Comments on: McKiernan on Afghanistan

By: Helen Flynn

Helen Flynn — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 23:55:50 +0000

I fail to see that there can be any progress toward economic and social problem solving, i.e., improving infrastructure, educational facilities, health problems–whatever leads to a strong, allegiance to love of Country, namely, in this instance, Afghanistan, until the strength of the people of Afghanistan– whether the military or tribal forces–are convinced and are able to convince their fellow countrymen to destroy the heroin crops and do something else for the Country. Simply said–right! maybe naive and disingenuous – otherwise, we Americans are wasting our time, talent, and treasure(our military). We can talk, talk, and discuss, discuss, and rationalize, rationalize, and strategize over and over, but until the Afghans are convinced that growing heroin is ruinous to a civilized state–do they want to live in one, or do they continue to live in the barbaric state existing for the most part among the Afghanistanie people.

By: Helen Flynn

Helen Flynn — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 16:55:50 +0000

By: Analisi, il discorso di McKiernan « Tashakor…

Analisi, il discorso di McKiernan « Tashakor… — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 22:22:41 +0000

[...] con l’annuncio di Obama dell’aumento del numero delle truppe statunitensi. Ho trovato molto interessante questa analisi del suo discorso fatto da Spencer Ackerman per TheWashington Independent. Vorrei commentarne alcuni [...]

By: One Utah » Blog Archive » Is It Too Late to Turn Things Around in Afghanistan/Pakistan?

Fri, 27 Feb 2009 00:49:50 +0000

[...] in Afghanistan/Pakistan. General David McKiernan, commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, recently told the press that 17,000 more troops will be sent there, a move backed by a two-thirds majority of Americans. [...]

By: rmwarnick

rmwarnick — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 15:49:31 +0000

I believe the Marines brought the first Strykers to Afghanistan in 2002. They had them before the Army did.

By: Loyal Sepoy

Loyal Sepoy — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 23:10:09 +0000

DoD press release announcing the increase mentioned 5,000 support personnel, with 12,000 soldiers and Marines.

The Canucks are in Kandahar, while the Brits are in Helmand. The Stryker-type vehicles – LAV (Light Armoured Vehicle) IIIs – have done yeoman service in the south, but the threat's changed constantly, and the terrain is definitely challenging. The LAVs were augmented with everything from Leopard 1 (and subsequently Leopard 2) MBTs, upgraded M113s (called Tracked LAVs – TLAVs – in the modern parlance) and a number of different enhanced route clearing vehicles, among others. And they've followed that up with a number of helicopters (including ex-US Army Chinook Ds) to try to fill out ISAF rotary-wing requirements and provide better mobility on IED-laced roads.

The Canadians have poured significant resources and effort – military and civilian – into trying to roll back the Taliban in the south, along with the Brits, Dutch, Aussies, Danes and others. But it's a big sandbox with lots of places for insurgents to evade, hide and scoot across the border, and the local human terrain is just as challenging. Good to have sizeable numbers of Americans coming in to provide the presence that's required to squeeze the Taliban, in both kinetic and non-kinetic ways. 2009 will definitely be the year of the battle for the south.

By: TPile » Blog Archive » Where the Afghanistan War is Headed

TPile » Blog Archive » Where the Afghanistan War is Headed — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 21:00:52 +0000

[...] Afghanistan, was in Washington yesterday, and talked to Pentagon beat reporters. Spencer Ackerman reads between the transcript’s lines, and finds some hints about the coming direction of the Afghanistan [...]

By: fnord

fnord — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:28:21 +0000

Ouch. Looks like it will be a stepping up of existing operations instead of a drastic change of model? And is 17000 really enough? How much of those numbers are logistics, and how much is point-of-spear?

As an aside, Kai Eide went out yesterday and howled at the EU for failing the police effort.

By: J

Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:13:39 +0000

F.Y.I. The Canadians have been using a vehicle very similar to a stryker — the same chassis w/ a 25mm chain gun in a turret — in Helmand. If I remember right, it's done fairly well against IEDs, but it's had real trouble off-roading, and the Canadian DoD has either considered sending M113s to augment these, or has already done so.