Holbrooke: US Combat Troops to be Phased Out of Afghanistan by 2014

[Turborama]

Source: VOA

The U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, says U.S. and NATO combat forces will be phased out of Afghanistan by the end of 2014 and the handover to Afghan security forces will begin in the middle of next year. Holbrooke's remarks came during a discussion with a group of journalists in Pakistan.

Ambassador Holbrooke acknowledged there is confusion in the region over the U.S. military commitment to Afghanistan.

U.S. President Barack Obama has set July 2011 as the date to begin withdrawing troops from Afghanistan.

However Holbrooke and other American officials are now stressing the combat mission is not likely to end until 2014. "The substantial combat forces should be phased out at the end of 2014, four years from now. Some withdrawals, the beginning of transition, will occur starting in July of next year and that process will not be completed until the end of 2014."

Read more: http://www.voanews.com/english/news/Holbrooke-US-Combat-Troops-to-be-Phased-Out-of-Afghanistan-by-2014-107969594.html

[onehandle]

1. How many non-combat troops will be there forever? We have 50k+ in Iraq.

And they will be there forever.

[ProudDad]

17. Not to mention (and nobody does) twice as many "contractors"

costing 5 times as much per unit...

[gratuitous]

2. Absolutely, 100%, no-doubt-about it TRUE

If you call that guy bristling with body armor, personal weaponry and the latest and greatest in battle gear a "combat soldier" on December 31, 2014, and on January 1, 2015, you call that exact same guy an "advisor" or something besides a "combat soldier," hey presto! They've all been phased out.

Now, if you're looking for a substantive change in what's going on, you'd be far better served to hunt unicorns or frumious bandersnatches.

[de novo]

3. Sure they will.

Look at all the wiggle language in his statement: "The substantial combat forces should be phased out at the end of 2014, four years from now."

Substantial is not all. Combat forces, as we learned from Iraq does not mean all, nor does it actually mean the remainders are not combat forces.

FOUR more (highly qualified) years of this fucking war, with no mention of an actual end! Un fucking believable.

[ronnie624]

4. I wonder how many "contractors" will be there, after 2014. n/t

[Jackpine Radical]

5. And they will no doubt be phased in to Iran

just as soon as we get done nuking it.

[NeoConsSuck]

19. Yes, we need to be out of Afghanistan by 2014

because at that time, we will be in a full scale war with ________________ (fill in the blank).

The military-industrial complex is never going away, if anything, it becomes larger every year.

[ronnie624]

6. "In 1989, after the Soviet Union left Afghanistan,

the United States lost all interest in Afghanistan and turned its back on the region with results that led directly to 9-11 and to the war today. So what I want to be clear on is, we are not going to do that again."

So terrorism is a result of less intervention, not more?

I don't believe it. In fact, I think 9/11 can be traced back to the CIA's organization of proxy war in Afghanistan, which resulted in the Soviet invasion and the rise to political prominence of extremist forces, like the Taliban.

[dreamnightwind]

20. Thank you

Excellent point. People like Holbrooke will never understand your point, nor even honestly think about it.

[hughee99]

7. Or at least that's the plan until early 2013.

Shortly after the 2012 election, but well before the 2014 midterms, they will announce this date is moving back further, to give people time to forget about this before the 2014 midterms. Either that or they'll do the old "All combat troops have left, the remaining 100K troops are for "support".

[Bragi]

10. Exactly

In 2013, President Palin will start to redefine the notion of "combat troops" so as to allow the US to leave contractors and mercenaries there to do in situ battlefield training and mentoring until say, 2017, right after her 2016 re-election campaign.

[hughee99]

12. "President Palin", now you're just talking crazy...

We should be so lucky as to have Palin run against Obama in '12.

[Bragi]

13. Probably so, but it makes the point

My point is that I think Obama is doing himself in by his failure to end the war in Afghanistan that just about everyone who voted for him knows to be a pointless war that will produce nothing of benefit to the U.S or anyone else.

I am quite saddened that this is so, and I'm coming to accept that the war is as much a political mistake as a foreign policy error. It is a cancer eating away at his Presidency, for which he has no-one but himself to blame.

[DesertDiamond]

8. (...if we have enough control of the country to get our pipeline through...)

[Roma]

9. Oh sure, and the new president will take the credit for ending

the war and bringing the troops home.

[Bragi]

11. Yes, President Palin the Peacemaker /nt

[lark]

14. Wash your mouth out with soap!!!

President Palin, is such a bad curse phrase.

[Bragi]

18. My tongue went black and fell out /nt

[rhett o rick]

15. Wait, was that a "cross my heart and hope to die" promise? nm

[ProudDad]

16. To be replaced by permanent occupation force... (n/t)