The US agrees: only a 'surge' can beat Taliban | WHAT REALLY HAPPENED

The US agrees: only a 'surge' can beat Taliban

American officials have backed the view of General Sir David Richards, the new head of the British Army, that a "surge" is needed in Afghanistan to beat the Taliban.

The Independent revealed yesterday that General Richards would replace General Sir Richard Dannatt as the head of the Army – he will take over next summer – and disclosed that the new commander believed 30,000 more troops would be needed to fight the Taliban. He is seeking 5,000 extra British troops.

"The numbers in the Afghan army will be raised from 65,000 to 134,000 over a five-year period," he added.

Webmaster's Commentary: 

Another 65,000 troop increase over a 5 year period?

Let that sink in for a second.

We've been in Afghanistan for 7 years at this point, and the thinking is that this catastrophe of occupation and aerial bombardment is going to go on for another 5 years?!?.

The US's own military protocol indicates that we will need at least 400,000 soldiers to successfully manage this occupation. Even with the 134,000 troop strength they are talking about here, we will still be 267,000 soldiers short of the number necessary to actually do the job.

And the troops will not get to Afghanistan anywhere nearly soon enough to be effective against the Taliban.