THE POWER OF 3: AL QAEDA, TALIBAN & AFGHAN NATIONAL ARMY

We must get out of Afghanistan now.

The WSJ reports that General McChrystal wants as many as 60,000 more troops to fight the war in Afghanistan. Whether we send 1,000 troops or 100,000 troops, are we really capable of "winning" the war against all of these negative forces? I say NO; I say get the hell out of dodge.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said al Qaeda has focused on hitting the U.S., while danger posed by the Taliban "was somewhat different" and less threatening. That's interesting because it was the Taliban, 300+ strong, that attacked our outposts last weekend. AP article here. In fact, my friend's husband led about 60 troops from the top of a mountain, down into the location of the attack. And yet the Taliban is less threatening than al Qaeda? Really?

Also reported to me by a member of the front line was that the Afghan National Army did not help the American troops at all. Apparently, members of the new army are easily paid off by the Taliban. In fact, our troops have implemented a buddy system even for bathroom breaks because they do not trust the Afghan National Army troops.

What is our mission in Afghanistan? We are not trying to bring down one regime, as we did with Sadam Hussein. There is no single leader, there is no single mission. We are fighting al Qaeda forces within Afghanistan and also seeking to keep them from entering from Pakistan. We are fighting the Taliban. And, we are trying to train an Afghan army that apparently is already rooted with corruption. Three forces, three issues, three reasons to get out of Afghanistan.

As a side note, an increase in helicopters is a silly request if the helicopters can't reach dangerous mountain regions. For example, the attack last weekend was in a remote village that prevented helicopters from landing closely; thus, the men had to be dropped off at the top of a mountain and then had to hike downhill. Here is yet another example that quantity of troops or resources are not the answer. The answer is that the United States must leave or we will never get out of there.

www.xpunged.com and www.tamaraholder.com

Comments

[Daniel Williams]

I agree - let's get outta Dodge. Leaving the Middle East will be welcomed by many around the world, but for the wrong reason. Wrongly believing that it will lead to a pacification of the region, supporters will instead witness an escalation of the plan bin Laden and his acolytes have stated as their goal from the very beginning: to first create an Islamic caliphate, enforced by Sharia Law, across the Middle East, then across the globe.

Islamic fundamentalists will successfully wage war against the weakest country in the region (and it's a toss-up whether that will be Afghanistan or Pakistan), establishing a base of operations to attack Saudi Arabia and gain control of their oil fields.

And when the shit really hits the fan; an attack on Israel, the entire region will be turned into a charcoal briquette via Israel's nuclear arsenal . And since the Americans will have been long gone from Dodge, blaming us will expected but hard to prove. Then the West, in concert with Europe and India and, possibly, China, will don hazmat suits and pump out the oil at 40 bucks a barrel until the cows come home.

So, yeah, let's get outta Dodge - and let the games begin!