David Kilcullen, a key adviser to Petraeus during the surge in Iraq, tells CNN that 25,000 additional international troops are the minimum needed in Afghanistan.
(CNN) -- An influential adviser to the U.S. commander in Afghanistan declared Friday that anything less than 25,000 extra international troops in the country would not be enough to win.
I suppose "international" does not have to mean "American" but I don't expect anything more from NATO.
Here are some of Kilcullen's thoughts during Obama's strategy review in March 2009. This stands out:
Obama's policy choices for Afghanistan are usually presented in stark terms: Either he authorizes a major new escalation, well beyond the 17,000 additional troops he has already approved, or he scales back the mission to a narrower counterterrorism effort aimed at preventing al-Qaeda from mounting attacks.
Kilcullen argues that either of these extreme options would be a mistake. "It would be the height of folly to commit to a large-scale escalation now," when the political climate in both Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan is so uncertain. We should use the extra 17,000 troops to stabilize the situation but delay the big decision about escalation until after Afghanistan's presidential election in August.
I am not sure why the uncertain climate of March has given way to a more favorable climate now, but (per CNN) Kilcullen has just come back from Afghanistan.
"I suppose "international" does not have to mean "American" but I don't expect anything more from NATO."
European respect for the current administration is at a highwater mark,(unless the BUSH flatline was an anomoly) and the current Prez' polling indicates more confidence we now have adults in charge, making NATO fertile ground for increasing support.
No thanks to you 'go-it-alone' Goomers.
Posted by: Teacher's Pet | October 11, 2009 at 04:00 PM
Well, I'd say we have as much chance of gettin gmore troops from NATO as we do of getting the Olympics held in Chicago.
Teacher's Pet I take the love of the world with the same degree of seriousness I took when teenage biys told me they'd respect me in the morning.
Posted by: clarice | October 11, 2009 at 04:11 PM
Get it right, we're JOMers, not goomers.
Posted by: narciso | October 11, 2009 at 04:22 PM
"ndicates more confidence we now have adults in charge,"
I thought SNL was fact checking this garbage?
Posted by: Pagar | October 11, 2009 at 04:27 PM
I've got to know right now; will Sarkozy and EuroCo increase commitment for fear of jihad rather than love of Obama?
==================================
Posted by: OK, I already know. | October 11, 2009 at 04:46 PM
Obama's rounding second, but doesn't have the ball!
==========================
Posted by: I'm trying to mangle my metaphor as much as he's mangling policy. | October 11, 2009 at 04:48 PM
First of all there is no such thing as "international troops". There is the United States Armed Forces - you know guys with real guns and bullets and helicopters. Then there are the guys with tents, saline drips, well drilling rigs, portable school houses, food warehouse personnel, etc.
In order to win this and bring security to Afghanistan (if that is the objective - does anyone know what that can be?) you need to brace up, augment and bring the power lethal and final force. If that is 25K or 40K or 130K - then so be it. But International force? Is that like the power of a Nobel Prize or an Olympic win?
Posted by: Jack is Back! | October 11, 2009 at 05:36 PM
International troops? We already can't get the Germans to honor their agreements for ISAF contributions, and most of those who showed up from Germany were unfit to fight. In fact the large proportion of the "troops" sent from NATO allies are not even combat troops. They're REMFs.
But you know who IS ponying up? The Eastern Euros. You know, the ones that Dear Leader's patented Smart Power (Not available in stores! Act now!) screwed on missile defense.
As for current polling, please show your work on both the polls and who the hell the adults in question are. Because I'm not seeing any adults running things, and I'm not seeing any numbers suggesting anything other than failure.
What I'm seeing is a bunch of know-it-all snarky seventh graders who lied their way into office, and have now realized they can't handle the job. And the American public is beginning to realize it too. Hopefully before too many more people will have to die while Barry Obastard dithers.
So shove it, troll.
Posted by: Soylent Red | October 11, 2009 at 05:51 PM
In case you didn't see it --Diane Feinstein is saying that O should stop dithering and send McChrystal the troops he needs.
Posted by: clarice | October 11, 2009 at 05:55 PM
This is the transcript, which doesn't carry the full flavor,
Posted by: narciso | October 11, 2009 at 06:18 PM
In the LUN
Posted by: narciso | October 11, 2009 at 06:27 PM
making NATO fertile ground for increasing support
*snort*
NATO -- outside the US -- has nothing else to send. Even what they've sent so far depends on US air support, transport, and supply.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | October 11, 2009 at 06:56 PM
"European respect for the current administration is at a highwater mark,(unless the BUSH flatline was an anomoly) and the current Prez' polling indicates more confidence we now have adults in charge, making NATO fertile ground for increasing support."
You jest,they are screaming to get out,just ring that bell and it would be like the end of term,with no dance.
Support in Britain is at a low ebb There is no enthusiasm for the Afghan war.The public support the troops,but regard the government as something you get on your shoe walking the dog. If you think that we are willing to get our young people killed whilst home grown fanatics are given free reign,think again.
The Euros do not want to fight,the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty will see a new EU policy and those boys be gone.
Do you think that Captain Indecisive inspires confidence, you should check the reading on your rectal thermometer,you're brain dead.
Posted by: PeterUK | October 11, 2009 at 07:00 PM
Kim.
"I've got to know right now; will Sarkozy and EuroCo increase commitment for fear of jihad rather than love of Obama?"
Man of the European countries have large Muslim populations the have to keep on side. For us Jihad starts at home.
Posted by: PeterUK | October 11, 2009 at 07:06 PM
Trouble ahead, trouble behind,
Obama Jones you'd better Khyber Pass.
=====================
Posted by: Canter on down that dark defile. | October 11, 2009 at 07:22 PM
There is the United States Armed Forces - you know guys with real guns and bullets and helicopters. Then there are the guys with tents, saline drips, well drilling rigs, portable school houses, food warehouse personnel, etc.
Jack, that's just wrong. The Poles, the Czechs, the Brits and the Aussies have real fighting men on the ground.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 11, 2009 at 08:33 PM
No thanks to you 'go-it-alone' Goomers.
I seem to remember that a lot of those European nations were perfectly happy to vote with the US on a bunch of UN resolutions against Sadaam and then chickened out when it came time for action.
Yeah, we certainly don't want to do without their respect.
Posted by: PD | October 11, 2009 at 08:53 PM
"Do you think that Captain Indecisive inspires confidence, you should check the reading on your rectal thermometer,you're brain dead."
Nominated for best line of the day!
Posted by: Pagar | October 11, 2009 at 09:23 PM
I second that!
Posted by: clarice | October 11, 2009 at 09:29 PM
I wonder if TP was groping for GOMER?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 11, 2009 at 11:41 PM
If things don't go as we like in the election, can't we tell the politicians in afghanistan to stick it?
Posted by: Douglas | October 12, 2009 at 01:54 AM
Charlie Colorado,
Poor little dupe. Turn off Fox News and read icasualties.org to find where your rapidly dwindling allies and your "alliance managers" are. As we all witness preps for the biggest pair of bugouts in modern history, tell us again who is "manning up"!
Posted by: rdmntfrd | October 12, 2009 at 05:48 AM
Wow, an unabashedly pro-al Qaeda troll. Don't see many of those.
Posted by: bgates | October 12, 2009 at 06:03 AM
Boy, doesn't the right look like a bunch of idiots now.
We had President Obama take the mission in Afghanistan seriously for the first time, he set a brand new strategy back in March, he hand pick his General, he met with his General, he had long, drawn out meetings with his war council. He pondered, he thought long and hard. This was life and death, war and peace, the weighty decision to deploy 40,000 soldiers to battle a difficult foe, lives were in the balance.
Obviously showing an astute military mind and thinking strategically, he then pounced and went public and boldly proclaimed:
HE'S ENDING DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL.
Posted by: Pops | October 12, 2009 at 06:17 AM
Pops - and the gays aren't happy LUN
He is even losing THAT battle.
Posted by: Janet | October 12, 2009 at 06:27 AM
No pajamas!?. My God, I won't be able to type.
============================
Posted by: Running the country is a serious business. | October 12, 2009 at 06:57 AM
Just like BigGovernment and ACORN, it appears some serious investigations need to be done on leftist monetary motives for opposing the Iraq war.
LUN - Peter Galbraith and Kurdish oil
Like Soros and Brazilian oil?
Al Gore and "green energy", carbon trading?
It is always - follow the money.
Posted by: Janet | October 12, 2009 at 07:33 AM
Gee, I'm glad the world loves us now....show me the difference. And the wonders that obama and pelosi have brought to my country....severe emotional depression, sense of hopelessness, tanked economy, college grads with no jobs, families with no jobs or hope of ones, small businesses, bust, big businesses raided by obama and nationalized.....I guess it is time for me to take a pill and fade away.
Posted by: J | October 12, 2009 at 08:57 AM
Regarding the "minimum" we have to look at Office Space. Are you interested in just doing the minimum?
Posted by: Harrison | October 13, 2009 at 12:04 PM