McChrystal Rejects Lower Afghan Aims

[TheCoxwain]

Source: NY Times

LONDON — The top military commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, rejected calls for scaling down military objectives there on Thursday and said Washington did not have unlimited time to settle on a new strategy to pursue the eight-year-old war.
In a speech to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, a private policy group here, General McChrystal said that the situation in Afghanistan was serious and that “neither success nor failure can be taken for granted.”

He was speaking in Britain —America’s close ally in Afghanistan — a day after he had participated by video link from London in a White House strategy session on the war that included President Obama, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and an array of senior advisers.

General McChrystal was asked by a member of an audience that included retired military commanders and security specialists whether he would support an idea put forward by Mr. Biden to scale back the American military presence in Afghanistan to focus on tracking down the leaders of Al Qaeda, in place of the current broader effort now under way to defeat the Taliban.

“The short answer is: no,” he said. “You have to navigate from where you are, not where you wish to be. A strategy that does not leave Afghanistan in a stable position is probably a short-sighted strategy.”

He did not mention Mr. Biden by name.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/world/asia/02general.html?_r=1&hp

---

Is he taking a leaf out of Palin's book? -- Is he going rogue?


why isn't he confining his views to the inner circle?

[bemildred]

1. Afghanistan's people have advice for Obama and the U.S. military

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x485225

[avaistheone1]

2. I reject McChrystal and his advice.

No more horror and bullshit.

No more wasted $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ death escapades.

Shut down the wars.

WHERE IS THE CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN?

[Jim Sagle]

3. Time for a rerun of Truman vs. MacArthur.

[Sam1]

16. Could it be that it is impossible to do what Truman did in the day?

[Jim Sagle]

20. I dunno, but Kennedy vs. Dulles ended quite badly.

[Demit]

4. Actually, the short answer is: the general had better support his CiC's orders.

Maybe he doesn't have to support the VP's idea, but if he gets any closer to defying his President he'll have a very long retirement in which his answers as a civilian can be as long as he likes.

[elleng]

8. If he's defying as approach is reworked, you're correct.

[Renew Deal]

5. "A strategy that does not leave Afghan. in a stable position is probably a short-sighted strategy"

I agree

[elleng]

6. Thats certainly true,

but VP's strategy was not to leave Afgh unstable, but rather HOW TO get to stability.

[Renew Deal]

9. I'm surprised that things have turned this way

Has Obama already lost the appetite for war in Afghanistan? He promised to change the strategy and take on Al Queda head on. That happened for a couple months. I think the recent casualties prove how much needs to be done in Afghanistan, and slowing or weakening the offensive is not the right decision.

[elleng]

11. Depends on definition of 'offensive.'

I tend to agree with VP's approach. Prez O never had an 'appetite' for war, but wanted to understand all aspects and make sound decisions about how to get out, imo.

[pattmarty]

14. Ok, you agree. BUT, now what? Take your time, I'll wait...............

[Alamuti Lotus]

21. Any strategy that leaves Afghanistan under a brutal foreign occupation is probably worse

and is not one that will leave them in a stable position. Sorry. Well, actually I'm not..

[shotten99]

7. This loudmouthed bastard needs to get tossed

If he really wanted to talk to the president more than he has, then he could have done so.
"I've only talked to him once in 70 days" is overstated bullshit and pure political fodder.

He doesn't want to be the next Westmoreland. Plain and simple.

[EFerrari]

10. This is a guy who hid prisoners from the ICRC at Camp Nama.

He was a POS in the first place.

[pattmarty]

12. It's time to say, "you're fired"!!!!!!!!!!!

[TheCoxwain]

15. Where is Donald Trump just when we need him?

[pattmarty]

17. Probably in a sewer somewhere or banging a 17 year old.

[Abq_Sarah]

13. McChrystal submitted his request

Based on what he needs to meet the administration's objectives, set earlier this year. If President Obama wants to change the focus from stabilizing Afghanistan to pulling back and running ops against al Qaeda, McChrystal will have to come up with a new strategy. If he is opposed to that policy, he can resign and they can find someone else to run counterterrorism operations as VP Biden suggests.

[elocs]

18. I don't believe that the solution to stability is a military one from the U.S.

As a regional governor in Afghanistan said, they need more tractors than tanks. Our involvement in Afghanistan needs to be weighted far more heavily toward humanitarian aid than military victory.

We need to arm and support the people of Afghanistan to do their own fighting and then there won't be constant civilian casualties as a result of our actions. They have to want their own country more than the Taliban wants to take it from them. It is a trap to fall in to constantly accepting the argument that just so many more thousand troops are needed for success or it is always just so many more months until the Afghani troops are trained enough to secure their country. That approach is the carrot and the stick, one where you never reach the carrot.

Militarily the U.S. has been terrible at fighting an insurgency war against a foe that uses guerrilla tactics, who fight and then melt away only to return again when we leave. We can and have provided excellent training for the Afghanis, but they still have to want to fight the Taliban and secure their own country. If they are unwilling to do that, then we cannot drain our treasury and sacrifice our soldiers for years to come to do it for them. Afghanistan is being aided by a world superpower. Does the Taliban have someone of as great a strength as the U.S. supporting them?

Ultimately, concerning McChrystal, he needs to do exactly what his CIC commands him to do. It is important for Obama that this be done or he should fire McChrystal or allow him to resign because the last thing he needs is not to appear to be strong or in charge regarding the military in the eyes of the U.S. or the world.

[Sam1]

19. why isn't he confining his views to the inner circle?

Because he doesn't have to! All he needs, and I assume he has it, is the support of his commander, Betrayus. And that man is more of a politician with his eye on the presidency than a commander. By going public in a foreign country McChrystal has dishonored himself and been derelict in his duty to register his concerns and objections through the chain of command. If he can't live with his orders or the resources that he is given he should request relief, resign, and then go public.

As it is it looks like politics by extortion conducted by CENTCOM.

That these things are getting out in to the public is, to me, an indication that civilian control of the military is slipping. If McChrystal is not relieved of command that will be confirming evidence.