End in Sight

Status
Not open for further replies.
Because Afghanistan is the actual place where the terrorists were coming from (which is why Canada refused to send troops to Iraq). Why Bush decided to send the troops to Iraq, we'll never know. The only benefit of the War in Iraq was the idiot Saddam Hussein getting out of power.

What a joke because any terrorists in afica, iraq and other country. Why is go there Afghanistan ?? i not have clue. Bush and Blair sent troops to Iraq is reason they not want Saddam Hussein only control oil also Bush and Blair not allow him do that So that why it start war.
 
What a joke because any terrorists in afica, iraq and other country. Why is go there Afghanistan ?? i not have clue. Bush and Blair sent troops to Iraq is reason they not want Saddam Hussein only control oil also Bush and Blair not allow him do that So that why it start war.

Because the Taliban government were deliberately offering refugees for terrorists-- namely al-Queda was centred in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Iraq weren't guilty of harbouring terrorists before the invasion; Somalia and Darfur are big bloody stateless messes.
 
Taliban defiant over Obama surge
The Taliban say they will step up their fight in Afghanistan, after pledges by the US and its allies to send large reinforcements to the country.

A Taliban commander told the BBC that if more US troops came, more would die.

US President Barack Obama, announcing a long-awaited strategy on Tuesday, said another 30,000 American troops would be deployed quickly in Afghanistan.

Defence Secretary Robert Gates told the US Congress that curbing the Taliban was essential for regional security.

Speaking to the Senate Armed Services Committee, Mr Gates stressed that the US goal in Afghanistan and Pakistan was to defeat the al-Qaeda network - and to do that, the Taliban must be pushed back.

"Failure in Afghanistan would mean a Taliban takeover of much, if not most, of the country and likely a renewed civil war," he said.

"Taliban-ruled areas could in short order become, once again, a sanctuary for al-Qaeda as well as a staging area for resurgent militant groups on the offensive in Pakistan."

He said the first of the new US troops could hit the ground in Afghanistan in two to three weeks.

"Beginning to transfer security responsibility to the Afghans in summer 2011 is critical - and, in my view achievable," he said.

Senator John McCain, the senior Republican on the committee, said he backed Mr Obama's decision to deploy more troops but not the announcement of an "arbitrary date" for their withdrawal.

'More casualties'

The Taliban expressed defiance in the face of Mr Obama's commitment to send additional forces.

A Taliban commander, who did not give his name but is part of the ruling council in Wardak province, told the BBC there could be no peace talks until all foreign troops had left Afghanistan.

“ We must reverse the Taliban's momentum and deny it the ability to overthrow the government ”
Barack Obama
He said: "Obama is sending more troops to Afghanistan and that means more Americans will die. With just a handful of resources we can cause them even more casualties and deaths."

The commander claimed that foreign forces, not the Taliban, were responsible for most Afghan civilian deaths, but the opposite is true, the BBC's Ian Pannell in Kabul says.

Mr Obama reached his deployment decision after more than three months of deliberations and 10 top-level meetings with advisers.

In his speech at the West Point military academy in New York, he said US forces lacked "the full support they need to effectively train and partner with Afghan security forces and better secure the population".

"I have determined that it is in our vital national interest to send an additional 30,000 US troops to Afghanistan," he told cadets.

"After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home."

'Common fight'

Rising violence - more than 900 US soldiers have died in Afghanistan - and August's discredited elections in the country have fanned domestic opposition to the eight-year-old war.

MARDELL'S AMERICA
“ Mr Obama's top team have been on Capitol Hill trying to convince the serious and senior elected politicians that this is the right strategy ”

Gen Stanley McChrystal, the US commander in Afghanistan, who had asked for 40,000 extra troops, welcomed Mr Obama's speech, saying he had been given "a clear military mission" and the necessary resources.

The reinforcements will take the total number of US troops in Afghanistan to more than 100,000.

The BBC's Aleem Maqbool in Kandahar says that Gen McChrystal's message is that the president's announcement is not just about troop numbers but about a new clarity in the US mission there.

He told troops that the success of their operation would be judged not on how many militants were killed but how many Afghans were given new opportunities and gave up their support for the insurgency, our correspondent says.

Gen McChrystal also backed Mr Obama's estimate that enough progress would have been made by 2011 for the withdrawal of American forces to begin, although he warned of further casualties to come.

Some 32,000 other foreign troops are also serving in Afghanistan. Nato Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen urged members to do more.

He told reporters on Wednesday that 5,000 extra troops would be sent in 2010, and "probably" a few thousand in addition.

"This is our fight together," he said. "We must finish it together."

The UN envoy to Afghanistan, Kai Eide, told the BBC he did not believe the announcement from Washington amounted to an exit strategy because a long-term commitment remained.

He stressed the need to strengthen Afghan institutions at a local level and build a sustainable economy.

The Afghan government said it supported the new US strategy.

Foreign Minister Rangin Dadfar Spanta said that with international help, Afghanistan's armed forces would be able to start taking responsibility for security in 18 months.

Story from BBC NEWS:
BBC News - Taliban vow to fight US troop surge in Afghanistan

Published: 2009/12/02 18:28:26 GMT

Heat's on.
 
I can't see this ending well. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results. We're going to use the same plan as we used in Iraq and I don't believe that we'll get different results this time. Saying that the war won't drag on for 8 long years is not much comfort. Someone will make money off the war, as someone always does.
 
Balancing it with a Canadian viewpoint:

December 2, 2009
Canada welcomes U.S. forces boost
By CBC News
Canada's foreign affairs minister says the announcement of more U.S. troops in Afghanistan would allow Canada to focus on its priorities before a planned pullout in 2011.

Canada's foreign affairs minister welcomes Barack Obama's announcement of 30,000 more American troops in Afghanistan, saying it would allow Canada to focus on its priorities before a planned pullout in 2011.

Lawrence Cannon, speaking during a teleconference Wednesday morning, said Canada remained committed to respecting a motion passed in the House of Commons to withdraw from Afghanistan by December 2011.

"Our position is clear," he said. "We will respect the motion to the letter."

Cannon said the additional U.S. troops would allow Canada to bolster efforts in three signature projects in Kandahar province:

Vaccination of hundreds of thousands of Afghan children for polio.
Construction of area schools.
Rehabilitation of the Dhala Dam and irrigation system.
New marching orders

Canada recently received an adjustment in its assignment in Kandahar, with Brig.-Gen. Frederick Hodges, director of operations for NATO's southern command, saying on Tuesday that Canada would again take control of the Arghandab district, the location of the Dhala Dam.

U.S. troops will augment the force under Canada's command, Brig.-Gen. Daniel Menard told reporters Wednesday.

The district was Canada's responsibility until August this year, when Canadian forces handed over their duties to the U.S. as part of a scaling back of military operations to Kandahar City and a few turbulent outlying regions.

Obama's announcement also called for a withdrawal of American forces beginning in about 18 months, in July 2011, if conditions are right.

Training a top priority: Afghan ambassador

Jawed Ludin, Afghanistan's ambassador to Canada, said training Afghanistan's soldiers should be the primary function of both Canadian and U.S. troops until their departure.

"The surge is not just about combat operations and extra troops, it's about making sure that the Afghan forces are ready as soon as possible to take over, and that involves training," Ludin told CBC News.

"I believe that Canada can play a much more effective role in this strategic objective of training Afghans," he said.

Afghan troops, under the guidance of Canadian forces, launched an offensive in the Arghandab district in June of last year to counter Taliban gains, but attacks have continued in the region.

When asked if Afghan military and police forces would be ready to take over after 2011, Cannon said he's confident the training of Afghans was progressing.

"I think by the time we get [to 2011], a great deal will have been achieved," he said.

CBC News - World - Canada welcomes U.S. forces boost
 
I can't see this ending well. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results. We're going to use the same plan as we used in Iraq and I don't believe that we'll get different results this time. Saying that the war won't drag on for 8 long years is not much comfort. Someone will make money off the war, as someone always does.

I agree. Personally I think the whole conflict is on behalf of Israel. Phooey.
 
Because the Taliban government were deliberately offering refugees for terrorists-- namely al-Queda was centred in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Iraq weren't guilty of harbouring terrorists before the invasion; Somalia and Darfur are big bloody stateless messes.

:gpost:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top