Thread: A "Troop Surge" May Well Just Do Some Good...

HERE!

Our grandson will be going back to Afghanistan, as part of the surge. He just got back a couple of weeks ago & was supposed to get his discharge in August, but he was involuntairly extened with another tour. So, i hope & pray it works. He was supposed to have come back in March but his tour was extended for the surge. He's one of many that has been caught up in this surge.

Good lord thats an old map, it still has the soviet union on it.

A little info from those commie left wingers at Stars and Stripes...

=============================

Stars and Stripes: Request for more troops not being met

Request for more troops not being met
DOD asking NATO to step in to fill need for 3,400 soldiers to train Afghan police </B>

By Jeff Schogol, Stars and Stripes
Mideast edition, Saturday, June 9, 2007



ARLINGTON, Va. — The U.S. military is having a hard time filling a request from commanders in Afghanistan for 3,400 troops to train Afghan police, a senior Defense official said.

In March, a spokesman for Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan said the request for the trainers had been made by the commander of Task Force Phoenix, which is in charge of training Afghan police and soldiers.

As of May, only 200 U.S. troops had received orders to go to Afghanistan to fill the request.

The U.S. military just does not have enough troops with the right skill sets to send to Afghanistan, the senior Defense official explained on Friday.

To meet the request, the U.S. military would have to move U.S. trainers from Iraq to Afghanistan, the official said.

Therefore, the U.S. military is looking to its NATO partners to help train the Afghan police, the official said.

------------

The coalition’s goal is to train 82,000 Afghan police officers by the end of 2008, said Maj. Sheldon Smith, a spokesman for Combined Security Transition Command—Afghanistan.

“The police are the tip of the spear in Afghanistan’s fight against terrorism and they need maximum international support toward becoming a self-sustaining force,” Smith said in a Friday e-mail to Stars and Stripes.

But on Tuesday, Gen. Dan McNeill, NATO commander in Afghanistan, told reporters that the Afghan interior ministry was “several years behind the Ministry of Defense” in many people’s assessment.

Originally Posted by JohnMaynardKeynes

Good lord thats an old map, it still has the soviet union on it.

Maybe it'll help bring it (USSR) back.

Originally Posted by JohnMaynardKeynes

Good lord thats an old map, it still has the soviet union on it.

Hard to find ones that feature the border region.

Besides if Bush's "I looked into his soul" buddy Putin had his way...

Originally Posted by Migi e!

Our grandson will be going back to Afghanistan, as part of the surge. He just got back a couple of weeks ago & was supposed to get his discharge in August, but he was involuntairly extened with another tour. So, i hope & pray it works. He was supposed to have come back in March but his tour was extended for the surge. He's one of many that has been caught up in this surge.

Sorry to tell ya. But, there has been no surge in Afghanistan.

Your grandson was extended because they do not have the numbers to sustain our current force levels. They are tied down in Iraq or not combat ready because they are so worn down.

Too bad we didn't fight the battle there against the folks that attacked us with all of our resources instead of sending them after a country that didn't attack us and creating a second needless front in the war.

When folks say "we are still fighting in Afghanistan", I ask them to compare the troop numbers (all troops, not just USofA - all NATO troops) to the police force of New York City. That usually makes folks stop and think about the true committment to the "war on terror"

Originally Posted by Vortex

When folks say "we are still fighting in Afghanistan", I ask them to compare the troop numbers (all troops, not just USofA - all NATO troops) to the police force of New York City. That usually makes folks stop and think about the true committment to the "war on terror"

But, but, a country that did not attack us is the "central front" in the WOT. Didn't ya here?

Truely sad how they squandered our chance to really do that one right but obsessing (as per PNAC freakshow dogma) on Iraq. If we had put 150,000 troops there, maybe Osama would not have slipped the "noose" at Tora Bora when he was escorted over the border by a local warlord we paid hundreds of thousands of tax payer dollars to.

That is some comparison. Really does put it in perspective.

Do you believe I actually saw someone here argue that as long as we hade even ONE troop there, Bush is meeting his commitments to that country and its security??? WTF???

Just goes to show that some are so obsessed with defending the disasterous decision to go to Iraq that they really are quite ready to write Afghanistan off. Unreal.

Originally Posted by Distressed American

Truely sad how they squandered our chance to really do that one right but obsessing (as per PNAC freakshow dogma) on Iraq. If we had put 150,000 troops there, maybe Osama would not have slipped the "noose" at Tora Bora when he was escorted over the border by a local warlord we paid hundreds of thousands of tax payer dollars to.

Squandered our chance, I'm not sure we ever really wanted that chance. Negotiating with and paying millions to the Taliban in 2001 yet not accepting their offer to hand over OBL, not accepting their offers to hand him over after 9/11 and pre-invasion of Afghanistan - it has never been about fighting terrorists, if it had been, we never would have left Afghanistan until every AQ cave was gutted and every bunker collapsed.