Afghanistan

Re: More NATO forces needed for south Afghanistan

Deano said:
There are so many good people here...
Click to expand...

Well, I understand and believe believe that. I am not a hippy who is against all Americans. I wish more countries would help other nations as much as they have done. My sharp comments towards them were mostly meant to bring more balance in the total picture, but I surely realize their value.

Deano said:
To elaborate on the previous post; I DO know that US Marines in Kandahar would make a huge difference, but I also wondered about the possibility of the French Foreign Legion being sent there. This is a very strong fighting force and I think would do very well there or anywhere else they are sent. I do not quite understand France's stance with employing so many other nationalities within one of their most elite fighting forces but that is not for me to pass judgment on. If it works for them, then more power to them. I have praised and welcome any nations help in this struggle.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid I have understood the term French Foreign Legion in a wrong way. My apologies for the ignorance from my part.
 
Re: More NATO forces needed for south Afghanistan

No problem there Forostar. The FFL is kind of a hard concept to wrap your head around. All I do know is that they are very tough and professional. I do know that they are offered French citizenship for their service too. How this works with other loyalties and internal French politics, I have no idea. It would be an interesting subject to learn more about.
 
Re: More NATO forces needed for south Afghanistan

I actually thought it was some 'fake' kind of army, like e.g. the Salvation Army. That's why I understood your post totally wrong.
 
Re: More NATO forces needed for south Afghanistan

No, they're quite real and quite good. They have been active in the region before.
 
Re: More NATO forces needed for south Afghanistan

Gates: U.S. to send more troops to Afghanistan

By ROBERT BURNS The Associated Press
Sat. Apr 5 - 4:47 AM

MUSCAT, Oman — The United States intends to send many more combat forces to Afghanistan next year regardless of whether troop levels in Iraq are cut further this year, U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates said Friday.

It is the first time the U.S. administration has made such a commitment for 2009.

Gates told reporters while flying to this Persian Gulf country from a NATO summit in Bucharest, Romania, that U.S. President George W. Bush made the pledge to other allied leaders at the summit on Thursday.

Bush was not specific about the number of additional troops that would go to Afghanistan in 2009, Gates said.

The United States has about 31,000 troops there now — the most since the war in Afghanistan began in October 2001 — and has been pressing the allies to contribute more.

Until now, the heavy commitment of U.S. forces in Iraq has been a constraint on the ability to increase U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan. But Gates said he did not believe that would be the case next year.

Although he said many more U.S. troops will go to Afghanistan, Gates argued it’s too early to decide how many additional combat forces the United States should plan on sending in 2009.

It would depend on several things, he said, including the extent of U.S. and NATO success on the battlefield this year, as well as the impact of a new senior U.S. commander. Gen. David McKiernan is due to replace Gen. Dan McNeill this spring as the top overall commander in Afghanistan.

McNeill has said he believes he needs another three brigades — two for combat and one for training. That translates to roughly 7,500 to 10,000 additional troops. The Bush administration has no realistic hope of getting NATO allies to send such large numbers.

McKiernan told Congress on Thursday that while he can’t yet say how many more troops he would want there, he believes he needs additional combat and aviation forces, intelligence and surveillance capabilities, and training and mentoring teams.

Bush’s national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, told reporters Thursday any extra U.S. combat troop deployments would be in southern Afghanistan — where fighting is heaviest and where British and Canadian troops have been taking the lead in confronting the Taliban.

Gates said he believed deploying to the south was a logical possibility but it was too early to say they would go there. "I put this in front of the president as a possibility, as something that I thought we ought to be willing to say and do," Gates said.

He said a pledge by Bush would have extra effect at a summit where France announced it will send several hundred combat troops to Afghanistan this year.

The French decision was praised by Bush.

The developments enabled Prime Minister Stephen Harper to declare at the summit that Canada’s conditions for keeping its troops in Afghanistan until 2011 have been met.

Canada has been demanding 1,000 more NATO troops as well as helicopters and unmanned spy planes to bolster the Canadian contingent of about 2,500 troops serving in the Afghan mission.

Gates also said he expected a Bush decision "fairly soon" on a proposal to reduce U.S. soldiers’ combat tours from 15 months to 12 months, a move the U.S. Army deems urgent in order to relieve stress on troops and their families.

Gates indicated for the first time publicly that there are drawbacks.

"It really is whether we’re prepared — and ultimately the president — to sign up to something that clearly imposes some limits on what we could do in the future," Gates said.

He was referring to the fact that 15-month tours enabled the army to build up in Iraq in 2007 — a cornerstone of Bush’s revised Iraq strategy known as the "surge" — with the limited number of ground combat brigades in its ranks.

"So the bottom line is, we’re all still looking at that," he added.

His comment suggested a link between reducing tour lengths and the prospect of substantially expanding the U.S. troop presence in Afghanistan next year.

Such an expansion could make it difficult, if not impossible, for the army to maintain troop rotations for both wars in 2009 and beyond if it is unable to substantially cut forces in Iraq in the near term, while tour lengths are shortened by three months.

Gates said he advised Bush to make the pledge in Bucharest even though the movement of additional troops would ultimately be a decision for the next president who will take office in January. "The question arises: how can we say that about 2009?" Gates said.

"All I would say is, I believe . . . this is one area where there is very broad bipartisan support in the United States for being successful" in Afghanistan. By some accounts, progress of the alliance campaign against the Taliban insurgency has stalled.

"I think that no matter who is elected president, they would want to be successful in Afghanistan. So I think this was a very safe thing for him to say," Gates said.


-------------------------------------------------


So there we are.  More troops in the less violent areas to free up US troops to fight in the South.  Not that there's anything wrong with it.  Maybe we can finally make some progress once we get some more soldiers there.
 
Re: More NATO forces needed for south Afghanistan

Come on Canada! Run with US; You know we're not that bad. DEATH TO ALL JIHADIS!!!!
 
Re: More NATO forces needed for south Afghanistan

Now let's hope that the rebuilding will go as swiftly as the fighting.
 
Re: More NATO forces needed for south Afghanistan

Washington - At a meeting of the World Bank in Washington, Dutch Development Minister Bert Koenders has presented a series of proposals to improve coordination of international aid provided to Afghanistan. Mr Koenders said that international donors and the Afghan government should work more closely together, and added that the government in Kabul should be more directly involved in aid projects. The minister expects that this approach will yield better results in education, health care and agriculture. A World Bank delegation will travel to Afghanistan next week to discuss Mr Koenders' proposals.

source
 
Finally a politician who dares to say what I have been trying to point out:

Karzai demands say in policy decisions

Press Trust of India / Saturday, April 26, 2008 (New York)

Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai has strongly criticised the American and British conduct of the war in his country, and demanded that his government be given the lead in policy decisions.

In the interview to New York Times, Karzai said that he wanted the US American forces to stop arresting suspected Taliban and their sympathisers, asserting that these arrests and past mistreatment were discouraging Taliban from coming forward to lay down their arms.

Karzai said the real terrorist threat lay in sanctuaries of the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Pakistan.

''The war against terrorism is not in Afghan villages, the war against terrorism is elsewhere, and that's where the war should go,'' he told the Times, referring to the Taliban and Qaeda sanctuaries in Pakistan.

''There is no way but to close the sanctuaries,'' he said.

''Pakistan will have no peace, Pakistan's progress will suffer, so will Afghanistan's peace and progress, so will the world's. If you want to live, and live in peace, and work for prosperity, that has to happen. The sanctuaries must go,'' he said.

He blamed mistreatment by some warlords and the US forces for driving the Taliban out of the country, to Pakistan, where they regrouped and took up weapons again.

Karzai, however, expressed optimism over Afghanistan's path, and said that the change of government in Pakistan could bring progress against terrorism.

''We began on a very good note,'' he said of relations with the new government, led by the party of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, who was killed in December last year.

''The current government has the full backing of the military and intelligence circles in Pakistan and with the good intentions that they have, things will improve,'' Karzai said.

Karzai said he supported the Pakistani government's efforts to make peace with Taliban there who were not a threat to the rest of the world.

''But if the deal is with those that are hard-core terrorists, Al Qaeda, and are bent upon sooner or later again causing damage to Pakistan, and to Afghanistan and to the rest of the world, then that's wrong and we should definitely not do it,'' he said.

The president said that civilian casualties, which have dropped substantially since last year, needed to cease completely. For nearly two years the American-led coalition has refused to recognise the need to create a trained police force, he said, leading to a critical lack of law and order.

The comments came as Karzai is starting to point toward re-election next year, after six years in office, and the New York Times said it may be part of a political calculus to appear more assertive in his dealings with foreign powers as opponents line up to challenge him.

Karzai called for greater respect of Afghanistan's fierce independence and for more attention to be paid to building up the country than doing things for it.

''For the success of the world in Afghanistan, it would be better to recognize this inherent character in Afghanistan and work with it and support it,'' he was quoted as saying.

''Eventually, if the world is to succeed in Afghanistan, it will be by building the Afghan state, not by keeping it weak,'' he added.
 
....and as a gesture of thanks, the Taliban try to kill him (again).

All very nice sentiments but as mentioned before, he is essentually the President of Kabul. The warlords run the show elsewhere.
 
Germany Plans to Send 1,000 More Troops to Afghanistan

The German government plans to send 1,000 additional troops to Afghanistan by the end of this year, Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung announced on Tuesday, June 24. The issue is likely to be a political hot potato.

0,,3219866_4,00.jpg


The increase would bring German soldiers serving with NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) to 4,500. The extra soldiers are needed to fulfill Germany's mission in the country and for their own security, Jung said.

"The increase is necessary to give us more flexibility to respond to challenges," Jung said.

The German defense minister said he would be informing the German parliament, which has to sign off on the plans, later in the day. The Bundestag is set to vote on a mandate for the German Bundeswehr mission in Afghanistan this autumn.

As of July 1, Germany will take over responsibility for the rapid deployment forces in order to protect ISAF operations in northern Afghanistan. The German military would also like to increase involvement in training of Afghan soldiers.

Approval sure to spark debate

Any increase in troop numbers would require the approval of Germany's lower house of parliament, the Bundestag. Under the current parliamentary mandate, Germany is allowed to send no more than 3,500 troops to Afghanistan. That limit has been reached in recent months and Jung wants it increased when the mandate comes up for renewal in October.

He also wants the new mandate to run until December 2009, a move which would prevent the issue from being debated during the middle of next fall's election campaign.

While the left-right ruling coalition has approved past troop increases, the issue remains sensitive in Germany. Some opposition parties are critical of the mission and opinion polls show a large proportion of the German population against increased involvement.

Allies keep up pressure

NATO partners, particularly the United States, have pressured Germany to send more troops to Afghanistan. They also want more German soldiers sent to the dangerous south to help fight a resurgent Taliban. The parliamentary mandate does not allow German soldiers to take part in combat missions.

Jung said German troops would remain focused on the north. But the new mandate would also send 40 communications specialists in the south, a mission that Germany would share with Denmark.

There are about 60,000 foreign troops in Afghanistan, most of them part of the NATO-led ISAF force. Yet despite the heavy NATO involvement, some 60,000 people were killed in 2007, the deadliest year since the Taliban was forced from power in 2001.

German NATO General Egon Ramms this week said he urgently needs an additional 5,000 to 6,000 troops in Afghanistan.
 
Fantastic! I'm happy that this is occurring. The German's have been one of the strongest and most dedicated members of our coalition in these efforts.
 
Clearly, deploying an extra thousand men in support of a NATO mission is equivalent to a woman having more than 2 children in Germany which is equivalent to Nazism.  Facists!
 
Intelligence my ass, Mr. Nielson-Green:


More pain and misery in the history of mankind
Sometime it seems more like
The blind leading the blind​

Afghan government says 47 civilians killed when US bombed wedding party

afghan_2_385x185_366804a.jpg

Afghan hospital workers carry an injured boy after he was hurt in the airstrike

afghan_1_385x185_366773a.jpg

Doctors treat another of the injured in Jalalabad city following the airstrike


An Afghan government investigation has concluded that 45 women and children and two men were killed when a US aircraft bombed a wedding party in eastern Afghanistan last Sunday.

The nine-man investigation team appointed by the Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, found that only civilians were hit during the airstrike.

Burhanullah Shinwari, the leader of the investigation team and the deputy speaker of Afghanistan's Upper House, said: "We found that 47 civilians, mostly women and children, were killed in the airstrikes and another nine were wounded."

The claims of civilian casualties were initially strongly rebutted by the US military. A US military statement released last Sunday claimed: "intelligence revealed a large group of militants operating in Deh Bala district. Coalition forces identified the militants in a mountainous region and used precision air strikes to kill them."

This morning, a military spokesman said that a separate US investigation into the incident was ongoing.

A US military spokesman, Lieutenant-Colonel Rumi Nielson-Green, told The Times: "We don't have a position on this. There is an ongoing investigation, which has not concluded yet. Any loss of civilian life is tragic and we go to great lengths to avoid civilian deaths. Certainly, I can say that no civilians were targeted."

Local officials in Deh Bala produced graphic testimony of what they said was a bomb strike on a party of around 70 or 80 civilians accompanying a wedding party on foot.

The Governor of Deh Bala, Haji Amishah Gul, told The Times: "The attack happened at 6.30am. Just two of the dead are men, the rest are women and children. The bride is among the dead."

Injured civilians later arrived at the main hospital in Jalalabad, repeating claims that a wedding party had been hit near the village of Ka Chona.

One of the injured, who identified himself as Kerate, said that a group of around 70 people, mostly women, were escorting the bride to meet her groom, as local tradition dictates. He said: "We were bombed. I couldn't figure out what had happened and I went unconscious. When I woke up, I saw lots of people killed and injured."

The incident in Deh Bala came two days after another claim that US forces killed 15 civilians during an airstrike on two vehicles in the province of Nuristan. A charity, the International Medical Corps (IMC), reported the deaths of three of its medical workers in the incident. A statement on the IMC website said that they died with local villagers while trying to flee fighting in Waygal Dstrict after US forces issued a warning to local people to evacuate the area. US military officials said an investigation into the incident was still ongoing.

Civilian deaths are a deeply emotive issue amongst ordinary Afghans and one on which President Karzai has directly criticised Western forces on numerous occasions.

An early public relations disaster for Western forces was the bombing of a wedding party in Uruzgan Province in July 2002 after US pilots mistook celebratory gunfire for an attack.

Figures released at the end of June by the United Nations claimed that around 700 Afghan civilians lost their lives in the first half of the year in violence, an increase of around two thirds on the same period last year.
 
Coalition 'bombs Afghan police'

At least 13 Afghan police and civilians have died in two incidents involving international forces, officials say.

Four Afghan police and five civilians died in an apparently mistaken air strike by international coalition forces in Farah province.

Separately, the Nato-led Isaf said it had "accidentally" killed at least four civilians in Paktika province.

_44847393_afghan_farah_paktika_2007.gif


The incidents are the latest in a series of controversial clashes involving foreign troops.

They come as US Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is in Afghanistan as part of an overseas tour.

Mr Obama, who wants to increase US troop levels in Afghanistan, was due to meet Afghan President Hamid Karzai on Sunday.

Mr Karzai has said no civilian casualty is acceptable.

'Mistaken identity'

The BBC's Martin Patience, in Kabul, says there was darkness and much confusion when the Farah province fighting took place in the early hours of Sunday morning.

The police had opened fire on a joint convoy of Afghan national army and foreign troops believing - incorrectly - that they were Taleban fighters.

The deputy governor of Farah province, Younus Rasuli, said the foreign troops had not informed police they were coming.

On hearing the gunfire, a number of locals had rushed to support the police, our correspondent says.

Nato and US coalition officials are investigating the reports.

In Paktika province, Isaf said at least four and possibly as many as seven civilians had been killed when one of its units fired two mortar rounds which landed about 1km from their intended target.

"ISAF deeply regrets this accident, and an investigation as to the exact circumstances of this tragic event is now underway," it said in a statement.

Series of incidents

The issue of civilian casualties at the hands of foreign forces is a hugely sensitive issue in Afghanistan.

In the past, the Afghan President Hamid Karzai has said that no civilian casualty is acceptable.

Last week, local tribal elders claimed dozens of people, including civilians, died in a Nato-led attack in Herat province, though Nato strongly denied this.

Earlier US forces admitted killing eight civilians in Farah province after they were attacked in Bakwa district.

And on 6 July, more than 50 people from an Afghan wedding party were said to have been killed after being bombed by US aircraft in the eastern province of Nangarhar.
 
I find senseless civilian casualties to be unacceptable in any war; let me make that perfectly clear before continuing.

In this war on terror, surmising who are friend and enemy is EXTREMELY difficult. Add to this that the traditional guidelines for a "combatant" can basically be thrown out of the window. A civilian today can blow your ass to bits tomorrow. In Afghanistan in particular, trained Afghan soldiers have "defected" from their military positions with their recent military training still fresh in their minds and all payment and gear they have received and rejoined their warlords. This happens at an alarming rate. They sometimes come back and kill ISAF and UN personnel using the training and equipment that were provided to them.

Again, let me make this clear, I find senseless civilian casualties to be unacceptable in any war. In these matters, a lot of what may seem senseless on the surface can turn out not to be, even if on accident.

They sometimes come back and kill ISAF and UN personnel using the training and equipment that were provided to them.


Don't hear about that too much in the media, huh?
 
Very Roman.

Christie Blackford wrote about the phenomenon; the people who want to defect show up and get some training and free guns, sometimes credentials, and join the insurrection with all their new fancy gear.  Of course, it's not just going to the Talibs, but to the regional warlords as well.  Not uncommon for the Afghan Police or Afghan Army to look the other way when Taliban soldiers come through, either.
 
On the Maiden site:

RAF pilots flown home courtesy of Iron Maiden
Published: September 2, 2008

From The Independent:

RAF pilots flown home courtesy of Iron Maiden

Bruce Dickinson, the singer with heavy metal outfit Iron Maiden, has in the past performed for British troops in Iraq. On Sunday, he did his bit for our boys in Afghanistan.

Dickinson, a qualified pilot for British airline Astraeus, was behind the controls of a Boeing 747 that the Ministry of Defence had chartered to transport a group of RAF pilots back home.

"A lot of them recognised him because they are Maiden fans, but he was there in his professional capacity as a pilot," says an RAF spokesman. "He gave out lots of signatures to the guys."


And from The Mirror:

Iron Maiden frontman Bruce Dickinson takes the pilot's seat of a Boeing 757

Iron Maiden frontman Bruce Dickinson, 50, shocked 106 members of the RAF returning from Afghanistan, when he took control of a Boeing 757 and flew them from Cyprus to RAF Wittering, Cambs, on Sunday.

But don't panic, he's a trained pilot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top