McChrystal: More Forces or 'Mission Failure'

[Warrior-Mentor]

Here's his actual remarks (see attched).

[abc_123]

Originally Posted by afchic

Last week I got a follow on email from her stating that her mentoree, and all the other Afghan GOs that showed any thought to ending the corruption were summarily dismissed, and replacements were there by that afternoon.

Not surprising.

I have seen this happen at Battalion level with S-3s / S-2s / Company Commanders in order to retard the units conduct of effective targeted offensive operations as mentored by their advisors. In the particular case that I am remembering, the personnel shuffle was also accompanied by a redrawing of the Bn's operational area which also prevented it from conducting any sort of independent operations targeting the major "bad guy" areas without first coordinating and gaining permission from the same Chain of Command that replaced all the good officers and redrew the operational boundaries in the first place.

[Richard]

WWTHD?*

Richard

*What Would Tom Highway Do?

[Team Sergeant]

So now they have found "Government corruption", good for them, maybe they are now on the road to "civilization".
IMO Afgan government corruption should be the last of our concerns.

They live in mud huts as they have for thousands of years. They believe in a radical ideology where no-one but they are "right". They pray five times a day to a meteorite. They are world's biggest heroin dealer and see nothing wrong with that. When not farming heroin they are fighting someone/anyone. They have not added one positive idea, suggestion, export, art, etc etc to humanity since their discovery and we think we can beat them?

Here's a thought, in order to be "beat" you first need something to lose......

Please enlighten me and tell me what the people of Afghanistan have to lose?

What's that quote, "When you have nothing, you have nothing to lose."

After you're done with that please tell me what we're going to "win"?

And we call the people of Afghanistan simple-minded.....

[Warrior-Mentor]

Enclosed is a Letter from the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Chariman Ike Skelton. Rep Skelton prides himself as being a military historian - he has a recommended reading list that's over 100 books long and I've watched him chew a 3 star's ass for know knowing his military history (he deserved to have his asss chewed).

So here's a heavy hitter in the Democratic Party who actually knows something about military history (as opposed to Joe Biden) telling the President to listen to GEN McChrystal.

Read his assessment for yourself.

[CJFarris]

edit: nevermind

[Pete]

Obama hand picks a General and sends him to Afghanistan and says "Tell me what you need."

Almost two months ago the General said "More Troops."

Now we get.....

" White House Casts Doubt on Afghan Reliability"


http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009...stan.html?_r=1

".....''I don't see how President Obama can make a decision about the committing of our additional forces or even the further fulfillment of our mission that's here today without an adequate government in place or knowledge about what that government's going to be,'' said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass....."

Obama and the D's are going to play Hide the Sausage for a year or so then pull the plug and blaim it on the Afghan government.

So Sen. Kerry, who will be the "last man"?

[nmap]

I suspect the real problem is not General McChrystal, or the troops, or the importance of the area geopolitically. Rather, it is a matter of costs and priorities.

In terms of costs, the budget has expanded, likewise the deficit - and projections suggest the high, trillion-plus deficits will continue for some time. Less optimistic (IMO, more realistic) projections anticipate deficits well over the trillion mark for a decade, coupled with anemic growth. But the current administration has given abundant evidence that it seeks increased social spending. This hints at the possibility that both the Pentagon budget and the war in Afghanistan will attract the attention of those who seek funding for their pet projects.

In that light, let us consider this:

The Pentagon pays an average of $400 to put a gallon of fuel into a combat vehicle or aircraft in Afghanistan.

LINK

Whatever the merits of General McChrystal's position, I think his arguments are likely to be trumped by other considerations. And, if I may say so, if I were a U.S. asset in the area I would be more than a little afraid right now.

All MOO, YMMV.

[Dozer523]

Originally Posted by Pete

Obama hand picks a General and sends him to Afghanistan and says "Tell me what you need."

Almost two months ago the General said "More Troops."


Obama and the D's are going to play Hide the Sausage for a year or so then pull the plug and blaim it on the Afghan government.

So Sen. Kerry, who will be the "last man"?

Well, a request for 60,000 to 80,000 more trigger pullers is probably not exactly what POTUS or SECDEF was expecting from a guy who came from a SOF organization.