was speaking as the president ponders a request to send 40,000 more soldiers to fight in the war, a decision which could prove one of the most crucial of his presidency. In an interview published on Saturday, the German weekly magazine Der Spiegel asked Mr Jones whether he agreed with General Stanley McChrystal, the top United States and Nato commander in Afghanistan, that the troop increase was needed. "Generals always ask for more troops," Mr Jones said.
"You can keep on putting troops in, and you could have 200,000 troops there and Afghanistan will swallow them up as it has done in the past," he said, according to comments published by the magazine's website in English and German.
The leading options under consideration would add at least 10,000 to 15,000 U.S. troops, but an announcement is expected to be weeks away. | ||
| Posted by:Fred |
| #14 ION DAWN [Pakistan] > ASIA A HUB OF GEOPOLITICS. Former Ambassador SHAMSAD AHMED KHAN. ASIA remains highly disparate + fragmented, + cannot blame the US-West in sole for all of its problems. * WAFF > UIGHURS SEEK PASSAGE TO INDIA. CHINA STATE MEDIAS > XINJIANG Region remains highly volatile due to its 5600-km borders wid RUSSIA in north, INDIA in south, MONGOLIA in the east, + FORMER MUSLIM SOVIET SSRS + AFPAK + INDIA again in west. * TIMES OF INDIA > [Chief Minister BUDDHADEB MATHANCHARJEE]"BUDDHA'S" TWIN-STRATEGIES TO FIGHT MAOISTS. GOVT-ARMY controls main Urban areas + roads, but must focus on VILLAGES + FORESTS * PAKISTANI DEFENCE FORUM/BHARAT RAKSHAK > INDIA: MAOISTS GETTING ARMS FROM CHINA; + INDIA: ORGANZIED HINDU EXTREMISTS/RADICAL GROUPS FEARED TO BE TARGETING CHRISTIANS [120 killed tote in Orissa region; up to 70,0000 Indian CHristians left homeless + in hiding due to fear of VIOL HINDU Radicalist backlash]. SAME > [Seymour Hersch]PAKISTAN GOVT. SIGNS DEAL WID AMERICANS/ US SECURITY FIRMS WILL GUARD PAK NUKES??? versus PAKISTAN FOREIGN OFFICE [FO]: NO DEALS WID US ON SECURITY FOR N-ARSENAL. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2009-11-08 23:10 |
| #13 It was a cheap insult suggesting Dear Leader is weak and indecisive; No apology needed, dear SteveS, I just didn't understand. My vocabulary and idiom collection have grown dramatically since I found Rantburg, which I enjoy immensely, and which periodically startles the trailing daughters who think me irredeemably innocent. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2009-11-08 18:45 |
| #12 And German NCOs frequently frustrated the plans of the Russian generals, a lesson the US learned and currently demonstrated daily by our nonpareil NCOs. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2009-11-08 18:27 |
| #11 Force correlations are hard to quantify with modern forces. You should read about the Eastern Front in WWII where the Red Army in 1942-43 in some cases enjoyed six to one sometimes nine to one superiority in men and materiel and still were defeated by the German Army through professional application of firepower and maneuver. If you revisit the chrononogy of Obama's involvement in Afghanistan, you will notice that Obama installed his guy, Gen. Stanley McChrystal and then ordered him to change the rules of engagement, which he promptly did. Whereupon General McChrystal told Obama if he wants to win the war he needs the real time equivalent of 10 combat brigades. That is where we stand. NATO has been trimming the equivalent of a combat division per year from Taliban ranks since 2007, with everything in situ since the May 2009 Farah airstrikes. I don't know if 10 more combat brigades will win it, but General McChrystal thinks it will. And with the supporting firepower available there's no reason to think that he can't... But for amateur hour in the White House |
| Posted by: badanov 2009-11-08 18:05 |
| #10 Sorry, TW. It was a cheap insult suggesting Dear Leader is weak and indecisive; more an expression of exasperation at His reluctance to make a decision than gender stereotypes. I realize Obama is whipsawed between pandering to his political base on one hand and the advice of his commanders, Petraeus and McChrystal on the other. His campaign rhetoric about Afghanistan being the 'right' war probably doesn't make it any easier, but we are getting used to Him talking out of both sides of his mouth. Coming from the IT world where the first response to any difficulty is to throw more bodies at the problem, I find this insistence on having the exact minimum head count for military ops fascinating. There is a rough rule of thumb that you need at least 3:1 superiority for a successful attack. More is better. Skimping on people means greater losses. I hate to sound like a 70's rock song, but refusing to decide *is* making a choice. |
| Posted by: SteveS 2009-11-08 17:47 |
| #9 I believe Kimberly Munley is female and she seems to have had no problem finding the solution to the problem facing her. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2009-11-08 16:56 |
| #8 He means Obama is a girl and he's searching for a solution between his legs. I think he's partially correct about the search but it's in the posterior orifice, not the anterior. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2009-11-08 16:33 |
| #7 I'm sure it's funny, but I have no idea what that means, SteveS. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2009-11-08 16:29 |
| #6 Bambi doesn't have a plan for that, either. I just hope He doesn't sprain His uterus trying to come up with one. |
| Posted by: SteveS 2009-11-08 15:45 |
| #5 General Jones might be right. If we dumped 200K troops into Afghanistan the way we did in Vietnam with an emphasis on body counts, sweeps, 'search and destroy', China Beach, 'hammer and anvil' operations, and huge supply depots, then indeed, Afghanistan might swallow them up. What matters is what you do with them. Bambi doesn't have a plan for that, either. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2009-11-08 10:49 |
| #4 If you believe it, then you'd believe this headline - ACORN: more votes may not be the answer, says Obama adviser |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2009-11-08 10:00 |
| #3 We told you about him, but you wouldn't listen. Quite probably that's why President Obama chose him, g(r)omgoru. It's sounds like he's a good fit for his employer's needs. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2009-11-08 09:14 |
| #2 "Generals always ask for more troops," Mr Jones said. "There are three ways in which a ruler can bring misfortune upon his army: By commanding the army to advance or to retreat, being ignorant of the fact it cannot obey; this is called hobbling the army. By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administrers a kingdom, being ingornant of the conditions which obtain in an army; this causes restlessness in the soldier's mind. By employing the officers of his army without discrimination, through ignorance of the military princile of adaption to circumstances. This shakes the confidence of the soldiers." - Sun Tzu, the Art of War |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2009-11-08 05:54 |
| #1 We told you about him, but you wouldn't listen. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2009-11-08 04:16 |