Do you believe a new strategy in Afghanistan will lead to success?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090831/ap_on_re_as/as_afghanistan

US general calls for new strategy against Taliban

By JASON STRAZIUSO, Associated Press Writer Jason Straziuso, Associated Press Writer – 20 mins ago

KABUL – The commander of U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan said Monday in an assessment of the war that a new strategy was needed to fight the Taliban, while NATO officials disclosed he is expected to separately request more troops.

Increasing U.S. forces is a hot-button issue that could ignite furious debate in Washington on the U.S. military's future in an increasingly unpopular war. Some Democratic senators have increased calls for a timeline to draw down troops.

Gen. Stanley McChrystal sent his strategic review of the Afghan war to the Pentagon and NATO headquarters on Monday. U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates ordered the 60-day review to size up the rapidly deteriorating security situation in Afghanistan as Taliban attacks rise and U.S. deaths spiral upward.

"The situation in Afghanistan is serious, but success is achievable and demands a revised implementation strategy, commitment and resolve, and increased unity of effort," McChrystal said in a statement Monday.

After how long? And what will be the ultimate benefit? With so much happening (or needing to happen) domestically, I don't know that President Obama needs to be getting further involved in a lengthy land war in Asia.

I think the best possible strategy may be to work with the most "moderate" Taliban leaders that can be found and give them aid in the form of cash, much like we did the Sunni in Iraq. Keep the cash to a few leaders, under conditions of security and human rights, including women's rights. That may be impossible but that is the Hobson's choice.

:think:

But, the "new" strategies and generals are a CYA operation in PR to avoid admitting to another lost war.

Something about terrorists, or Buddhist statues, or women's rights (I don't remember atm.)

Whatever our mission, I'm sure we're just another few thousand or so dead Afghanis away from VICTORY!

My question is what would be a success? This whole war on terror is a flawed concept designed and used as a means to an end as there is no winning here or in Iraq or Iran to come if ever and on and on. The only success will be us leaving

and I would also prefer the American people came to a consensus conclusion and could impose their will upon the military industrial complex that promotes these ill-conceived adventures that are to the benefit of a few and the detriment of millions. We would need to more clearly define why the whole war on terror is a flawed concept and hammer that message home to the US public. I would then love to see a mass movement, petitions, sit-ins at our representatives' offices, town halls, impromptu demonstrations, moratoriums, national strikes, etc. Then maybe D.C. would find the political will to actually leave.

But unless and until enough people give a sh*t that killing continues in our name and financed by our tax dollars in this twisted fashion, nothing of the sort will take place. There will be some ignominious withdrawal over an extended period of time, accomplishing nothing, if we actually withdraw at all. Then there will be an excuse to continue this charade in some other beleaguered, de-stabilized ME nation, such as the upcoming confrontation in Pakistan or Iran. The establishment of a permanent US military presence in the middle east has long been a goal of Israel and the neocons. Everything else is just a smokescreen. We have to find some way to make our reps responsive to the will of the people again, and not simply to the power-brokers. Some democracy, huh?

Just think if the billions/trillions were not thrown away on military misadventures like these how easy it would be to address our domestic issues and maybe, just maybe, do more beneficial things for the disadvantaged around the globe?

Not gonna happen when so many of our political reps have such vested interests in promoting this scam. Sorry to feel so pessimistic, but can anyone provide any factual basis for hope?

My prediction: Karzai the puppet gets re-insalled, troops/merceneries increase, stage is set for escalation in Pakistan, years go by, no health care reform, economic stagnation continues,......shock doctrine rules the day.



Just my dos centavos

robdogbucky

My generations war, Vietnam/Iraqistan same thing, stop 'em over there before they get over here which we all know too well that that is a bunch of hooey but the sheeple scarfs it up. I feel if we/President don't get our press under control we can't expect to get any thing done whatsoever. Without the presses lies the lying bastids would be exposed for what they are and once exposed many of these traitors would be in jail or have changed their spots long ago. I can say though that I feel like somewhere these last 40 or so years I got some time where I didn't feel so worried as I do today, I think that would have to have been before the St Ronnie's regime. I really do think we need to work on our press by exposing them for what they are, propaganda tools.

And we all know the outcome of that fiasco! The wars just need to end, and the troops need to come home. We can no longer afford these wars, they have to end.

Doesn't the fact that we have troops stationed in their country provide the Taliban with a strong propaganda point of accusing us of occupying their nation with designs to subjugate them? I realize that basically we are there to suppress terrorism. But isn't it a fact that the Western Nations are resented because of their exploitation of the Middle East countries and this gave rise to terrorism? I just can't bring myself to believe that we will ever be able to achieve their destruction by military means. It appears that we kill one terrorist and five take their place and when we kill an entire innocent family we have created extended families of hundreds eternal enemies. How would Americans feel if they were in the same situation? I know how are forefathers felt. They denounced the king as a tyrant and defeated his vastly superior army.

How would Americans feel in the Afghans' place? We don't consider that at all. But if you're trying to do some home improvement projects, who's going to get welcomed at your door - the guy who walks up carrying 125 pounds of body armor and weaponry or the guy carrying a shovel and a rake, with a hammer tucked in his tool belt?

it depends on what is meant by 'success'. If 'success' means installing and propping up the puppet Karzai regime long enough that it acquires mass popular legitimacy in the eys of Afghans, then no, a new strategy is Afghanistan will not lead to success. (See Diem and Vietnam for more on that subject.)

If, otoh, the new strategy is to 'declare victory and go home' (with apologies to George Aiken), why then success is definitely achievable.

I suppose then yes we will accomplish that. If it means we are going to turn the Afghans into Americans then I think we have another thought coming..

was great. Just a few thousand more and we'll win in a year. Just repeat that about a dozen times and you will eventually realize that LBJ had the same mantra 45 years ago. Remember what happened next? A Republican was elected in 1968 with a "secret plan to win the war".

Here we go again.

how did that work out?

Unless you count Grenada where we won in one day by invading, shooting at the two Cubans soldiers who were there and rescuing some very puzzled student doctors and exiting quickly. That was a glorious victory. But it was also right after Reagan hastily withdrew from Lebanon after they successfully bombed the military headquarters there killing over 300 soldiers.

In Vietnam they chased us right to the top of the roof of the American Embassy, the last tiny piece of American soil while helicopters airlifted personnel.

Afghanistan? We haven't even come close to winning

Iraq we haven't won either.

Can anyone come up with any war we've decidedly won since WWII? Yet every generation gets its war.