US commander’s report paves way for military escalation in Afghanistan

[Hannah Bell]

The commander of US and NATO forces in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, has issued a dire assessment of the state of military operations there. The classified report sets the stage for an expansion of US troop levels in Afghanistan by as many as 45,000.

McChrystal’s report, which was immediately endorsed by the chief of the US Central Command, Gen. David Petraeus, is to be handed over to President Barack Obama today. According to press reports, McChrystal’s review makes no specific request for additional troops. However, according to Tuesday’s New York Times, American officials said “it effectively lays the groundwork for such a request in the coming weeks.”

...The Obama White House immediately signaled its inclination to approve an increase in US troop levels above the 21,000 additional troops Obama approved last February. Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, said Monday, “There’s broad agreement that for many years our effort in Afghanistan has been under-resourced politically, militarily and economically.” The Times noted that Gibbs used the term “under-resourced” six times in the course of his daily briefing.

According to press reports, the substance of discussions within the Obama administration is whether to increase troop levels by 20,000 or 40,000-45,000. The escalation already approved by the Obama administration will bring US troops levels to 68,000 and combined NATO military forces to 100,000 by the end of this year.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/sep2009/afgh-s02.shtml

[bridgit]

1. Do you love it do you hate it there it is the way you made it, wow!

[leftstreet]

2. Occupation is Hell n/t

[FrenchieCat]

3. Articles states...."McChrystal’s review makes no specific request for additional troops"

So try again later.

Meanwhile, the folks that don't really read but pretend to will flip out.

Guess there are morans on every side after all. :eyes:

[Hannah Bell]

5. It also states that discussions about increased levels are occurring.

"According to press reports, the substance of discussions within the Obama administration is whether to increase troop levels by 20,000 or 40,000-45,000."

[ConsAreLiars]

7. And, reading a bit more "it effectively lays the groundwork for such a request in the coming weeks."

Here's the full sentence you distorted by selective editing:

According to press reports, McChrystal’s review makes no specific request for additional troops. However, according to Tuesday’s New York Times, American officials said “it effectively lays the groundwork for such a request in the coming weeks.”

You're better than that, FC. Do you really imagine that sending more killing machinery there will yield anything more than more killing? Do you think enough more killing will turn that that land into some sort of subservient client state, if that is the goal you share with those who still attempt to subjugate the people of Afghanistan? Do you think sending even more highly trained and well-equipped killers will turn them into docile puppets whose only sense of civic/community responsibility/loyalty is to go vote every 5 years or so?

[Monk06]

4. At least Alexander the Great had the good sense of having marched

through Afghanistan on the way to India
decided to go around it on his return home.

Tribal bandits, always have been always will.

[dipsydoodle]

6. Afghanistan's total population is 31,889,923

So wouldn't it just be easier to increase troop levels to match that and fight it out man to man for those so inclined to do so.

:sarcasm: