Marines to wind down Afghan combat in 2012

Saturday, November 26, 2011

Afghanistan (AP) --

U.S. Marines will march out of Afghanistan by the thousands next year, winding down combat in the Taliban heartland and testing the U.S. view that Afghan forces are capable of leading the fight against a battered but not yet beaten insurgency in the country's southwestern reaches, senior U.S. military officers say.

At the same time, U.S. reinforcements will be sent to eastern Afghanistan in a bid to reverse recent gains by insurgents targeting Kabul, the capital.

Gen. James F. Amos, commandant of the Marine Corps, said in an Associated Press interview that the number of Marines in Helmand province will drop "markedly" in 2012, and the role of those who stay will shift from countering the insurgency to training and advising the Afghan security forces.

The change suggests an early exit from Afghanistan for the Marine Corps, even as the prospects for solidifying their recent successes are uncertain.

"Am I OK with that? The answer is `yes,'" Amos said. "We can't stay in Afghanistan forever."


read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/11/26/international/i002639S65.DTL

. . . still, it appears even the military is beginning to lose its taste for fighting and killing Afghans.

Karzai has fought the presence of military contractors, publically and graphically. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/22/karzai-us-taxpayerfunded-_n_690385.html)

The remaining power structure in Afghanistan isn't going to long bear U.S. influence without the full force of NATO looking over Karzai's shoulder. Further, it won't serve our interests there to follow through on any of the threats to withhold aid and the like to bend the Afghan regime our way after we've pulled out. This isn't like Iraq, where the U.S. presence is easier defended. You can't keep some skeleton force of retired Americans in place without some sort of backup protection and Afghanistan isn't going to be a comfortable place for visible American mercenaries when our forces begin to draw down.

quite as much. Or did anyone think the drones were really just going to be used 'sparingly'?

Welcome to 21st Century warfare.

Countries like Iran shouldn't be wasting their time on obsolete nuclear weapons. They should be investing heavily in robot war machines if they want to stay competitive.

Yeah, :sarcasm: but I'm afraid there's more truth in what I say than not.

Drones aren't new at all. They are pernicious unto themselves. The issue of American troops on the ground in Afghanistan doesn't hinge on the reliance on drones. The troops are there to fight the Afghan resistance to the NATO-enabled Karzai regime. When the President and the Pentagon tire of that ambition, troops will come home, regardless of the reliance on, or the efficacy of the use of drones.

But robots are being used much more. And the troops themselves will actually fight less and less. That is, on our side. Their side will still have humans doing the heavy work and the dying.

And I have my doubts about just how much nation building goes on. But each to their own reality.