76 of our bravest have died in Afghanistan over the last two months:
KABUL -The U.S. military said Wednesday six American troops were killed in Afghanistan, as militants killed six election workers amid growing fears on the eve of the presidential election that insurgents would mar the vote.
Two troops were killed in gunfire in the south on Wednesday, the U.S. military said, while a third was killed in an unspecified hostile attack. The U.S. also said a roadside bomb Tuesday in the south killed two troops, while another died of noncombat-related injuries. No other details were released.
The deaths bring to at least 32 the number of American troops killed in the country this month, a record pace. Forty-four U.S. troops died in Afghanistan last month, the deadliest month of the eight-year war.
And where are is the anti-war left and their buddies in the MSM now? Bush is gone so now the casualties are no big deal as we slowly lose grip on this war:
“Is the military mission to engage, push back and dismantle the Taliban networks,” asks Bing West, “with population protection being a tactic to gain tips and local militia, or is the military mission to build a nation by US soldiers protecting the widespread population, with engagements against the Taliban as a byproduct?”
West figures it’s the latter, for two reasons. First, non-kinetic operations are more palatable to the American public, the lifeblood of any war effort. That’s why you see Navy recruiting commercials emphasizing foreign tsunami and disaster relief just as frequently as their standard warheads-on-foreheads fare. Second, denying insurgents use of the local population is prime-directive number one in any low-intensity fight. There’s two ways to accomplish that mission: brutalize the population until they’re broken like a well-trained horse (a favorite insurgent tactic) or — because the first option is proscribed by our Western values — feed, shelter, and protect them until you can bring your superior firepower to bear on the now-isolated enemy.
That soft power, it seems, is the new hotness in Afghanistan. But is it costing us our ability to inflict severe casualties on the Taliban? Controlling the population is only the first step in a successful COIN fight, the second is decimating the opposition to a point where they can no longer function as a combat entity. West lays this out succinctly:
…our ground forces are not inflicting heavy losses on the enemy. However, the annual bill for the US military in Afghanistan exceeds $70 billion, with another four to six billion for development. We’ve already spent $38 billion on Afghan reconstruction. Congress may eventually balk at spending such sums year after year. The problem is we’re liable to be gradually pulled out while the Taliban is intact. Nation-building alone is not sufficient; the Taliban must be disrupted.
And we are not disrupting the enemy. The British see this also:
In March 2007, soldier turned journalist Anthony Loyd thought the war in Afghanistan was “winnable”. The tide was turning against the Taleban, he wrote.
That was from a man who was “there” and we all accord great respect to those knowing figures who have “been there”, as able to divine from their very presence all there is to know about the region they happen to visit.
Well, Anthony Loyd is back “there”, in Sangin actually, where on the eve of the presidential election he is reporting the official view that: “Helmand locals too scared of Taleban to vote in presidential election”.
There was little to show yesterday, he writes, for the copious expenditure of British money, bullets and blood over the past three years in Sangin. With less than 24 hours to go before the start of voting in Afghanistan’s presidential election today the streets were all but empty and the bazaar was, in effect, closed.
One more reason why the handing over of this mission to NATO was a mistake. NATO refuses to send the number of troops needed to win this thing and the NATO troops that are there have rules of engagement that are just plain weak. Ever since the handover in 2006 the situation has slowly deteriorated. But Obama has pledged to defeat this enemy in the War on Terror:
The insurgency in Afghanistan didn’t just happen overnight and we won’t defeat it overnight. This will not be quick, nor easy. But we must never forget: This is not a war of choice. This is a war of necessity. Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which al Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans. So this is not only a war worth fighting. This is a – this is fundamental to the defense of our people.
And you thought the War on Terror didn’t exist anymore….heh.
Well, the number of our young dying is going up, the left is silent over the matter, and Obama seems to have no plans to win this thing other then, as Bing West said above, “US soldiers protecting the widespread population, with engagements against the Taliban as a byproduct?”
Not a winning combination.
UPDATE
See author page
The left is silent about the increasing death toll of our young soldiers in Afghanistan because they represent 76 votes the left won’t have to toss out in 2010.
Peter Feaver:
First of all, Bill Ayers doesn’t support this war and he said it on TV. So, I am expecting that our President will flip flop on this one too very soon.
Second of all, our soldiers are being used and killed by the indiference of this administration that is trying to please the Marxists like Ayers, while putting up a front saying they support the war. As a comander in chief, you must give your troops a clear just cause to fight for and you must believe in that just cause. Calling it a war of necessity is not enough for our men and women in the armed forces.
Finally, my sincere condolences to the fallen heroes and their families. God Bless.
Of course he is ignoring it. WE WON!! At least that’s what I read here on June 29. I guess someone needs to change that thread to, Victory in Iraq?
@loyalist: Pay attention…..the title of that post and the contents inside were about the victory in IRAQ.
God Speed to those who sacrifice much and appreciated the least by this Administration and Congress.
Thought and prayers to family and friends of the fallen .
Out of the 41 new Czars in place and the 9 yet to be appointed, is there a special CZAR to assist financially, comfort and reward the families of their lost loved ones who served and sacrificed theier lives?
Mon, this bunch doesn’t know the first thing about sacrifice — much less appreciate the sacrifices of others. They’re the “me first” brigade. They spout Marxist and Socialist doctrine out of one side of their mouths while appointing themselves “Czars” with the other. They profess to care about the soldiers, but they do nothing to support them in their mission. This is the same bunch who screamed about the Iraq war under Bush and reported a daily tally of those killed in action — but now their guy is in charge, they could not care less about the casualties in Afghanistan. It’s disgusting.
Considering Obama knows absolutely zip about anything having to do with the military or national security, I’d have to consider that he just rubber-stamps anything his Secretary of Defense tells him to. (Not to excuse it or pass the blame, just stating facts.)
PEBO doesn’t have a plan for ANYTHING, he lets others control it, if it goes well he takes credit, if it goes badly he points the finger at the person responsible as the cause. Jimmy Carter tactics, sit back and wait for something to happen then look at how it can make you appear to be the better person.
The sum effect will be to say, “The effort was made. We endured much, and we prevailed.” It wouldn’t matter if it’s not a true statement.
Unfortunately, the outcome that is being sought is to provide an illusory victory, in that ACM forces (Taliban/AQ and allies) can be reduced in which the ANA and ANP can handle the security situation. Using the Iraq template in Afghanistan will not be too successful in that the theater is quite different in terms of geography, population, and the enemy.
Consider the “tactical directive” issued by GEN McChrystal upon assuming command in Afghanistan. It has essentially changed the ROE by imposing greater restrictions in engaging the enemy. This is driven by policy from the Obama WH and political considerations from the Afghan leaders to minimize civilian casualties. The effort to minimize non-combatant casualties were already being done. It didn’t need further “clarification.”
Also, there is the desire of the administration to “globalize” the war effort. Except that approach has not and will not work considering the restrictions other NATO countries have imposed on their forces in country. And, the other NATO countries have limited military capabilities or resources that would add to the effort in a substantive manner.
…and yet look what the treasonous NYTs makes sure to splash on the front-pages as always.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/20/us/20intel.html
As if this is new news about BlackWater…they, along with all on the left of all venues have been slamming them since day one, how dare they go after the enemy/terrorist, how dare they have the mission to kill them…yet it was okay I guess when they were dragged, burnt, hung from a bridge a few years back on one of he most dangerous areas in Iraq there were to go.
Panetta , DiFi and the rest of them to the rescue…time to destroy them, along with what is good that’s left in the CIA, that haven’t retired or just plain exited yet.
Anyone old enough to remember the Church Commission…they destroyed so much, he was a leftist with a cause, it took years to build us back up again, this administration will help devastate it, once again.
Clinton, Reno, Torricelli, Gerlick were tough enough with their destructive wall they built between the CIA/FBI..let alone everything having to be done via courts instead of just going after the SOBs and ridding them once and for all, especially after the Cole…
Endless circle of destruction from the enemy within…at our own peril.
I despise these people…all of them.
I keep up with this shit. I read most everything about Iraq and Afghanistan. I believe that most people that write about it don’t know a damn thing about what they are saying or writing. Just copy catting and guessing and bullshitting.
But one guy I do believe is Michael Yon. Three years ago he said that the west was losing it’s ass fast in Afghanistan and that major efforts would be needed just to meet the level of violence, let alone make the population safe and to turn them away from the bad guys. The Afghans are not stupid they go with the strongest and most dangerous. That is the way they stay alive.
That is how it has always been.
There are many factors involved in why the Afghan war and Iraq war (I call them battles in the same war) are different. But one of the major reasons is that Pakistan is much more involved in Afghanistan than Iran ever will be in Iraq. To “win” in Afghanistan we must also win at the same time in Pakistan. They go together like a condom and pussy. But actually there is no condom between them, just a line that the UN drew which is not recognized by the various tribes anymore than we would recognize one wave in the ocean separating one ocean from another.
Go to Michael Yon’s website and start reading from as far back as you care to go to get an idea of the deep shit that we have stepped into and sunk into our ears in. He mentions other sources of info in his “dispatches” as well.
While your there, hit his tip jar. It is the ONLY source of revenue he has other than his book sales. You should buy his books too. Great reads and will leave you in amazement at our Warriors and their exploits.
Some have said that the Afghan is still back in the stone age. They are almost right except these Islamic caveman hordes know how to use almost every modern weapon there is and how to make a lot of them. They are born Warriors and have been at it for thousands of years.
Yon and others have said in all seriousness that it will take most likely a century to bring Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan into the 20th century. Not even the 21st Century.
But all those that have spent any time there all say that the people are such that once they are your friend they are your friend for life. That they, like Americans despise a government which pushes them down with false promises, which they now have.
That they deserve help climbing out of the past into a future where life and liberty are more important than corruption, tribal identity and perpetual war.
Obama doesn’t have the stomach for what it will take to even slow down the killing let alone construct what needs to be built in Afghanistan. Notice I didn’t say re-construction, because there is nothing there to re-construct.
Those that know say it will take even more troops than Iraq and it will take more from our NATO “friends” than they will want to give. Right now only about 4 or five countries are actually doing any fighting, the rest are there for other reasons. Some don’t know why they are there at all.
Fundamental Islamics are the same the world over, except that those in Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan are more nationalistic and more tribal. They don’t want ANYBODY in their country, even as they hate what the Taliban and outside Islamics are doing to their nation. But even as they say that, they admit that the Taliban are still their “brothers”. Both the Taliban in Afghanistan and those in Pakistan.
It is indeed a mess and a quandary and Obama and the democrats have no Idea what to do. But they do know that they don’t want to send any more troops. Without many more troops there is not a chance of bringing security to Afghanistan let alone bringing Afghanistan out of the stone age into today’s world.
Under them I can not envision any kind of success, let alone a victory for anyone but the Taliban.
Papa Ray
West Texas
Papa Ray: If the battle is considered a loss, you can best believe that they will paint it as a Bush failure even though they have had ample time to do SOMETHING about it.
On the Stans, it will take at least two generations to break the Tribal hold on the folks there.
The tribal Sheik has more sway over everything than a Central Government in Kabul.
I was deployed there in 02 and Our Teams dealt with Dope Smugglers and Bandits, the Northern Alliance to raise an indigenous fighting force. Who better than bandits and smugglers that knew how to fight and knew the ground like the back of their hands? For a Price their loyalty was available. If you proved to be feared fighters so much the better.
They must develop their OWN Economy and Infrastructure with support but in accordance with their desires. Theirs, not a Western concept that they will not accept on promises.
Now on the folks Obama listens to, Gates and Gen. Jones. Neither are experts on anything on the ground there. They are Managers and Bureaucrats. Being the Head of the CIA does not give you any expertise in Intel. Being the former Commander of NATO troops does not give you Field craft.
Too easy folks. Obama should rely on folks that he has never met and consider Him to be a larger threat to America than Al Queda. Career Soldiers and lower level State Department folks that are there on the ground now. It is in fact Their battles to win or lose.
At this point hearts and minds are won by the individual Soldiers and Diplomats that are on the low end of the Food Chain, not by suits and pretenders in DC. The folks that train their Army & Police and work with the Central Government in Kabul and assume the risks with their HIDES, not with their political posturing fro the safety of offices in DC. It has always been that way regardless of how the Newsies report it or how CODELs (Congressional Delegations, or Visiting Fireman) speak about it on the floor of the House.
Obama does not have a clue nor do his SEC DEF or National Security Adviser. It is gonna be a Long War folks. It is now Obama’s War.