Is The U.S. Strategy In Afghanistan Just A Game Of 'Whack-A-Mole'

Daniel Brown, Business Insider: The Air Force released new videos of A-10 Warthogs striking Taliban drug labs — and it shows why the US strategy is a game of 'whack-a-mole'.

* The US released two new videos of airstrikes on Taliban drug labs in Afghanistan.
* The US is quietly escalating the war in Afghanistan, and has released a number of similar videos of strikes on Taliban drug facilities and training compounds.
* But civilian casualties have also increased along with the strikes, and Afghan farmers say the drug labs only take three to four days to rebuild.

The Air Force recently released two new videos of A-10 Warthogs taking out Taliban narcotics production facilities in Afghanistan, as the Trump administration continues to quietly ramp up the US' nearly 17-year war in the country.

The videos are rather shocking. One shows several missile strikes that turned the black and white video nearly all-white for a few seconds before flames can be seen rolling up.

"The Taliban have nowhere to hide," Gen. John Nicholson, commander of Resolute Support in Afghanistan, said in February, after the Air Force dropped a record number of smart bombs from a B-52 on Taliban training facilities.

Read more ....

WNU Editor: The U.S. strategy against ISIS in Syria and Iraq was basic. Kill the leadership. Destroy revenue streams. Engage the enemy in their strongholds. But ISIS is not the Taliban, and Afghanistan is not Iraq/Syria. The Taliban leadership are hiding in their safe havens in Pakistan. The Taliban's command and control centers are disperse and hard to target. The strongholds are not defined. And their revenue streams are based on farming and processing a crop that is easy to grow and can be processed in a small building. And while I do believe that targeting the Taliban's revenue streams will have an impact .... the question that remains unanswered is how many labs are the Afghans and the coalition willing to destroy.

Update: The U.S. Ambassador in Afghanistan believes there is hope (I do not) .... Afghanistan Is Not A Forever War, Its Ambassador Tells T&P (Task & Purpose).

What Is The U.S. Strategy In Afghanistan?

© U.S. Army

Gerald F. Hyman, National Interest: Trump's New Afghanistan Strategy Isn't Really a Strategy

Principles guiding a strategy are no substitute for an actual strategy whether developed by Washington or by field commanders.

To much anticipation, on August 21 President Donald Trump announced “our new strategy” for Afghanistan. Unfortunately, it revealed neither a succinct strategy nor even anything new. It was instead a list of a dozen pronouncements defining various U.S. policies tied to Afghanistan. Leaving aside their wisdom, they describe almost perfectly the policy of President George W. Bush and the initial policy of President Barack Obama.

More importantly, the announcements form not even the semblance of a strategy. A strategy is a plan for the deployment of (limited) resources in support of a set of objectives and in the face of obstacles (like adversaries), as President Trump said himself, it is “a plan for victory.” President Trump elucidated none of the elements.

Read more ....

WNU Editor: The White House and the Pentagon have not publicly articulated what they will be exactly doing in Afghanistan, but if I was to guess on what is the Afghan strategy, it will be something like what was done in Iraq during the Obama administration and refined by the Trump administration under the guidance of US Defense Secretary of Defense Mattis. First things first .... stabilize the situation, and this has been somewhat successful. Taliban and ISIS gains have been limited in the past few months, and this was been done by changing the rules of engagement, and conducting far more airstrikes. Second .... build up the Afghan security forces, and like in Iraq .... put together a division of elite soldiers that will storm enemy strongholds. This rebuilding  took approximately 2 years in Iraq to accomplish, and I expect the same in Afghaistan. Three .... when these Afghan forces are ready, launch military offensives with U.S. special forces embedded to order in air and artillery strikes. Four .... make sure the Afghan Army does the fighting .... this is their country, and they are the ones who will have to fight for it.

If this is the strategy .... will it work? I honestly do not know. Afghanistan is not Iraq, and the conditions on the ground are different in both countries. But I do know that the Afghan conflict is a war of attrition, and it will not surprise me if it will take decades for some semblance of peace to return to this country. The hope is that the Afghan government will be able to sustain this conflict by itself .... and the sooner they can achieve that, the better that it will be for all of us.

More News On The U.S. - Afghan Strategy

The Convoluted Arguments Underlying U.S. Afghanistan Strategy -- Lawrence Sellin (Retired Colonel, U.S. Army Reserve), Daily Caller
Afghanistan's Chief Executive Is Hopefull For U.S. War Strategy -- NPR
Abdullah Upbeat About New US War Strategy -- TOLO News
Afghanistan: New US Strategy Proves Popular -- IWPR
Trump's Afghan policy causing a rethink on both sides in conflict -- Scott Peterson, CSM
News Analysis: Taliban downplays U.S. new strategy on Afghanistan, pushes for war: Afghan observers -- Xinhua
The Marines Returned To Helmand Province. Is Their Mission A Blueprint For Trump’s Afghanistan Strategy? -- Shashank Bengali, Task & Purpose/Los Angeles Times

Panetta: U.S. War Strategy Cannot Be Dictated By Polls

U.S. Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta, left, shakes hands with U.S. Ambassador to Canada David Jacobson as the secretary arrives in Ottawa, Ontario, March 26, 2012, to attend meetings with Canadian and Mexican defense officials. DOD photo by Glenn Fawcett

Panetta: Polls Won't Change Afghan Strategy -- CNN

Ottawa (CNN) -- U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said Tuesday polls would not change the strategy in Afghanistan, underscoring the fact that he realizes the American people have tired of war.

"We cannot fight wars by polls," Panetta said in Ottawa, where he was attending a trilateral defense meeting with Canadian and Mexican officials.

Panetta was responding to a new New York Times/CBS poll showing that 69% of Americans want troops out of Afghanistan.

Read more ....

More News On Panetta's Remarks That War Strategy Cannot Be Dictated By Polls

Panetta says focus on strategy, not polls in Afghanistan -- Reuters
Panetta: War strategy can’t be guided by polls as survey shows most Americans oppose war -- Washington Post/AP
Panetta says polls cannot dictate Afghan war plans -- AFP
Panetta: Polls Cannot Dictate Afghan War Strategy -- Voice of America
U.S. will continue with its plans for the Afghanistan war irregardless -- Examiner

Many Are Now Starting To Doubt President Obama's Afghan Strategy

BOMB UNIT - A unit from the International Security Assistance Force specialized in explosive disposal investigates an improvised explosive device found under a bridge east of Shindand Airbase in Herat province, Afghanistan, July 19, 2010. Specialists exploded the device from a distant location and did not damage the bridge. International Security Assistance Force photo

Afghan Deadline Is Cutting Two Ways -- David Sanger, New York Times

WASHINGTON — When President Obama announced a new strategy for Afghanistan in December, he argued that by setting a deadline of next summer to begin drawing down troops he would create a sense of urgency for the Afghan government to take the lead in the fight, while acknowledging the limits of America’s patience with the longest war in its history.

But over the past two weeks — on Capitol Hill, in Kabul and even in conversations with foreign leaders — Mr. Obama has been reminded how the goal has become what one senior American military commander called a “double-edged sword,” one that hangs over the White House as surely as it hangs over President Hamid Karzai.

Read more ....

My Comment: What is there to doubt or question .... President Obama is scrambling and trying his best to lay the groundwork to get out of the country .... and the sooner the better. He is not engaged to fight this war .... he is engaged to make it politically palatable for the U.S. to leave. This is a good article and analysis from Sanger and the New York Times .... read it all.

U.S. And British Special Forces To Target The Taliban Leaderhsip

U.S. Army soldiers and Afghan National soldiers walk towards the district center to attend a meeting with local leaders to address regional concerns. The soldiers are based out of Combat Outpost Munoz, Paktika province, Afghanistan, and are deployed with Company B, 3rd Battalion, 509th Infantry. U.S. Army photo by Staff Sgt. Andrew Smith

Special Forces Troops Open Up New Front Against The Taliban In Helmand -- The Telegraph

British and US special forces are set to open a new front in southern Afghanistan in a bid to "break the back" of the Taliban insurgency.

A task force composed of members of British, US and Afghan special forces will be ordered to hunt down and kill or capture senior Taliban and al-Qaeda leaders as part of American-lead Nato surge into southern Afghanistan and the border region of Pakistan.

The operation to "decapitate" the Taliban leadership will begin in earnest in the next few weeks and form part of a series of "shaping operations" prior to a major offensive against key insurgent strongholds in central Helmand.

Read more ....

My Comment: This is the same strategy that was used to decapitate the insurgent leadership in Iraq. I am surprise that it has taken the coalition forces this long to implement this strategy.

The Questions That Should Have Been Asked To General McChrystal

US Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, commander of the International Security Assistance Force and commander of United States Forces Afghanistan, speaks at a House Armed Services Committee hearing on the war in Afghanistan, at the US Capitol in Washington. Photo by Reuters

Questions No One Wants to Ask Gen. McChrystal -- Townhall

Gen. Stanley McChrystal's long-awaited testimony before Congress on the Afghanistan "surge" was, according to one account, "uneventful." The general himself, another story noted, was "a study in circumspection." And questioning from lawmakers was, said a third, "gentle."

That's a nice word for it. "Ineffectual" is more like it. Throw in "callous," too, given House members' obligations to constituents in the war zone, operating under what are surely the most restrictive rules of engagement (ROE) in U.S. history.

Read more ....

My Comment: Indeed .... the questions that should have been asked were not. Neptunus Lex sums it up perfectly in the following post .... Re-leashing the Dogs of War.

General McChrystal And Ambassador Eikenberry Give Their Testimonies To Congress Today

Gen. Stanley McChrystal To Congress: 'We Can Defeat The Taliban' -- Christian Science Monitor

At hearings on Capitol Hill Tuesday, Gen. Stanley McChrystal said the US would be able to disable the Taliban to the point where they would no longer threaten the government of Afghanistan.

Washington - There are as many as 27,000 Taliban operating in Afghanistan but the top American commander there says he believes they can be defeated under the new strategy.

Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top military commander in Afghanistan, told Senate lawmakers Tuesday that while the Taliban is comprised of disparate parts, one prominent group, the Quetta Shura, or "Afghan Taliban," is the biggest threat.

Read more ....

As Abe Lincoln watches, President Obama met with U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry, left, and General Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, in the Oval Office on Monday. (White House/Pete Souza)

More News On General McChrystal's And Ambassador Eikenberry

McChrystal backs Afghan plan to skeptical Congress -- Yahoo News/AP
U.S. commander, envoy unite behind Afghan strategy -- Yahoo News/Reuters
McChrystal Confident of Progress in 18 months -- ABC News
McChrystal supports new strategy in Afghanistan -- AP
General: Pakistani help could defeat Afghan gang -- AP
Men behind Obama’s surge, McChrystal and Eikenberry, put on united front -- Times Online
Top U.S. General, Envoy In Afghanistan Defend Surge -- NPR
Obama's Line in the Afghan Sand -- CBS
US Gen Stanley McChrystal backs US surge in Afghanistan -- BBC
McChrystal, Eikenberry project united front -- Politico
McChrystal and Eikenberry on the Hill -- Washington Post
A Wrap-Up Of The Second McChrystal/Eikenberry Hearing -- Attackerman
FACTBOX: Quotes from U.S. lawmakers on Afghan policy -- Reuters
McChrystal/Eikenberry Testimony Today -- Abu Muquwama

Afghans Offer Jobs to Taliban Rank and File if They Defect

Gul Agha Shirzai, the governor of Nangarhar Province, told Afghan tribal elders this month, “O.K., I want you guys to go out there and persuade the Taliban to sit down and talk.” Moises Saman for The New York Times

From The New York Times:

JALALABAD, Afghanistan — The American-backed campaign to persuade legions of Taliban gunmen to stop fighting got under way here recently, in an ornate palace filled with Afghan tribal leaders and one very large former warlord leading the way.

“O.K., I want you guys to go out there and persuade the Taliban to sit down and talk,” Gul Agha Shirzai, the governor of Nangarhar Province, told a group of 25 tribal leaders from four eastern provinces. In a previous incarnation, Mr. Shirzai was the American-picked governor of Kandahar Province after the Taliban fell in 2001.

Read more ....

My Comment: I am skeptical with the idea that the Taliban can be paid off. Many of them are from outside the country .... Pakistan to be specific .... and most are involved because of religious and ideological reasons. While it is true that many are also involved because of money, it is money that they can also earn if they join the Afghan Army.

I am more optimistic on the formation of tribal militias. These militias were incredibly successful in Iraq, and there is every reason to believe that they will also work in Afghanistan. Tribal loyalties trump everything, and in Afghanistan (with a minimum of 400 tribes) this can become a powerful weapon.

U.S. To Be Out Of Afghanistan In 8 Years: White House

STRYKER SUNSET - U.S. soldiers dismount a Stryker armored vehicle near the village of Zakuzi in Zabul province, Afghanistan, Nov. 18, 2009. Company C is conducting counterinsurgency operations in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. The soldiers are assigned to the 2nd Infantry Division's Company C, 4th Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment, 5th Brigade Combat Team. U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Efren Lopez

U.S. Will Be Out Of Afghanistan By 2017: White House -- Yahoo News/Reuters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The United States will not be in Afghanistan eight years from now, the White House said on Wednesday, as President Barack Obama prepared to explain to Americans next week why he is expanding the war effort.

After months of deliberation and fending off Republican charges that he was dithering on Afghanistan while violence there surged, Obama will address the nation on Tuesday on the way forward in the costly and unpopular eight-year war.

Read more ....

My Comment: The Taliban now know how long they must fight this war before U.S. soldiers start to leave their country. For the Afghan people who are fed up with war and continued suppression by the Taliban, and for the U.S./NATO soldiers who put their lives on the line everyday, nothing good is going to come out of this announced date of departure .... nothing good at all.

U.S. Afghan Strategy To Be Revealed On Tuesday, 16:00 EST

President Barack Obama during a joint news conference with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India at the White House on Tuesday. Luke Sharrett/The New York Times

Obama To Unveil His Afghan Strategy Tuesday At West Point -- L.A. Times

The president is expected to announce that the U.S. will send more troops to Afghanistan. He also is likely to offer a plan for eventually withdrawing U.S. forces.

Reporting from Washington - President Obama will roll out his new strategy for the Afghanistan war during a televised speech Tuesday at 8 p.m. Eastern time from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, the White House said.

Obama, who has presided over at least nine meetings of his senior advisers devoted to the war, is expected to announce higher troop levels for Afghanistan while also detailing a plan for ultimately withdrawing U.S. forces and handing over security responsibilities to the Afghan government.

Read more ....

More News On Tuesday's Announcement

Obama to Deliver Prime-Time Address on Afghanistan Tuesday -- Wall Street Journal
Obama to Speak on Afghanistan From West Point on Tuesday -- New York Times
US Troops Experiment with New Strategy for Afghanistan -- Voice of America
US troop buildup carries high costs -- AFP
What to Expect from Obama’s Speech on Afghanistan -- Wall Street Journal
ANALYSIS-Obama expected to outline Afghan benchmarks, endgame -- Reuters
FACTBOX: How Obama's Afghan strategy is shaping up -- Reuters

President Obama Will Announce 34,000 More Troops To Afghanistan Next Week

President Barack Obama during a joint news conference with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India at the White House on Tuesday. Luke Sharrett/The New York Times

Barack Obama To Send 34,000 More Troops To Afghanistan -- The Telegraph

Barack Obama will announce next Tuesday that the US is sending 34,000 extra troops to Afghanistan to "finish the job", in an announcement that will finally bring to an end three months of deliberation.

White House officials said the US president would address Americans in a live prime-time broadcast and outline a new strategy for ending the Afghan war, which began when US forces ousted the Taliban after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Senior figures such as Robert Gates, the defence secretary, General Stanley McChrystal, commander of Nato forces in Afghanistan, and Karl Eikenberry, American ambassador to Kabul, are then expected to testify before Congress about the reasons behind the increase.

Read more ....

More News On President Obama's Upcoming Decision On Afghanistan

Obama plans to send 34,000 more troops to Afghanistan -- McClatchy News
More Troops to Afghanistan, But What Will They Do? -- The Danger Room
Obama: Afghanistan Troop Announcement Coming Soon -- Voice of America
Obama poised to announce decision on Afghanistan -- The Guardian
Obama vows to 'finish the job' in Afghanistan -- AFP
Obama to 'finish the job' in Afghanistan -- BBC
US Afghan buildup may involve brigade per quarter -- Reuters
To surge or not? Reasons why Barack Obama delayed Afghan decision -- Times Online

My Comment: So the number is 34,000 soldiers .... a brigade to be sent each quarter .... and this will change the war in Afghanistan?

I am skeptical .....

Is Canada's Counter Insurgency Tactics Working In Afghanistan?

Brig. Gen. Daniel Menard, speaks with local Afghan journalists, in Kandahar Afghanistan, on Thursday, Nov. 19, 2009. THE CANADIAN PRESS/ Jonathan Montpetit

Canada's Counter-Insurgency Experiment Get Blessing From Top General -- Canadian Press

BELANDAY, Afghanistan — When Capt. Jean Vachon's lost dog came back, the war against Taliban insurgents in Kandahar suddenly didn't seem so hopeless after all.

Vachon's platoon had moved into Belanday, a small town southwest of Kandahar city, as part of an experiment by military brass to have troops leave their fortified bases and live among the population.

In Belanday, the Canadians quickly adopted one of the town's stray dogs as part of their effort to reach out to locals.

"One day she went missing, and we thought... she's going to come back to us in pieces as a warning," Vachon said.

"But no, the villagers brought her back to us."

Read more ....

My Comment: I know people who are serving in the Van Doos .... and some of them have voiced a different view point to what is happening there. Still ... from my point of view the Canadian experience has been successful. Long term commitment and the willingness to spend the necessary funds will make a difference in what is the hotbed of the Taliban insurgency .... but like it said .... it will take time, blood, and treasure to succeed .... resources that are in short supply today.

Will The Afghan Strategy Be Decided Tonight?

Obama Adds National Security Session On Afghanistan -- L.A. Times

President Obama has added a nighttime meeting with his national security advisors to his schedule, the White House announced this morning, as the president prepares to make a decision on U.S. policy in the Afghan region.

The meeting is scheduled for 8 p.m. EST. It is at least the seventh full discussion of what to do in Afghanistan, whether to send more troops or to redefine the role of U.S. involvement.

Read more ....

More News on Tonight's Strategy Meeting On Afghanistan

Obama could lock in Afghanistan decision Monday -- AP
Obama to Meet Advisers on Afghanistan -- New York Times
No. 9: Obama Meets Again on Afghanistan -- Wall Street Journal
Obama to hold last-minute meeting on Afghanistan -- Press TV
FACTBOX-How Obama's Afghan strategy is shaping up -- Reuters
Obama's Afghanistan strategy must be more than more troops -- L.A. Times editorial

President Obama's Options For Afghanistan

Click Image to Enlarge

In 3 Tacks for Afghan War, a Game of Trade-Offs -- New York Times

WASHINGTON — Should President Obama decide to send 40,000 additional American troops to Afghanistan, the most ambitious plan under consideration at the White House, the military would have enormous flexibility to deploy as many as 15,000 troops to the Taliban center of gravity in the south, 5,000 to the critical eastern border with Pakistan and 10,000 as trainers for the Afghan security forces.

The rest could be deployed flexibly across the country, including to the NATO headquarters in Kabul, the capital, and in clandestine operations.

Read more ....

My Comment: Kudos to the New York Times for detailing the options that are available to President Obama. That is a considerable amount of information in this piece from the New York Times, and needs to be read completely. Click on the above image for a visually understanding of what may become the new Afghan strategy next year.

Debate Shifts to Afghan Exit Plan

Brown and Obama: The speech comes after Mr Brown held talks with President Barack Obama at the White House Photo: EPA

From The Wall Street Journal:

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown have turned the focus of Afghan war planning toward an exit strategy, publicly declaring that the U.S. and its allies can't send additional troops without a plan for getting them out.

The shift has unnerved some U.S. and foreign officials, who say that planning a pullout now -- with or without a specific timetable -- encourages the Taliban to wait out foreign forces and exacerbates fears in the region that the U.S. isn't fully committed to their security.

Read more ....

My Comment: You must never tell the enemy the exact details of your plan .... but this type of thinking is not shared by President Obama or U.K. PM Brown. One is then left with two perceptions of both men .... (1) they have no understanding or sensitivity on what their comments may do on the Afghan battlefield .... demoralizing our allies and emboldening our enemies. Or (2) this is done deliberately to confuse and obfuscate the enemy.

I tend to side with option #1.

Launch Major Counter Strike In Afghanistan: Kilcullen

Bagram Airfield from the Air Traffic Control Tower's catwalk. Wikimedia

From DoD Buzz:

Counterinsurgency adviser David Kilcullen spoke last night at my alma mater, Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), where he also teaches (lucky students). Mostly, he addressed irregular warfare and how he sees it as the dominant form of war in the foreseeable future and that we’d be wise to prepare accordingly.

I wanted to highlight some of the points he made in remarks the other day to a British newspaper to clarify his position on Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s troop request, and why a large troop surge is needed. First off, he said the Taliban are much better fighters than the insurgents in Iraq. “The Taliban love to fight,” he said, and their operational skills have improved significantly over the past three years as they’ve learned and adapted to U.S. and NATO tactics.

Read more ....

My Comment: Logistics will make it almost next to impossible to dump 30,000+ troops in a short period of time into Afghanistan. But Kilcullen knows what it takes to change the dynamics in the Afghan war, and is proposing it anyway. But unfortunately for him (and us), I doubt that anyone in the White House is listening to him.

We will probably know in the next few weeks what is the new White House strategy for Afghanistan .... but my gut is telling me to not hold my breath.

U.S. Administration Confesses That They Are Now Looking For An Exit Strategy From Afghanistan

NATO-led troops are seen near a blast site after a
suicide bomb attack in Kabul Nov. 13. (Reuters Photo)

Administration Lowers Bar for Success in Afghanistan War, Seeks Exit Strategy -- FOX News

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says the administration has 'no illusions' about the Afghanistan war. Officials say the administration wants to make sure the U.S. commitment in the country is not 'open-ended' as the president drafts a new strategy.

Top Obama administration officials took pains to lower the bar for success in Afghanistan Sunday, stressing that the administration is seeking an exit strategy and holds "no illusions" that it will transform the country into a functional modern democracy.

Read more ....

My Comment: The administration does not hide their intentions anymore .... their priority is to set the conditions for an exit strategy. The Taliban and their Al Qaeda allies also see the same news reports that we do .... and I am sure that they are now smelling victory.

Our Afghan and NATO allies are now going to take stock of this situation and will start to lay the groundwork for their own exit from Afghanistan. Saying that this has the markings for an incredible geopolitical disaster that will impact us for decades to come will be understating the obvious.

US Lacks Political Will For Af-Pak

From DoD Buzz:

“I believe that the US at the moment does not have the political will, nor the public understanding and commitment to do what is necessary in Afghanistan.”

Those are the words of Muqtedar Khan, director of the University of Delaware’s Islamic studies program, testifying Monday morning before the House Armed Services subcommittee on oversight and investigations.

He cited poll numbers that support for the war stands at about 40 percent. “With the current spike in casualties the growing political crisis that started with the malpractices in the presidential elections, I suspect public support will decline further. It will become difficult for both the White House and Congress to do what is necessary,” Khan said.

Read more .....

My Comment: I could not have said it any better.

What Is Next In Afghanistan? – A Strategy Options Debate

AFGHAN GRADS - Afghan National Police prepare to graduate from a police academy in Herat, Afghanistan, Oct. 29, 2009. The hundreds of graduates are part of an initiative to double the size of the Afghan force to 160,000 by 2013. Coalition forces contributed to their training. U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Stephen Decatur

From Armchair General:

Two noted experts comment on America's policy options regarding this vital National security issue.

There is currently an important and passionate debate raging about the future course of American strategy in Afghanistan. Yet, today’s politically-charged atmosphere makes it difficult for the general public to obtain clear-headed objective analysis that is not tainted by partisanship and competing political agendas. The President is reported to be weighing various options for U. S. strategy and is expected to announce his decision in the coming weeks.

To provide our readers with revealing insight and a better understanding of this vital national security issue Armchair General asked two noted experts to offer their best analysis and insight about three likely options regarding future U. S. strategy in Afghanistan.

Read more ....

My Comment: I found that both sides gave interesting viewpoints and options on what to do. There is a lot to digest from this discussion, and the comments thread (with only a few comments) also deserves a read through.

Is Presdient Obama's Afghan Startegy Similar To President Bush's

Cheney: Obama's Afghan War Strategy 'Bears Striking Resemblance' to Bush's -- FOX News

Former Vice President Dick Cheney returned fire on the Obama administration Wednesday over an allegation that the Bush White House did not ask any key questions about the war in Afghanistan, forcing Obama officials to form a strategy from scratch and leaving the war "adrift."

Former Vice President Dick Cheney said Wednesday that the Bush administration had developed a new strategy on the war in Afghanistan before leaving office -- a strategy that he said "bears a striking resemblance" to the one announced by President Obama in March.

Read more ....

My Comment: I may disagree with many things that the former Vice President has said or done in the past .... but he is probably right on this one. President Obama made it very clear that Afghanistan was/is a war of necessity, and that they had a plan on what to do in Afghanistan (March 2009). 8 months later .... we are at the end of October ..... and still no firm decision on how to address the growing insurgency in Afghanistan has been made from the White House.

Instead, we now have an Administration that prefers to blame the previous White House for the problems that they themselves put into motion when they ordered the shipping of thousands of additional soldiers to Afghanistan this past spring. This failure by some in the White House to grasp that this is their war now .... and their responsibility .... is not helping the situation. What is worse, the perception that I am receiving is that some in the White House do not want to assume this responsibility .... and are trying their best to wash their hands of it.

They cannot. President Obama IS the Commander in Chief .... and he is the man ultimately responsible for what happens in Afghanistan .... for better or worse.