US Commander: More Embedded Troops Will Break Afghan Stalemate | WHAT REALLY HAPPENED

US Commander: More Embedded Troops Will Break Afghan Stalemate

Gen. Joseph Votel, the head of Central Command, expressed confidence at the ongoing US escalation in Afghanistan, saying he is “seeing some positive trends” in the war, and thinks the US is on the right track, some 16 years into the war.

Votel cited the increased number of US troops embedded with Afghan forces, nominally as “advisers,” as an important part of the move to “break the stalemate” in Afghanistan, which he was confident would happen.

The “stalemate” conceit is something Pentagon officials have claimed for a long time, explaining that the war isn’t being won because it’s in a stalemate. In reality, US-backed forces have been losing ground for years, and hold less territory than at any time since the 2001 invasion.

Webmaster's Commentary: 

General Votel, a word please; we are not leaving Afghanistan because the US government and military are collectively terrified that we are losing yet another war we had no business getting into in the first place.

Afghanistan is not characterized as "the graveyard of empires" for no good reason; the British, and later the Russians found that out.

It is time, sir, for the American miilitary and politicans to cut their losses here, and bring US and NATO troops home as quickly as safely possible, then negotiate with whatever government is left in Kabul for the pipeline and mineral rights.

You do, sir, understand that it was the disagreement on payment for the pipeline rights, coupled with the instability of the Taliban government which got the US military in Afghanistan in the first place, RIGHT?!?

As reported by in June, 2010:

B. What Was the Motive for the Invasion? This conclusion is reinforced by reports indicating that the United States had made the decision to invade Afghanistan two months before the 9/11 attacks. At least part of the background to this decision was the United States’ long-time support for UNOCAL’s proposed pipeline, which would transport oil and natural gas from the Caspian Sea region to the Indian Ocean through Afghanistan and Pakistan.15 This project had been stymied through the 1990s because of the civil war that had been going on in Afghanistan since the Soviet withdrawal in 1989. In the mid-1990s, the US government had supported the Taliban with the hope that its military strength would enable it to unify the country and provide a stable government, which could protect the pipeline. By the late 1990s, however, the Clinton administration had given up on the Taliban.16 When the Bush administration came to power, it decided to give the Taliban one last chance. During a four-day meeting in Berlin in July 2001, representatives of the Bush administration insisted that the Taliban must create a government of “national unity” by sharing power with factions friendly to the United States. The US representatives reportedly said: “Either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs.”17 After the Taliban refused this offer, US officials told a former Pakistani foreign secretary that “military action against Afghanistan would go ahead . . . before the snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the latest.”18 And, indeed, given the fact that the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon occurred when they did, the US military was able to mobilize to begin its attack on Afghanistan by October 7. It appears, therefore, that the United States invaded Afghanistan for reasons far different from the official rationale, according to which we were there to capture or kill Osama bin Laden.

General Vogel, your statements here are tantamount to what can best be characterized as "magical thinking"; your troops, and this country, deserve far better than this!!


There Is No Choice !


US Commander: More Embedded Troops Will Break Afghan Stalemate

(*Why do you keep emphasising that There Is No Choice , Logan ?
A legitimate question deserving a legitimate answer !
I say it because Trump says it regularly , usually to defend one of his less than popular administrative decisions .
But Logan , one may suggest . It's really a kind of nothingburger dripping in special sauce , like adding a little fire and fury to his otherwise ho-hum decisions .
Really ?
Wait until he starts going balistic about reinstating the draft , and all the Pentagon Generals start posturing like they're opposed to him , again , to bolster your support for the outsider/victim . Then you'll find out what There Is No Choice really means .
The Day The Draft Gets Reinstated , because they're going to need More Embedded Troops To Break The Afghan Stalemate , and they're going to need to get them from somewhere !
TRUMP in 2020
There Is No Choice)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.