U.S. Military Experts Devise Another Vietnam-Like Debacle

by Rory Cripps | August 23, 2009 at 06:35 pm
285 views | 4 Recommendations | 2 comments

My original intent was to make this story a "non-opinion" story. But after reading the crap in the following highlighted stories, my emotions got the better of me. Here goes:

The idiot and murderous American military brass can't accept the fact that the "war" in Afghanistan is unwinnable. They're like some geek that studies a martial arts manual; and on that basis,  gets into a fight, and gets his ass kicked. And then the geek goes back  home and re-reads the martial arts manual and goes back out on the street and gets his ass kicked again. 

The bloodied geek goes back home and re-reads his martial arts manual again . . .certain that the next time he'll win the fight. Of course he loses the next fight . . . .

That's what the American military brass is today: A bunch of geeks that think that they're so smart and yet they can't fight their way out of a paper bag. They sit on their  fat collective asses and send young American men and women to some hell-hole, like Afghanistan, in order to engage those that have no regard for human life. And the U.S. military men and women, that are sent to hell-holes like Afghanistan, are given strict orders not to respond in kind . . . .

The Vietnam debacle occurred over thirty years ago. The war in Afghanistan is similar in many respects. It's obvious that the U.S. military brass and the U.S. government haven't learned a thing throughout  the past thirty years when it comes to fighting a war . . . .

The U.S. military's top uniformed officer expressed concern Sunday about eroding public support for the war in Afghanistan and said that country remains vulnerable to being taken over again by extremist forces.

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said President Obama's new strategy for defeating the Taliban and al Qaeda was a work in progress as more U.S. troops are put in place.

Just over 50 percent of respondents to a Washington Post-ABC News poll released this past week said the war in Afghanistan is not worth fighting.

Adm. Mullen, a Vietnam veteran, said he's aware that public support for the war is critical. "Certainly the numbers are of concern," he said, but, he added, "This is the war we're in."

Three years ago, the U.S. had about 20,000 forces in the country. Today, it has triple that, on the way to 68,000 by year's end when all the extra 17,000 troops that Mr. Obama announced in March are to be in place. An additional 4,000 troops are arriving to help train Afghan forces.

"I recognize that we've been there over eight years," Adm. Mullen said. "This is the first time we've ever really resourced a strategy on the civilian and military side."

Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican and top GOP member on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he wants the military leadership in Afghanistan to use the same aggressive approach that Gen. David Petraeus used successfully in Iraq.

He said the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, should say exactly how many troops he needs in Afghanistan, let the Congress debate it, and Mr. Obama would make the ultimate decision.

Troops in Afghanistan should "clear and hold" an environment for people so that economic and political progress can be made, he said. Mr. McCain said he worries Gen. McChrystal will be pressured to ask for lower troop totals than he needs.

Mr. McCain acknowledged that public opinion on Afghanistan is slipping, but he said that opinion could be reversed.

"I think you need to see a reversal of these very alarming and disturbing trends on attacks, casualties, areas of the country that the Taliban has increased control of."

Gen. David H. Petraeus plans to open an in-house intelligence organization at U.S. Central Command this week that will train military officers, covert agents and analysts who agree to focus on Afghanistan and Pakistan for up to a decade.

The organization, to be called the Center for Afghanistan Pakistan Excellence, will be led by Derek Harvey, a retired colonel in the Defense Intelligence Agency who became one of the Gen. Petraeus' most trusted analysts during the 2007-08 counterinsurgency campaign in Iraq.

Mr. Harvey distinguished himself in Iraq by predicting that the Iraqi insurgency would spiral out of control, at a time when it was widely underestimated by the Bush administration, in 2003 and 2004.

He later dissented from the emerging consensus in Congress and the CIA, when he said, as early as March 2007, that al Qaeda had been strategically defeated. This was during the early days of the surge, at a time when most of the intelligence community thought the Sunni insurgency was intact.

Mr. Harvey said the new center would focus on integrating all sources of information to develop strategic products for both war fighters and decision makers in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"We have tended to rely too much on intelligence sources and not integrating fully what is coming from provincial reconstruction teams, civil-affairs officers, commanders and operators on the ground that are interacting with the population and who understand the population and can actually communicate what is going on in the street," he said. "If you only rely on the intelligence reporting, you can get a skewed picture of the situation."

Mr. Harvey calls this approach "widening the aperture."

Asked whether the new training commitments suggest a long-term military presence in Afghanistan, Mr. Harvey said those decisions are above his pay grade. But he said, "Even if we downsize, we are still going to have investments in South Asia."

A retired four-star general who helped develop the Iraq counterinsurgency strategy, Jack Keane, compared Mr. Harvey's work to that of a homicide detective: "deliberate, methodical, thankless work, putting all the evidence together to form a story."

"As it turns out, Harvey in my view is the only intelligence analyst who was right from the beginning to the end in Iraq. So it's no wonder that General Petraeus, who has tremendous confidence in him, wants him to focus on Pakistan and Afghanistan, which is the next-thorniest problem our troops are facing," Mr. Keane said.

Advertisement
recommend Sign In or Join to post comments
1
Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

I just read an article in the Globe and Mail that amplifies just that Rory.  Admiral McMullin made the talk show round yesterday trying to prepare the public when McChrystal asks for 20,000 more troops next month.

You can read the analysis in the article below.  It is worth reading.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/state-of-afghanistan-deteriorating-top-us-commander-says/article1261705/

I tend to agree with your analysis of a quagmire like Vietnam.  We are once again in a war, where the hands of US troops are tied.  I can't wrap my head around winning hearts and minds, when troops have no idea of the culture. 


0
Rory Cripps

Thanks ACP!

From the story you recommended:

The war in Afghanistan is going so badly – “it is serious and it is deteriorating” – that America's top military commander Admiral Mike Mullen was grimly preparing a war-weary public Sunday for the possibility that many more U.S soldiers may soon be needed to quell the raging Taliban insurgency.

This already has been the bloodiest summer for both foreign troops and Afghans since 2001.

At present, more than 100,000 U.S. and NATO troops – roughly matching the peak Soviet deployment in Moscow's failed 10-year effort to subjugate Afghanistan – are battling a resurgent Taliban that last month killed more foreign soldiers than at any time since former president George W. Bush ordered the Taliban toppled after 9/11.

Mr. Obama, who has left the White House for a week-long family holiday on the Martha's Vineyard, said last week in a rousing speech to thousands of veterans that defeating the Islamic extremists, who are threatening to retake Afghanistan and to destabilize nuclear-armed Pakistan, was a “war of necessity.”

The three or four brigades that General Stanley McChrystal, who took command of all U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan in June, is expected to seek in September, will push the allied troop levels far higher than during the 1980s when the Soviet Union failed to crush Afghan insurgents.

Adm. Mullen, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, America's most senior military commander, warns time is running out.

“We've got to start to turn this thing around from a security standpoint in the next 12 to 18 months,” he said Sunday. That warning came on the heels of a flawed presidential election in Afghanistan where Taliban threats kept millions from the polls in the war-torn south and accusations of widespread vote-rigging threaten to further taint the outcome.

So far, Mr. Obama has faced little domestic outcry – of the sort that increasingly bedevilled the last years of Mr. Bush's presidency – over his open-ended commitment to increase the numbers of troops.

But Afghanistan remains a potential quagmire for the new president, who has made it his war.

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows a majority of Americans believe the war in Afghanistan is not worth fighting, and just a quarter say more troops should be sent there.

More than 1,000 Afghans civilians have been killed so far this year, 24 per cent more than in 2008 and 50 per cent more than 2007. Although the Taliban cause the majority of civilian casualties, air strikes still kill hundreds and occasion far more outrage and attention.

Meanwhile, 289 foreign soldiers – including 21 Canadians – have been killed to date in 2009. Casualties are up 50 per cent over last year and roughly five times the levels in 2004. No one keeps track of Taliban deaths, but the number is believed to be in the thousands.

Hundreds of Afghan government soldiers and police have also been killed so far this year as the vast influx of U.S. troops have turned all of southern Afghanistan into a battleground.

closeSign in to NowPublic

is reporting from