Obama's plans for Afghanistan.

[ColbertWatcher]

Poll question: Obama's plans for Afghanistan.

Yesterday it was announced that General David McKiernan would be fired as commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan (LA Times)

Reasons given were:

"... growing criticism in military circles that the U.S. war effort has been suffering from stale ideas and inadequate innovation."

and

"... {a} lack of bold, new operational plans and a reluctance to adapt successful strategies from Iraq ..."

When discussing the change in command, Secretary Gates said,

"Today we have a new policy set by our new president. We have a new strategy, a new mission and a new ambassador. I believe that new military leadership also is needed."

In addition to the increased U.S. military presence, what do you think Obama's plans for Afghanistan will involve?

[Pirate Smile]

1. Here is an article with more details - sounds like special ops is taking over.

http://www.slate.com/id/2218160/

It's Obama's War Now
The ouster of Afghanistan commander David McKiernan could make—or break—the Obama presidency.
By Fred Kaplan
Posted Monday, May 11, 2009, at 6:45 PM ET

Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced this afternoon that he has "asked for the resignation" of Gen. David McKiernan, commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, and that he plans to replace him with Gen. Stanley McChrystal.

This is a very big deal.

McKiernan's ouster signals a dramatic shift in U.S. strategy for the war in Afghanistan. And it means that the war is now, unequivocally, "Obama's war." The president has decided to set a new course, not merely to muddle through the next six months or so.

First, let's clarify a few things. When a Cabinet officer asks for a subordinate's resignation, it means that he's firing the guy. This doesn't happen very often in the U.S. military. McKiernan had another year to go as commander. (When Gen. George Casey's strategy clearly wasn't working in Iraq, President George W. Bush let him serve out his term, then promoted him to Army chief of staff.) Gates also made it clear he wasn't acting on a personal whim. He said that he took the step after consulting with Gen. David Petraeus, commander of U.S. Central Command; Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and President Barack Obama. According to one senior official, Gates went over to Afghanistan last week for the sole purpose of giving McKiernan the news face-to-face.
Gates emphasized at a press conference today that McKiernan didn't do anything specifically wrong but that "fresh thinking" was needed urgently. The United States couldn't just wait until the current commander's term ran out.

An intellectual battle is now raging within the Army between an "old guard" that thinks about war in conventional, force-on-force terms and a "new guard" that focuses more on "asymmetric conflicts" and counterinsurgency.

McKiernan is an excellent general in the old mold. McChrystal, who rose through the ranks as a special-forces officer, is an excellent general in the new mold. He has also worked closely with Gates and Petraeus. (In his press conference, Gates referred to McChrystal's "unique skill set in counterinsurgency.") For the past year, McChrystal has been director of the Pentagon's Joint Staff. More pertinently, for five years before that, he was commander of the Joint Special Operations Command, a highly secretive operation that hunted down and killed key jihadist fighters, including, most sensationally, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq.

Last fall, Bob Woodward reported in the Washington Post that JSOC played a crucial, unsung role in the tactical success of the Iraqi "surge." Using techniques of what McChrystal called "collaborative warfare," JSOC combined intelligence intercepts with quick, precision strikes to "eliminate" large numbers of key insurgent leaders.

[readmoreoften]

2. According to the enlisted troops I've been talking to, not a dimes worth of difference.

They hope Obama is going to END THE WARS. There is no such thing as a "peace keeping troop." When you are patrolling for civilian "insurgents" anyone on the ground is both a potential target and potential combat soldier.

Ramping up war operations in Afghanistan will do nothing. You can't win a war against a shadow enemy--not a "shadowy" enemy, but an enemy that is nothing but shadows. The only enemy that has developed are resisters who are pissed off at what we've done to their families and communities. There is no military solution for that.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. Get out of Iraq and Afghanistan now. No more funding (lost) colonial wars.

We lost. Come home. Get over it.

[ColbertWatcher]

4. Okay, I added that in there. n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. Thanks. Now I was able to vote.

[atreides1]

6. I Don't Know and Neither Do You

The fact that they have now put in charge a controversial general, who is alledged to have authorized the torture of at least two detainees that died, could very well mean that in the future captured insurgents will be taking flying lessons out of helicopters.

Maybe even another My Lai.

Perhaps the assasination of the country's elected leader who refuses to kowtow to the US, afterall it worked so well in Vietnam!


I don't have a damn clue what this man is planning, I keep hearing words, which only shows he can talk a good game, but unlike others who worship at his feet, I need see something a little more substantial.

That's just the way I am, you don't like it get stuffed!!!

[ColbertWatcher]

7. Don't forget his investigation into the Tillman affair ...

... see the link in the OP.