PDA

View Full Version : Obama Says Afghan War "Winnable," Sends 17,000 Soldiers



Gold9472
02-18-2009, 09:26 AM
Obama Says Afghan War ‘Winnable,’ Sends 17,000 Soldiers

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aUWFaWvXjzFU&refer=us

By Edwin Chen and Roger Runningen
2/18/2009

Feb. 18 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama ordered an additional 17,000 U.S. soldiers to be sent to Afghanistan, saying the war against the Taliban is “still winnable.”

Military force alone won’t be able to deal with the threat posed by a “resurgent” Taliban, Obama said in an interview with Canadian Broadcasting Corp. late yesterday. The war is “still winnable -- in the sense of our ability to ensure that it is not a launching pad for attacks against North America.”

Only a “comprehensive strategy” that also relies on diplomacy and development can halt the Taliban and the spread of extremism, Obama said.

The announcement of the deployment marks Obama’s first significant decision on defense as he seeks to fulfill his campaign promise to shift the focus away from Iraq to Afghanistan as the central front in the battle against terrorists.

Obama, who is scheduled to visit Ottawa Feb. 19 on what will be his first international trip as president, said he intends to discuss Afghanistan with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper. The government in Ottawa has scheduled a full withdrawal of Canada’s 2,800 soldiers in Afghanistan by mid- 2011.

Since October 2001, Canada has deployed more than 25,000 soldiers to Afghanistan and by mid-2011 will have given the country C$1.9 billion ($1.5 billion), Canada’s biggest foreign aid program.

In the interview, Obama said he is “absolutely convinced” that military means “cannot solve the problem of Afghanistan, the Taliban, the spread of extremism in that region.”

Security Deteriorating
In a statement released separately by the White House, Obama said the dispatch of 17,000 more soldiers is “necessary to stabilize a deteriorating situation in Afghanistan, which has not received the strategic attention, direction and resources it urgently requires.”

The increase doesn’t “pre-determine the outcome” of a review of the war in Afghanistan, he said. “Indeed, it will further enable our team to put together a comprehensive strategy that will employ all elements of our national power to fulfill achievable goals in Afghanistan.”

Pentagon officials were informed of the decision Feb. 16, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said in Denver, where Obama signed legislation providing $787 billion in tax cuts and spending to stimulate the economy.

Initial Deployment
Although Obama authorized 17,000 personnel, Defense Secretary Robert Gates signed a deployment order that covers an initial 12,000 combat personnel, including the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Brigade from Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, and an Army Stryker Brigade from Fort Lewis, Washington, the Pentagon said in a press release.

The remaining 5,000 soldiers belong to combat support units that will receive deployment orders at a later date, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said.

The U.S. has 38,000 personnel in Afghanistan now. Army General David McKiernan, the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, asked for as many as 30,000 more over the next year to beat back a renewed Taliban insurgency. Obama’s order amounts to the first phase of deployments to ramp up the U.S. presence in Afghanistan.

Obama’s buildup will leave NATO four battalions short of the troop numbers needed to bolster security for Afghanistan’s Aug. 20 elections, said a senior U.S. official who requested anonymity because the troop requirements aren’t public.

NATO Fund
NATO is close to agreeing on setting up a fund to manage the estimated $1 billion annually needed to build up the Afghan army, the official said. NATO countries plus allies such as Japan and Australia plan to make contributions.

Afghanistan’s army now has 79,300 troops, with a goal of 134,000 by the end of 2013, according to NATO.

Insurgent attacks in Afghanistan rose last year to the highest level since the U.S.-led invasion in 2001.

John McCain, the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he welcomed Obama’s decision and the additional troops “can make a significant difference.”

“The situation there has deteriorated for several years, particularly in the south, and it is now dire,” McCain said in a statement yesterday. “Success in Afghanistan will require additional troops and resources, including from the United States.”

Coherent Strategy
“More troops alone, however, will not lead to success there,” McCain said, calling on Obama to “spell out for the American people what he believes victory in Afghanistan will look like and articulate a coherent strategy.”

McKiernan and other military commanders want additional forces in place by late spring or early summer to help counter the growing violence, particularly ahead of Afghanistan’s presidential elections scheduled to take place in August.

Obama last week ordered a strategic review of U.S. policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan, headed by former CIA officer Bruce Riedel, Richard Holbrooke, Obama’s special representative for the two countries, and Michele Flournoy, the undersecretary of defense for policy.

The president wanted the review completed before a scheduled April summit of NATO leaders in Strasbourg, France, Gibbs told reporters last week.

Gates said last week that a decision on whether to send more troops to Afghanistan needed to be made before the review is complete to give sufficient notice to units that may be deployed.

There are about 32,000 soldiers from other North Atlantic Treaty Organization members in Afghanistan, in addition to the U.S. forces. The U.S. is pressing NATO allies to add military and civilian resources there this year.

Gold9472
02-18-2009, 02:50 PM
Why are we in Afghanistan?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sen-ernest-frederick-hollings/why-are-we-in-afghanistan_b_167910.html

Sen. Fritz Hollings
2/18/2009

I keep asking the question, "Why are we in Afghanistan?" No one has a good answer. A few without television respond, "To get Osama." But everyone agrees that he is somewhere in Pakistan. Then the answer is: "As President George W. Bush said, 'to spread democracy.'" The Brits tried to spread democracy for years. The Russians tried to spread communism for years. But democracy must come from within. I helped liberate Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, sixty-eight years ago and they have yet to opt for democracy. We liberated Kuwait eighteen years ago and they have yet to opt for democracy. In the Muslim world more important than freedom and democracy is tribe and religion. We have made the good college try for over seven years and now should realize that we are not going to teach warlords to like democracy and grow cotton instead of poppies.

Now some answer to prevent Afghanistan from becoming a safe haven for Al Qaida. I called the State Department after 9/11, and it reported Al Qaida in forty-five countries, including the United States, but not Iraq. Now we have spread Al Qaida to Iraq and determined to have Al Qaida grow in Afghanistan. What we can't understand is that we are creating terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Taliban were our best friends in Charlie Wilson's War -- the only war we've won since World War II. I helped Charlie on the Senate side. I didn't know what was going on, but he was getting Israel to send Stinger missiles to Muslim Pakistan to shoot down the Russians. Now we are determined to turn our former friends into enemies and destroy Pakistan. Yesterday I read an article that it won't be long before charging President George W. Bush with war crimes for killing civilians in Pakistan with drones. Now the same charge could be made against President Obama. Five years ago, I was in Pakistan to learn that Osama bin Laden had a sixty percent approval rating and President Bush was at ten percent. I wouldn't advise an America to walk the streets of any city in Pakistan today. We are ruining Pakistan. Finally, I'm given the answer, "to stabilize Afghanistan." The best way to stabilize is to get out. It became a matter of conscience for me years ago. I always remember the Wartime Prayer found in Eleanor Roosevelt's papers:

"Dear Lord, lest I continue my complacent way, help me to remember that somewhere, somehow out there, a man died for me today. As long as there be war, I then must ask and answer, Am I worth dying for?"
Why are we killing GIs to spread terrorism?