U.S. To Send More Troops To Aid Afghan Forces Pressed By Taliban
Source: New York Times
By DAVID JOLLY NYTimes News Service
KABUL, Afghanistan — The U.S. Army will deploy hundreds of soldiers to the southern Afghan province of Helmand, where government forces have been pushed to the brink by Taliban militants, a military spokesman said Tuesday.
It will be the largest deployment of U.S. troops outside major bases in Afghanistan since the end of the NATO combat mission in 2014. Though the military insists that the soldiers will not take active combat roles, U.S. Special Operations forces have increasingly been drawn into the fighting in Helmand as one important district after another has fallen or been threatened by Taliban insurgents.
Col. Michael T. Lawhorn, a spokesman for the U.S. military in Afghanistan, said in a statement that the new deployment would provide protection for the current Special Operations troops in Helmand and give extra support and training for the 215th Corps of the Afghan National Army. Afghan forces in Helmand have taken heavy casualties in recent months and have been cut off by the Taliban in many places.
“Our mission,” Lawhorn said, “remains the same: to train, advise, and assist our Afghan counterparts, and not to participate in combat operations.”
Read more: http://westhawaiitoday.com/news/nation-world-news/us-send-more-troops-aid-afghan-forces-pressed-taliban
Pentagon To Boost Number Of U.S. Advisers In S. Afghanistan
By Dan Lamothe, The Washington Post
Published: February 9, 2016, 5:43 PM
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon will deploy dozens of additional U.S. military advisers to southern Afghanistan in coming weeks, a U.S. military official said, part of an effort to rebuild the Afghan army unit that has faced a bloody fight in Helmand province.
The advisers will be deployed to train the 215th Corps, the Afghan army unit based in Helmand, the official said. The poppy-rich province was once home to about 30,000 coalition troops and major operations run by U.S. Marines, but nearly all U.S. troops there were withdrawn by the end of 2014. In recent months, pitched battles have been fought there, some of which involve U.S. Special Operations troops working alongside Afghanistan commandos.
The Taliban has seized territory in several parts of the province, and was said this week to be close to recapturing Sangin, a strategically important district that the Afghan military and Taliban have been fighting over for months.
The deployment of additional military advisers will come as the U.S. Army rotates in a conventional infantry battalion from the 10th Mountain Division to replace one that has been deployed for months in southern Afghanistan to provide security on and around bases there. That has led to some media reports that the United States will send hundreds of new soldiers to Helmand, but the total number of U.S. troops likely will increase by only a few dozen, a U.S. military official in Afghanistan said.
The Guardian reported Monday that hundreds of U.S. troops will arrive in Helmand province in coming weeks.
more...
http://www.columbian.com/news/2016/feb/09/pentagon-to-boost-number-of-u-s-advisers-in-s-afghanistan/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Skittles
(153,164 posts)Bernin
(311 posts)
tazkcmo
(7,300 posts)In the interest of good manners I won't type the expletives running through my mind.
“Our mission,” Lawhorn said, “remains the same: to train, advise, and assist our Afghan counterparts, and not to participate in combat operations.”
This is just a crappy tactic and endangers our soldiers needlessly, IMO. If we're going to send our troops into a war zone then their hands need to be untied and they should be either fully engaged or not deployed, period. In other words, go big or stay home. Half assed measures produce half assed results and in the long run cause us to endure more casualties than a full force response would.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)That was the same mission US troops had in Vietnam. U Any expansion of force is limited by supply lines (i.e. through Pakistan, Iran or Russia and that include AIR transportation) and NOT turning people into supporters of the Taliban by bombing wedding parties and other local gatherings (which tend to collect Taliban Soldiers at the same time).
In Vietnam, until Cam Ranh Bay base was completed, the US had a difficult time supplying troops in Vietnam, thus US sent in few tanks till AFTER 1968 when Cam Ranh Bay Base was completed (And why the Tet Offensive took place in 1968, even the Viet Cong realized the importance of the completion of that base).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cam_Ranh_Bay
It was clear by 1968 that the the US Military could not shut off the supply lines from North Vietnam to the Viet Cong for the Viet Cong had popular support among the people along those supply lines and the US forces were NOT strong enough to patrol EVERY VILLAGE ALL OF THE TIME. The US Forces were to large to support and to small to put troops in every village. At the same time the Viet Cong were not strong enough to drive out US Forces but strong enough to force the US to keep forces at Platoon or large formation or find such forces being overrun by the people of Vietnam, organized by the Viet Cong in Militia unit (most of the time these were farmers, but when called into service by the Viet Cong effective soldiers).
Side note: Killing of the peasants of Vietnam for supporting the Viet Cong was also not an option, the people of Viet Nam depended on those farmers for the rice they ate, thus the US could not kill the peasants for supporting the Viet Cong for someone had to produce the food the South Vietnamese people eat.
The same thing with Afghanistan. During Vietnam, if you asked Americans who the people of Vietnam supported, American would say anyone but the Communists and give reasons why. On the other hand it was clear the people of Vietnam supported the Viet Cong and you could see this is who gained what ground when US or ARVN (Army of Republic of Vietnam, the name of the South Vietnamese Army) forces left, it was generally the Viet Cong NOT any pro south Vietnamese politician. The same thing when it comes to Afghanistan, when the US and its allies forces leave an Area it become Taliban (except along the border of Iran, where it becomes pro Iranian Afghan tribal area). Without US Military support, the Afghan Government would fall. That is how little support it has among the people of Afghanistan. If you ask Americans, they would say the Taliban has little support, but given the territory the Taliban control in Afghanistan and how fast the Taliban can move in once US and Ally forces withdraw from an area of Afghanistan, shows a lot of popular support for the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Thus the problem with Afghanistan is much like Vietnam. The US does not have the means to put down the Taliban but also has refused to leave the Taliban to take over Afghanistan. Given an inability to defeat the Taliban but a refusal to leave them win, the US policy has been since Bush's term of office NOT to permit the Taliban to win till after the end of the term of office of whoever is President (and that was the case in Vietnam, till Congress finally put its foot down and withdrew support for South Vietnam).
bobthedrummer
(26,083 posts)
