Top U.S. general in Afghanistan disagrees with McCain: “The word I don’t use for Afghanistan is ‘surge.’”
Top U.S. general in Afghanistan disagrees with McCain: “The word I don’t use for Afghanistan is ‘surge.’”
In last Friday’s presidential debate, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said that “the same strategy” that Gen. David Petraeus implemented in Iraq is “going to have to be employed in Afghanistan.” But McCain’s claim was undercut yesterday when Gen. David D. McKiernan, the new top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, “stated emphatically that no Iraq-style “surge” of forces will end the conflict there“:
Speaking in Washington yesterday, McKiernan described Afghanistan as “a far more complex environment than I ever found in Iraq.” The country’s mountainous terrain, rural population, poverty, illiteracy, 400 major tribal networks and history of civil war all make for unique challenges, he said.
“The word I don’t use for Afghanistan is ’surge,’ ” McKiernan stressed, saying that what is required is a “sustained commitment” to a counterinsurgency effort that could last many years and would ultimately require a political, not military, solution.
McKiernan also said that he doubts that “another facet of the Iraq strategy” — the U.S. military’s programs to recruit tribes to oppose insurgents — can be duplicated in Afghanistan. “I don’t want the military to be engaging the tribes,” said McKiernan.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
29 Responses to “Top U.S. general in Afghanistan disagrees with McCain: “The word I don’t use for Afghanistan is ‘surge.’””
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Top U.S. general in Afghanistan disagrees with McCain: ‘The word I don’t use for Afghanistan is surge.’
McCain: "My friends, when I say 'surge' I mean a surge of commitment, patriotism, and as my good friend Joe Lieberman would say, chutzpah.
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:33 amSounds to me like the general is getting caught up in "gotcha journalism"...
/snark
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:34 amPredicted response:
McCain: "I never said that. Not once did I call for a surge in Afghanistan."
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:36 amWar College's formula for occupation says over 600,000 troops needed for country the size of Iraq. They just aren't fighting us at the moment.
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:38 amThe problem is that we don't really understand the tribal kind of societies that exist in Afganistan. They are back in the early Middle Ages in terms of how the country is organized. You are not fighting one fight, but many. The Russians learned this and got their sorry behinds back home.
It would be nice if we had just focused on destroying the terrorist training camps and finding Osama Bin Laden, but Bush and Company had another idea. They obviously did not read history before making decisions. This is just one of their failures, and we are left holding the bag.
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:41 amKeith Says:
War College’s formula for occupation says over 600,000 troops needed for country the size of Iraq. They just aren’t fighting us at the moment.
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:38 am
_____
That's what happens when we pay them not to. Iraqis know which side the khubz is buttered on...
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:46 amOnce, just once, I would love for someone to press McCain or Palin to define EXACTLY what 'victory in Iraq or Afghanistan means.
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:47 amI want to see this victory in Iraq. Show it to us.
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:56 amand Palin knows what we should do militarily anywhere because why - her son is in the military?
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:56 amSir Sherard Cowper-Coles, a Foreign Office heavyweight and Britain’s Ambassador to Afghanistan said in a leaked memo
“In the short term we should dissuade the American presidential candidates from getting more bogged down in Afghanistan . . . The American strategy is doomed to fail.”
The British government is protesting that the memo as published is distorted —“a parody”.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article4860080.ece
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:57 amIf McCain can't remember what he said five minutes ago, then how can he possibly remember what happened to the Russians during the 'cold war' when they tried to fight a ground battle in Afghanistan? (Hint: they got their asses kicked by a bunch of desert guerillas)
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:57 amIn July, McCain called for a "surge" in Afghanistan
In her interview with CBS News' Katie Couric, McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, declared that "a surge in Afghanistan also will lead us to victory there, as it has proven to have done in Iraq."
“The word I don’t use for Afghanistan is ’surge,’ ” McKiernan stressed
Well, you know, Palin and McCain are just doing what are current fearless leader does: Listen To The Generals and Make Decisions Based On Conditions On The Ground.
Can't you libs see that!?
/sarcasm
October 2nd, 2008 at 11:03 amKhubz? Is that what Iraqis put in their toasters? Yeah we got 100,000 insurgent evil-doers on our payroll at $300 a month each. Isn't there a Nov.1 deadline for laying down of arms--that won't be met?
October 2nd, 2008 at 11:03 amunbelievable: they got their asses kicked by a bunch of desert guerillas)
armed with US Stingers to take out the Mil-24 "Hind-D" assualt choppers and sundry other weapons all secretly financed by a crazy Texas Democrat, Charlie Wilson. Forget the film, read the book.
October 2nd, 2008 at 11:04 am5th estate, the funny thing is that memo came from 1880!
October 2nd, 2008 at 11:05 am5th Estate, that film (as always when the US tells of Arghanistan) says that we began arming the Islamic fanatics AFTER the Soviets invaded. But the truth is we armed them first to CAUSE the Soviets to invade.
October 2nd, 2008 at 11:08 am5th Estate Says: armed with US Stingers to take out the Mil-24 “Hind-D” assualt choppers and sundry other weapons all secretly financed by a crazy Texas Democrat, Charlie Wilson. Forget the film, read the book.
The Russians certainly had their own technology to parallel what we were giving to Osama bin Laden. They should have had a psychological advantage having been one of the world's super powers at the time. The fact that they did makes it that much more of an ass-kicking.
October 2nd, 2008 at 11:11 amWonder "Surge" twins - Activate! Why don't Gramps and Barbie ask the Russians how their "surge" turned out during their 1980's military campaign in Afghanistan?
If ever there was proof of truth to the old saying that those who fail to learn from past mistakes are doomed to repeat them, it's the statements tumbling out of the mouths of these two dolts.
Just saying ...
October 2nd, 2008 at 11:24 amMcCain really needs a surge...in the polls.
The sewage he spews on a daily basis is circling the bowl as we speak.
Hey! What's that sound?
Ummm, I believe it's the sound of your credibility being flushed down the drain with your empty promises, Senator.
October 2nd, 2008 at 11:37 amTo bloody Hell with the War College, the politicians and anyone who believes we need to save Afghanistan. We should have only gone into Afghanistan to get bin Laden, followed him to his lair in Pakistan, then taken him out and left the Middle East.
How many times do we need to learn this lesson? Remember The Crusades, remember Russia?
The Bush administration is trying to punt beyond 1/20/09 but then we will need to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan and open up bread lines and soup kitchens throughout the United States and The World.
Kabul is surrounded. Poppies are growing throughout the country. Corruption is a way of life in Afghanistan. We need to get out now!
October 2nd, 2008 at 11:37 amthe "surge" = bribery. same thing that calmed down iraq. we start making multimillionaires out of taliban leaders like we have al-queda in iraq and i'm sure they'll be ALOT nicer...
October 2nd, 2008 at 11:37 amI already know McCains response:
MCCAIN: Look. It doesnt matter what you call it. The important thing is that the strategy succeeds. I know how to win wars. I've been to Afghanistan many times and I know the region. I know president Karzai and I know what the Afghan people want. And I know General McKiernan I've met him many times. Hes an excellent commander, one of the very best. The fact is we have succeeded in Iraq. The surge in Iraq which senator Obama opposed, is a success thanks to General Petreaus leadership and the additional boots on the ground which I called for even though it was not the popular thing to do. And I know what we succeeded with in Iraq we will succeed with in Afghanistan
October 2nd, 2008 at 11:40 am23, galmud,
You nailed it...those could very well be McChurian's words we hear tonight on the news.
October 2nd, 2008 at 11:54 amDoes John McCain even understand what the surge was all about? In debate he called it a strategy and said Obama didn't know what he was talking about when he called it a tactic. Well, guess what. The strategy was to buy time so the Iraqi's could settle their political differences and the surge was the primary tactic for achieving that goal.
While the tactic has had a great deal of success, helped along greatly because of a ceasefire by al Sadr, the strategy has been somewhat less successful.
Since McCain didn't understand the strategy in Iraq I think it is safe to assume that he doesn't know what the strategy needs to be in Afghanistan. As for Palin, she is just McCain's echo chamber.
October 2nd, 2008 at 12:09 pmI love how even progressive blogs report from a standpoint that McCain has a supposed advantage in foreign and military affairs. He is dangerous. The military is frightened of him (read soldier voter suppression tactics). The world is unified in its prayers he loses.
October 2nd, 2008 at 12:55 pmBeing a genuine hero doesn't make one smart or a strategic thinker!
October 2nd, 2008 at 12:58 pmKeith Says: 5th estate, the funny thing is that memo came from 1880!
ROFL! And I was taught about Afghanistan in History at school ( Iraq not so much) but Blair apparently wasn't paying attention (he's 7 years older than me.)
October 2nd, 2008 at 1:45 pmKeith...
Arrrghanistan!
Unbelievable and Keith and together...
Yes, no, maybe, not necessarily in that order. Ironically, whoever it transpired the Russians went in mechanized and equipped and structured for a strategic fight.
The US then backed the Mujaheddin in their "asymmetric" tactical response.
20-ish years later and the US goes in just as the Russians did and the Afghanis responded in the exact same way! Duh!
It would be hilarious if it weren't so tragic and stupid.
October 2nd, 2008 at 1:54 pmoh John Mcain just need a wonderful Life Alert
October 2nd, 2008 at 7:27 pm