PDA

View Full Version : US hints may put Al-Qaeda, not Taliban, in crosshairs



Darklord
10-08-2009, 06:03 PM
WASHINGTON — The White House said Thursday the Taliban posed less of a threat to US security than Al-Qaeda, raising speculation that President Barack Obama may decide against huge troop increases in Afghanistan.
Officials involved in Obama's intense Afghan policy review argued that Al-Qaeda poses a grave danger to US interests and the American homeland while the Taliban, though hostile to US forces in Afghanistan, did not.
The assessments seemed to differ with the view of war commander General Stanley McChrystal, who asked for up to 40,000 more troops and warned the counter-insurgency against the Taliban could fail without reinforcements.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs, who has ruled out any reduction in US forces in Afghanistan, said Obama had yet to make any firm decisions as he conducts an exhaustive Afghan policy review.
But he said there was "clearly a difference" between the two groups, styling Al-Qaeda as an "entity that, through a global, transnational jihadist network, would seek to strike the US homeland."
"I think that the Taliban are obviously exceedingly bad people that have done awful things. Their capability is somewhat different, though, on that continuum of transnational threats."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iH1WgxXpLu_caX4-aqObScOIxtVA


President Obama is prepared to accept some Taleban involvement in Afghanistan’s political future and is unlikely to favour a large influx of new US troops being demanded by his ground commander, a senior official said tonight.
Mr Obama appears to have been swayed in recent days by arguments from some advisers, led by Vice-President Joe Biden, that the Taleban do not pose a direct threat to the US and that there should be greater focus on tackling al-Qaeda inside Pakistan.
The official, speaking anonymously to the press about Mr Obama’s internal discussions – a tactic that is causing dismay among some senior military officials – said the president’s final decision on his war strategy and troop levels is still at least two weeks away.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/Afghanistan/article6866894.ece

Will this work? Has the US government forgotten why they were in Afghanistan in the first place?

NUCKINFUTS
10-08-2009, 06:08 PM
Will this work? Has the US government forgotten why they were in Afghanistan in the first place?

I was wondering the same thing.

Zarak
10-08-2009, 06:09 PM
Edited...

Lets hope the speculation about denying General McChrystal the troops he needs is false.

SoliDeoGloria
10-08-2009, 06:17 PM
I feel like it was the taliban who made Afghanistan a safe haven for groups like Al Qaeda, and if given another opportunity will be even friendlier to extremist groups who support their same views of radical islam. Which will be much harder to contain and defeat the next time around. I thoroughly believe there will be a next time around, and it may not even take place in Afghanistan but a little closer to home.

Since we're already in the neighborhood. Why can't we muster the full force of the US military and crush them as Gen. McChrystal has asked?....instead of telling him to shut his mouth and know his role.

Just my 2 cents.

Notlim
10-08-2009, 06:18 PM
back a year or so there was the intent of using some of the Afghan tribes for security.,,,,
maybe some of them might get some of the political power back and some areas will be reinforce as to stop those who want to keep fighting among the civilians,,,
you guys should wait what the end result will be before getting emotional,
I would not take seriously both articles specially the one for Times, at least not till we know what the overall plan is,

GregHJ
10-08-2009, 08:04 PM
Although I believe we need to adopt a more counter-terrorism/counter-insurgency strategy towards the Taliban, I do think we need an icnrease of regular troops as well. Not just for direct assaults which haven't worked well in dislodging the Taliban, but mainly for security and nation building efforts. The problem now is that we are using a sledge hammer to kill a gnat. We should be using special forces as much as we can. However, we're going to have to nation build in the meantime if we want any success in defeating the Taliban. If the Afghan people are happy and making money then they won't join the Taliban.

I'm personally curious as to what happened to all of those Northern Alliance fighters. We should really be using them with our troops instead of the poor bastards in the Afghan army. On of the Northern Alliance generals, Rashid Dostum, said that if he was allowed to recruit an army of 10,000 Mujaheddin veterans, he could mop up the Taliban in six months. Of course, he'd have to be on a tight leash. He's not exactly the most trustworthy man in the world.

GlassHarp
10-08-2009, 11:38 PM
http://www.youtube.com/v/MWNqun21uQo&feature=player_embedded#

This guy is a joke. Does a single thing that comes out of his mouth actually mean anything to him?

SilentType
10-09-2009, 02:40 PM
This guy is a joke. Does a single thing that comes out of his mouth actually mean anything to him?

He says what they put on his teleprompter.

Atlantic Friend
10-09-2009, 03:45 PM
Will this work? Has the US government forgotten why they were in Afghanistan in the first place?

Apparently that was Bush's initial idea as well - and it's not automatically a bad one either.

commanding
10-09-2009, 06:09 PM
IMO, it is possible to carry on two wars at the same time. IMO, Al Quaida and OBL should be primary target number one, no questions asked, kill em all. Target two should be the Taliban who gave shelter, aid, comfort, and harbored AQ in their territory, despite the warnings given to them after 9-11. They signed their own death warrant. Plus they are conducting a guerilla war on US uniformed troops, using terror tactics, as unlawful combatants. Therefore since they are not signors of the Geneva accords, they are not due the protection of the geneva accords.
I know there are people who will disagree with my last statement...and no doubt quote chapter and verse from the accords saying I am wrong...but that is what makes horse races...difference of opinions.

NUCKINFUTS
10-09-2009, 06:40 PM
back a year or so there was the intent of using some of the Afghan tribes for security.,,,,
maybe some of them might get some of the political power back and some areas will be reinforce as to stop those who want to keep fighting among the civilians,,,
you guys should wait what the end result will be before getting emotional,
I would not take seriously both articles specially the one for Times, at least not till we know what the overall plan is,

I recall that, there were talks of supplying them with weapons.