How Much is President Obama Willing to Sacrifice to Win in Afghanistan?

This is a very telling question considering the President will be sending 30,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, in spite of dwindling support from the public.

Our allies know Afghanistan is becoming an unwillable conflict and yet we decide to pour more troops and money into the conflict. Why have not our allies put the necessary troops and financial resources that our own advisors are claiming are necessary? Maybe because their analysis is supporting the concensus that an outright conflict with the Taliban will not stabalize the government of Afghanistan nor will it bring peace to the region. Most opposing analysis now indicates an inclusion of the Taliban within the political system of Afghanistan will eliminate most of the support for the radical members of the Taliban and stabilize the government.

François Fitou, the deputy French Ambassador in Kabul, told French President Sarkozy that Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, the British Ambassador, believed "the security situation is getting worse, so is corruption and the Government has lost all trust". He said Sir Sherard had told him Britain had no alternative but to support the US, "but we should tell them that we want to be part of a winning strategy, not a losing one. The American strategy is doomed to fail."

The CIA has tried to bribe the warlords in Afghanistan to get their support and has failed in part because Al Quaeda will pay more in order to secure the loyalty of the warlords. The CIA has even tried to use Viagra to bribe the tribal chieftains in order to secure their loyalty.

Opium production in Afghanistan has dramatically increased since the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. Previously the Taliban had imposed a crackdown and virtually eliminated opium production. According to the U.N., the drug trade is now worth $65 billion. Afghanistan produces 92 per cent of the world’s opium, with the equivalent of at least 3,500 tons leaving the country each year, while the corrupt Afghan government allows the continuation of the opium trade.

So why are we not winning in Afghanistan? For the most part it involves the Afghans themselves and our lack of understanding of their situation. We and the coalition promised safety, security, and improvements in the lives of the Afghans. What have they seen? Corruption, death of friends and family members, a growing insurgency, lack of basic services (roads, power, schools, etc), and a resolve of not including the Taliban in any discussions of the future of Afghanistan which further prolongs the conflict. The allied forces need to stabilize the economy in Afghanistan by providing the necessary services needed by the common citizens, they need to include the "Taliban" and resistance fighters in cease fire talks and inclusion in the government, and the allied forces need to begin a withdrawal of military forces.

Another issue involves the cost in dollars for the U.S. involvement. Currently it costs approximately $1 million per soldier deployed and that would put the price tag for the surge of 30,000 troops to be about $30 billion per year. The U.S. has already spent almost $230 billion so far in the last 8 years and the situation has gotten worse not better. Public opinion is also waning on the Afghanistan War, with an almost equal split in those who support and those who oppose the war.

So how much is President Obama willing to sacrifice to continue what now will be called "Obama's War" since he is the one now escalating the conflict? The U.S. economy is in horrible shape, millions of Americans are unemployed, thousands of U.S. military members come home injured in the conflict, and the U.S. has absorbed the brunt of casualties in the War.

Robert Dobbs for Congress, SC-01
www.electdobbs.com

:wtf:

Build the roads, give them electricity, water, schools, etc. Don't blow up villages and expect them to support us.

And it reminds me of what America needs right now.

the only people doing any sacrificing for this war are the military and their families.

Obama hasn't even suggested a tax increase to pay for it.

And perhaps that's the general Obama should have listened to.

And that for better or worse it will be a 'ONE TIME' attempt.

We have been in this for 8 years and now it continues.

this is his second escalation.

The poor guy must feel like the good guy in a Hollywood thriller where the hero's family is held hostage by the bad guys.

Excerpt, I'm starting to think it's true, going by the direction of the last year.

Obama, I had been led to believe, was a person who cared about the life of each and every person -- especially the members of America's armed forces and the innocent people in countries around the world.

nt

Only controlling it enough to get the TAPI energy pipeline built and secured so our trans-national energy conglomerates can prosper.

The Bush Administration seemed to have no problem recognizing the Taliban as legitimate when it appeared that they were going to allow the UNOCAL Corporation to build an oil pipeline across Afghanistan. It wasn’t until they said no to the UNOCAL pipeline deal that the Taliban suddenly became a threat to world peace.

I understand the sacrifices because I am a disabled veteran, but what is occurring is that we are wasting the precious lives of our soldiers in Afghanistan and also Iraq.