Comments on: Launch Major Counter Strike: Kilcullen

By: Gary Vardon

Gary Vardon — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 03:40:47 +0000

Some ideas to aid our good fight against the Raliban follow. We should mobilize our allies for the fight including NATO. We should mobilize the Afgan people to fight the Taliban. Popular will in the United States should be mobilized for a long term struggle to break the Taliban. Research should be done to enhance our military effort.

By: Steve Real

Steve Real — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:54:55 +0000

I totally agree with Commander Kilcullen he was balls on with Iraq
and that hellin a hand basket has
given great confidence in his advice and honesty to move this ball forward.
We want to collapse the opposition as quickly as possible
“keeping them off balance“
while paying off tribal influencers, working with the locals
and taking out the politikal opposition at all costs
especially the corrupt kind.

By: shfranke

shfranke — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:41:31 +0000

Greetings.

Without a national draft in place and its profound ramifications down the road, one wonders from where our DOD can get the 30-40K more troops to deploy in a large-scale surge, even if done in phases. Our existing AC and RC [both US Army Reserve and Army National Guard] force structures seem tapped out due to repeated deployments to this point.

Regards,

Stephen H. Franke
LTC, MI (FAO/SOF/SFA)
USAR (Retired)
San Pedro, California

By: SkysoldierRecon

SkysoldierRecon — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 14:37:21 +0000

how do we get to them if they are in Baluchistan? they walk around quetta with impunity..yeah, here its ALL or NOTHING..no holds barred, and small units should be sent to work with the tribes. being the strongest tribe will mean everything. these people gotta know we are not gonna cut and run..if we do leave, they come back..when they do, like the above comment..NUKE ‘EM…no more “caliphate” bs..no more “jihad”..we are in a war of civilizations..nobody wants to admit it…

By: iAM Critique

iAM Critique — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 11:00:13 +0000

With having enormous amount of money and resources engaged in these two nations.… Withdraw with very little or no improvement — that will backfire USA stronger. The last time that fanatics named Bin-Laden dropped three buildings in the middle of broad light., entire world seen that terror if we do not fix this problem now and leave Afghanistan means we are inviting them again to strike back again stronger on USA and world. Our citizens were dropped off from these burning building like flying birds. There isn’t a single nation went down in Afghanistan as deep as USA. USA Marines, Army, Navy and Air force have done very impressive jobs with what they have in their hands at present in the lands of Afghanistan. We have landed, we are there, we are training Afghanistan politicians and Defense forces how to deal with terror and how to run their nation. If we are capable of doing these much, why can’t we do a little more and send in as much as 75,000 troops in less than 3 months. Wipe each and every terrorist out quick and withdraw quickly. This will prevent our soldiers from death helping Afghanistan for what are landed in their nation for. None of the other nations are offering us a helping hand except for few from Canada, British, Australians and NATO. USA has a majority stake and takes on this war. It USA got hit not any other nation. USA must make difference or just stop wasting our tax dollars and return back home. It would be highly recommended that let’s not lose another war Vietnam like war — be brave and find out every terrorist and nail them. Mission Wipe OUT. Or the best deal is to temporary full withdrawn, every nation’s troops must be withdrawn. Let Taliban, Jihadist, Al Qaida get regrouped in Afghanistan. Than find a one day when they all get together and pray. Whack the BIG one and get over with it for ever — The END. Chapter Closed. No one will ever try committing terror again. It will be worst fiasco on Terror when they are burning and getting exploded in the day light like out Citizens did. We have done in Japan lets do it in Afghan.

By: West

West — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:01:59 +0000

Investment in Afghanistan and its army and police has been going on for 7+ years at huge cost
with little to show for it. The Afghan army mustered about 600 soldiers for the recent offensive in
Helmand province.

The better questions might be: how do the Taliban, with only a fraction of the resources poured
into the Afghan army and govt, produce a much better fighting force? Are there other Afghan forces
that could fight just as effectively but against the Taliban?

The 40,000 soldiers in the Uzbekh militia of Adbul Rashid Dostum fought the Taliban successfully
before their takeover in 1996 and collapsed only when the pre-Taliban government fragmented
internally. Perhaps those are the kind of Afghan groups Western resources should be spent on.

By: Jason

Jason — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:20:40 +0000

Kilcullen may support an addition of 30–40,000 troops, but he ought to be honest enough to understand that the request for 30–40,000 is really the “middle option.” It’s a minimum level required to stabilize the country but not enough to clear and hold it. And most importantly, as he outlined in his book, there still is the need to identify WHY we are still in Afghanistan (and spare me the “oh noes, the Pakistani nukes are at risk” story), how much we ought to invest in Afghanistan, and when the civilian personnel are going to come in great enough numbers to do their part.

Kilcullen is making the disingenuous argument, as Stephen Biddle does, that COIN operations will work if only we have the right numbers and are content with fighting for another decade. Neither man can present a coherent argument as to why containment of the Taliban, continued global operations against AQ, and better homeland defenses wouldn’t be an equal if not better choice to pursue.

By: pennst98

pennst98 — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 20:35:33 +0000

I think Kilkulen is right about one thing; go strong of go home. My only concern if we send more troops is that there is absolutely (or very little) discussion of how they’ll be used and what the can reasonably hope to achieve. This isn’t about our troops! We KNOW that our they are more than up for the fight, and I have no doubt that they'll be operationally successful. After all we’ve become quite good at killing insurgents, building villages, bombing goats, etc…….BUT THEN WHAT?! The real question is "do we have the strategic vision and leadership that can take a series of operational victories and parlay them into a strategic victory?" If we can, let's get on with it. If we can't, then we need to start thinking about brining home the troops......