US plan for Afghan troop surge

[grandpa]

US plan for Afghan troop surge - Times Online

THE conservative Washington think tank that devised the “surge” of US forces in Iraq has come up with a plan to send 12,000 more American troops into southern Afghanistan. A panel of more than 20 experts convened by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) has also urged the administration to get tough with Pakistan.

This seemed to merit a new thread. Getting "tough with Pakistan" may be a problem -- but just another one among many.

Grandpa h.

[Charlatan]

Sending more troops to Afghanistan will result in more soldiers to fight visible enemies, but soldiers are not equiped to uncover hidden forces. I think the war in Afghanistan isn't much of a war, so why send more troops there? These troops will use up funding for their stay, and fight nobody, unless they are all good at mingling in the street and getting information about where the enemy is.

I propose that America train agents at it's bases instead of soldiers, well more agents than it has, as the war on terror is based as a 'secret' war, one fought not with soldiers. The government will not send it's soldiers to fight, as it is not at war with America, but might be funding the 'secret' war, so America needs to get 'secretive' also. With more agents the war could be fought ndercover, hell why the mess of open war? Then America could pull troops out and send them home too, leaving only it's agents to sneak around and foil plans. A war on terror is not fought out in the open.

Sending troops to Pakistan - what will that accomplish? Will they say that there are terrorists there in Pakistan, so they need to deploy troops there? The Pakistani government recently named Bin Laden the sword of Allah, so why would they let their hero get caugh, or assist in his capture? Instead they will be wasting more money to sit around as targets, as they will be sold short by the Pakistani soldiers as to where they are for terrorist attacks. So they will be a sitting duck waiting to be bombed, with nobody to blame for the attacks. So they will just sit around and, ready to fight, be slowly eroded.

[xyzer]

I'm sorry grandpa but I think this is pure unadulterated crap!
The DOD has its own cadre of military planners under the JCS. This Think Tank may,if asked give advice but military planning is best done by the military who are actually on the ground and have the total picture. Not by civilians of other persuasions who are cobbled together?

The military statregy in Iraq and Afghanistan and its resultant tactical plans are of military origin. To think that panels(Think Tanks) of civilians
have some sort of overriding influence on such matters is naive at best. This suggest that we don't have qualified, experience military planners?

[grandpa]

Quote by: xyzer I'm sorry grandpa but I think this is pure unadulterated crap! The DOD has its own cadre of military planners under the JCS.

Their plans have been utilized before, as the article mentions. That could be the case again.

Grandpa h.

[grandpa]

Oh, and the US government may face another problem in its efforts:

Military Balance report sees "willpower gap" in NATO over conflicts

London (dpa) - The current military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan will have long-term implications for US defence strategy as Washington will find it increasingly difficult to recruit allies for extended campaigns, a key defence analysis report said Tuesday. "In the past it was the technological and doctrinal gap between the US and its NATO allies that was at the centre of anxious transatlantic debate, now it is the willpower and capacity gap that is striking," concluded the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) in its Military Balance 2008 report.

Grandpa h.

[rmnunez]

I think the war in Afghanistan isn't much of a war, so why send more troops there? Sending troops to Pakistan - what will that accomplish? Will they say that there are terrorists there in Pakistan, so they need to deploy troops there?

I wonder whether you have been following developments in the region, are aware of the post 911 US led initiative and acquainted with the general outlines of the current situation.

After 911 there was a radical change in US foreign policy, no longer would the slightest hint of terrorism be the least bit tolerated. Intervention in Afghanistan followed since the government there then was openly supporting Al Qaeda which was sheltered in that country.

Subsequent US occupation of Iraq met with some resistance which stalled progress towards reconstruction there. US military planners successfully deployed an additional 30 thousand troops in a surge which has proven effective in accomplishing all its stated goals, breaking the apparent 'quagmire' and routing the insurgency and terrorists. Thus it appears military planners would try and replicate the successful tactics employed in Iraq with a surge in Afghanistan.

Pakistan, a country that shares a border with Afghanistan, is believed to host fleeing remnants of Al Qaeda, including Osama bin Laden himself. These terrorists have hidden in the Himalayan foothills located in disputed territories on Pakistan's border. The US has sought to go after Osama and Al Qaeda in the disputed territories, but has not secured access yet. Now they are training, equiping and improving Pakistani 'special forces' to tackle Osama and Al Qaeda in the area.

[thx1138]

I wonder whether you have been following developments in the region, are aware of the post 911 US led initiative and acquainted with the general outlines of the current situation. After 911 there was a radical change in US foreign policy, no longer would the slightest hint of terrorism be the least bit tolerated. Intervention in Afghanistan followed since the government there then was openly supporting Al Qaeda which was sheltered in that country. Subsequent US occupation of Iraq met with some resistance which stalled progress towards reconstruction there. US military planners successfully deployed an additional 30 thousand troops in a surge which has proven effective in accomplishing all its stated goals, breaking the apparent 'quagmire' and routing the insurgency and terrorists. Thus it appears military planners would try and replicate the successful tactics employed in Iraq with a surge in Afghanistan. Pakistan, a country that shares a border with Afghanistan, is believed to host fleeing remnants of Al Qaeda, including Osama bin Laden himself. These terrorists have hidden in the Himalayan foothills located in disputed territories on Pakistan's border. The US has sought to go after Osama and Al Qaeda in the disputed territories, but has not secured access yet. Now they are training, equiping and improving Pakistani 'special forces' to tackle Osama and Al Qaeda in the area.

Do you really think the stories you're told by the media are the true reasons for these events?

You don't think any of the story you posted above was crafted in any way for public consumption?

Oceania Has Always Been At War With Eastasia.

[rmnunez]

Do you really think the stories you're told by the media are the true reasons for these events?

I doubt the media would knowingly misrepresent events. Its possible they'd be motivated by governments to distort things, but not to the point of disseminating falsehoods. This would be most unusual in western media which is privately owned and operated for a profit where marketability depends on accuracy and objectivity. Would you read a periodical you knew disseminated false information?

You don't think any of the story you posted above was crafted in any way for public consumption?

Not at all, I belive the US was attacked by terrorists on September 11, 2001, that one of the most obvious effects was a radical change in foreign policy which immediately was manifest in 'zero tolerance' for terrorism and a military effort to erradicate the practice in Afghanistan first and subsequently in Iraq.

I've been following reported developments and know a surge of military forces involving 30 thousand reinforcements in Iraq had the planned effects which are favourable to US strategy there. I presume this success inspires plans to try the same in Afghanistan. Pakistan does claim disputed territory where it is believed Osama is holed up in some cave.

What elements in my accounting of the situation seem "crafted" to you and how do you think this crafting distorts reality?

[thx1138]

Well I don't hold your faith when it comes to media. The major media companies are own by big business and big business crafts the stories.

YouTube - FOX News Whistle blowers. UNBELIEVABLE!!!

CMW REPORT, Spring 2003 Title: “Court Ruled That Media Can Legally Lie” Author: Liane Casten ORGANIC CONSUMER ASSOCIATION, March 7, 2004 Title: "Florida Appeals Court Orders Akre-Wilson Must Pay Trial Costs for $24.3 Billion Fox Television; Couple Warns Journalists of Danger to Free Speech, Whistle Blower Protection" Author: Al Krebs Faculty Evaluator: Liz Burch, Ph.D. Student Researcher: Sara Brunner -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States. Back in December of 1996, Jane Akre and her husband, Steve Wilson, were hired by FOX as a part of the Fox “Investigators” team at WTVT in Tampa Bay, Florida. In 1997 the team began work on a story about bovine growth hormone (BGH), a controversial substance manufactured by Monsanto Corporation. The couple produced a four-part series revealing that there were many health risks related to BGH and that Florida supermarket chains did little to avoid selling milk from cows treated with the hormone, despite assuring customers otherwise. According to Akre and Wilson, the station was initially very excited about the series. But within a week, Fox executives and their attorneys wanted the reporters to use statements from Monsanto representatives that the reporters knew were false and to make other revisions to the story that were in direct conflict with the facts. Fox editors then tried to force Akre and Wilson to continue to produce the distorted story. When they refused and threatened to report Fox's actions to the FCC, they were both fired.(Project Censored #12 1997) Akre and Wilson sued the Fox station and on August 18, 2000, a Florida jury unanimously decided that Akre was wrongfully fired by Fox Television when she refused to broadcast (in the jury's words) “a false, distorted or slanted story” about the widespread use of BGH in dairy cows. They further maintained that she deserved protection under Florida's whistle blower law. Akre was awarded a $425,000 settlement. Inexplicably, however, the court decided that Steve Wilson, her partner in the case, was ruled not wronged by the same actions taken by FOX. FOX appealed the case, and on February 14, 2003 the Florida Second District Court of Appeals unanimously overturned the settlement awarded to Akre. The Court held that Akre’s threat to report the station’s actions to the FCC did not deserve protection under Florida’s whistle blower statute, because Florida’s whistle blower law states that an employer must violate an adopted “law, rule, or regulation." In a stunningly narrow interpretation of FCC rules, the Florida Appeals court claimed that the FCC policy against falsification of the news does not rise to the level of a "law, rule, or regulation," it was simply a "policy." Therefore, it is up to the station whether or not it wants to report honestly. During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so. After the appeal verdict WTVT general manager Bob Linger commented, “It’s vindication for WTVT, and we’re very pleased… It’s the case we’ve been making for two years. She never had a legal claim.”

[rmnunez]

According to Akre and Wilson, the station was initially very excited about the series. But within a week, Fox executives and their attorneys wanted the reporters to use statements from Monsanto representatives that the reporters knew were false and to make other revisions to the story that were in direct conflict with the facts. Fox editors then tried to force Akre and Wilson to continue to produce the distorted story. When they refused and threatened to report Fox's actions to the FCC, they were both fired.

Unless there's some distortion in Akre and Wilson's account, then this story would be a good example of the media disseminating false information. But these folks are in litigation, suing their former employer over losing their jobs. I suspect there's at least some exageration in their characterizations of their employer's wrongful conduct.

What persuades me of the media's overall integrity is competititon. I think people would ignore sources they found unreliable and inaccurate, so media tends to make sure they get their stories right.