Wednesday, May 28, 2014

Will 10,000 U.S. Troops in Afghanistan Be Enough To Stop Al Qaeda?

Will Obama's 10,000 Troops in Afghanistan Be Enough To Stop Al Qaeda? -- Eli Lake and Josh Rogin, Daily Beast

The Pentagon prevailed this week in a fight over how many U.S. forces will fight in Afghanistan past 2014. But will 9,800 troops be enough to keep a resurgent al Qaeda out?

President Obama is poised to keep nearly 10,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan until at least 2016. Some top intelligence and military officers now fighting that war say the number of troops under consideration by the White House should be just enough to prevent al Qaeda from re-establishing a safe haven. Others aren’t so sure that 9,800 troops can keep the terror group and its allies at bay.

The stakes in the troop decision couldn’t be higher. Not only will it help shape the relationship between Obama and his national security state during the president’s final years in office, but in a very real way, the decision could determine the final outcome of America’s longest war. There are top military and intelligence officials who are deeply concerned about what the president might do next.

“The bottom line is that 10,000 troops is not enough to deny al Qaeda sanctuary in Afghanistan,” one U.S. intelligence officer told The Daily Beast. “As a result, they will come back. We have decided as a political leadership that we can live with this.”

Read more ....

My Comment: In a country as vast as Afghanistan .... I fail to see how 10,000 U.S. soldiers can make a difference when tens of thousands of U.S. and international troops could not stop the Taliban after 13 years of war. This is all political posturing done to placate critics of the White House that the Obama administration is not doing enough in Afghanistan .... and to make everyone feel good that they are trying their best. My prediction .... the Taliban and their Al Qaeda are going to step up their attacks .... especially on targets where U.S. forces are based and their defenses are weak.

No comments: