We should have done it differently over the years — but here we are. My colleague is right, it’s about leadership, I’d just add that at its heart the problem is political not military.

Dr Adam Cobb
Professor of International Relations
Marine Corps University
adam.cobb.as@usmc.mil

Moreover, UAVs have been highly effective at killing AQ/Tabib leadership targets, indeed much more so than any other approach; does this not suggest that a small footprint CT approach, in coalition with Pakistan as it fights for its survival, would be fighting smarter rather than larger?

Part III —>

The leadership vacuum we are facing goes much further than US forces and their interaction with the Afghan security forces. First, effective Afghan forces are much fewer in number than officially stated. But second and more importantly, the Afghan Govt is so profoundly corrupt and, since this last election, so illegitimate, that more US forces — even with a new strategy (protecting people), will be undermined by the failed state and government they are designed to serve.

What is missing here is an assessment on Pakistan. Pakistan is what really matters in all of this. The past failures in Afghanistan have, in part, pushed the problem into Pakistan, and their past support of various elements that now seek to take down their nuclear armed country is finally being recognized in Islamabad for what it is. Better late than never.

Part II —>

The entire concept is that your primary tool is fighting and killing the Enemy.

The Afghans have defeated every invader in the last hundred years or more. The Soviets killed 15–20 Afghans for every dead Soviet soldier. They destroyed every piece of infrastructure they could until the Afghans were literally eating grass soup. Then they left, creating a desperately poor, starving country with a huge power vacuum. All surrounded by other relatively poor areas with porous borders in unbelievable terrain.

Trying to impose American culture and solutions is at best an uphill fight (literally an uphill fight).

There has never been a good, fast solution to a guerrilla war with political and cultural factions.

At the end of the day, it is political and economic solutions that turn the tide. Look at Northern Ireland. 20,000 British troops fighting 2,000 IRA.

The solution is to set-up enclaves and security zones, then rebuild the infrastructure and economy, spreading success outward. That would take at least 10 years and many billions.

Oh, you were expecting an easy answer with tub thumping?

Moreover, the lack of nation building in the past didn’t make Medicare suddenly solvent-in fact we are in the midst of making yet another future Medicare without learning anything from the past. That’s why we need divided government, becuase both parties are blind to their own parties stupidity.

Actually pulling out of Iraq will take an enormous pressure off of our budget. (See CBO) So yes, the funds for health care will be available if we stop fighting wars we create ourselves.

That said, it is important to look at the decisions we made in the past that were not effective and make changes to them. That“s not living in the past. It’s living in the present.

Respectfully,

Daniel Russ
Civilianmilitaryintelligencegroup.com

What can I say, there are some individuals who are going to continue to dwell (still complaining about stolen elections) on the past no matter what is accomplished. We have fulfilled our obligations towards the Iraqis of getting them on their feet. Only time will tell if we and they are better off in the long run..thanks to the General Petraeus and the military.

I remember before the election how the progressives were going to make things happen and bring all this change– if only they were given complete control of the government. Now that they have it, we have yet to see financial reform and a solution to the housing crisis or the banking crisis. Pulling out from Iraq and Afghanistan is not going to make that trillion dollar health care bill any cheaper…oh wait, Congress played with numbers so that GAO would have to say that their bill actually cut the deficit-but I digress.

“Only one person in the room understood the most serious challenges in Afghanistan. Fortunately for Americans, he was the commander of U.S. Central Command, Gen. David Petraeus.”

Mr. Moyar is a mind reader, and could tell the room was filled with idiots ready to hear a four-star god enlighten them. He should’ve asked, General if the “surge” was a success in Iraq, why do we still have the same number of troops there?

I’m also pessimistic on the prospects of a military led by a majority of Tajiks. If the don’t have enough Pashtuns in leadership in high leadership posts, the whole thing won’t work.