More than 6,000 Fort Carson troops headed to Afghanistan

[khushal]

More than 6, Fort Carson troops headed to Afghanistan – The Denver Post

[khushal]

A continuation of same failed policies that brings misery to the poor and riches to the rich. You have to be an extremely stupid soldier to not see reality after 16 years.

[toughpashtun]

A retired Pakistani general , who is not pro-Taliban and has rather been a supporter the US/NATO War in Afghanistan since 2001 ,and has lead the operations against Taliban in Pakistan too, recently gave an interview in which he talked about the US and NATO failure in Afghanistan.
This general said that sending 10,000 troops to Afghanistan will not have any impact on reducing violence or crushing the Taliban.He went on to say that 150,000 - 200,000 troops would have to be deployed in order to actually quell the insurgency.Whether that would be economically and politically feasible, is another question.
The reason I quoted this general is because this is a person who genuinely wanted a NATO victory in Afghanistan and he has knowledge of this subject so his analysis would carry weight.

[toughpashtun]

Did you see this :

Pentagon: No scheduled deployment from Fort Carson soon

and this:

Pentagon denies Fort Carson deployment report - KRDO

[Peacelove]

A retired Pakistani general , who is not pro-Taliban and has rather been a supporter the US/NATO War in Afghanistan since 2001 ,and has lead the operations against Taliban in Pakistan too, recently gave an interview in which he talked about the US and NATO failure in Afghanistan.
This general said that sending 10,000 troops to Afghanistan will not have any impact on reducing violence or crushing the Taliban.He went on to say that 150,000 - 200,000 troops would have to be deployed in order to actually quell the insurgency.Whether that would be economically and politically feasible, is another question.
The reason I quoted this general is because this is a person who genuinely wanted a NATO victory in Afghanistan and he has knowledge of this subject so his analysis would carry weight.

May i disagree...As far as i remember at one time NATO/US had more than 100,000 soldiers in Afghanistan and yet unable to completely wipe out the insurgency....Taliban withdrew and again now on resurgent mode from last few years...Difference why Pakistan able to defeat and US can't replicate that in Aafghanistan is Local support and new breeding of soldiers..which Afghan taliban were/are still enjoying ...
In Pakistan Local support and public anger turn towards TTP which fails them..along with brutal action by Army

[toughpashtun]

May i disagree...As far as i remember at one time NATO/US had more than 100,000 soldiers in Afghanistan and yet unable to completely wipe out the insurgency....Taliban withdrew and again now on resurgent mode from last few years...Difference why Pakistan able to defeat and US can't replicate that in Aafghanistan is Local support and new breeding of soldiers..which Afghan taliban were/are still enjoying ...
In Pakistan Local support and public anger turn towards TTP which fails them..along with brutal action by Army

I don't think NATO had 100,000 troops all at once in Afghanistan at any point in time.But when they did have more troops , regardless of the exact number , the Taliban were more controlled and of course did not hold anywhere near as much territory as they do now.
But you have very valid points too.I agree regarding local support.

[Peacelove]

I don't think NATO had 100,000 troops all at once in Afghanistan at any point in time.But when they did have more troops , regardless of the exact number , the Taliban were more controlled and of course did not hold anywhere near as much territory as they do now.
But you have very valid points too.I agree regarding local support.

"Any increase of several thousand troops would leave U.S. forces in Afghanistan well below their peak of more than 100,000 troops in 2011, when Washington was under huge domestic political pressure to draw down the costly operation."
NATO assessing request for more troops to Afghanistan | Reuters
Just few years back they had..Though i agree that Taliban were controlled but yet they do hold territories necessary to recruit and regain strength..
ANA has approximately 180k troops with far superior arms and logistic including ISAF support yet they are unable to defeat 30 to 40k taliban estimated figures...Either US/ANA really does not want to wipe them out or they are incapable to defeat the insurgencies heavily supported by locals
What surprise me Taliban had casualities yet they recruit more and replace with new one easily..May be i am wrong it seems but Taliban slogan is attractive in Afghanistan "Gair Mulki or Kafir army" should withdraw and then we will settled..
Even in 2011 Taliban did control approximately 30%..

[khushal]

You guys are lost and dillusional.

These decisions are made in the US congress where they are fighting over the US treasury. The democrats want money for the Social services industry. In order to get this money, they must compromise with the republicans who want money for the military industry. These wars and military expansionism are excuses to get that money. You are cannon fodder, the sacrifice.

[toughpashtun]

You guys are lost and dillusional.

These decisions are made in the US congress where they are fighting over the US treasury. The democrats want money for the Social services industry. In order to get this money, they must compromise with the republicans who want money for the military industry. These wars and military expansionism are excuses to get that money. You are cannon fodder, the sacrifice.

Okay , Mr Expert Analyst , thank you for providing this information.

[khushal]

Okay , Mr Expert Analyst , thank you for providing this information.

No problem Mr Tough guy who was raped by old man sami haq.

[toughpashtun]

No problem Mr Tough guy who was raped by old man sami haq.

dey paleeday jabay ta de lagaam warka , zan ba kharaab key.

[khushal]

dey paleeday jabay ta de lagaam warka , zan ba kharaab key.

Dont start it in the first place

[toughpashtun]

Dont start it in the first place

You were the one who referred to us as 'lost and delusional'.
So it is you who initiated it.

[Firdousi]

A continuation of same failed policies that brings misery to the poor and riches to the rich. You have to be an extremely stupid soldier to not see reality after 16 years.

Afghan war has changed. Back then when the USA deployed 100k soldiers, it was an asymmetric war. Now the Taliban control up to 40% of Afghanistan´s territory. So its not an asymmetric war anymore. With massive air support and ground forces Taliban will be pushed back. If it worked with Daesh in Iraq and Syria, who were much better organized, armed and led than the Taliban, it will also work in Afghanistan with he Taliban who are barely armed, split in several groups and poorly led.

But we need to be realistic: the Taliban movement is deeply rooted in the rural Pashutn society. It can not be defeated by military means. Afghan government needs to engage with all regional powers (Iran, Pakistan, India, Russia, China, CAR´s, USA and even the GCC) in peace talks and also with the Taliban. I believe with proper reforms in the Afghan political system, ceding southern and eastern provinces to the Taliban and giving more autonomy to non Pashutn provinces in the west and in the north, peace can be achieved. The Taliban movement is showing some syntoms of exhaustion just like the Afghan government.

Of course many hardcore terrorists will refuse this. Those people must be obliterated along with their relatives and supporters.

[khushal]

Afghan war has changed. Back then when the USA deployed 100k soldiers, it was an asymmetric war. Now the Taliban control up to 40% of Afghanistan´s territory. So its not an asymmetric war anymore. With massive air support and ground forces Taliban will be pushed back. If it worked with Daesh in Iraq and Syria, who were much better organized, armed and led than the Taliban, it will also work in Afghanistan with he Taliban who are barely armed, split in several groups and poorly led.

But we need to be realistic: the Taliban movement is deeply rooted in the rural Pashutn society. It can not be defeated by military means. Afghan government needs to engage with all regional powers (Iran, Pakistan, India, Russia, China, CAR´s, USA and even the GCC) in peace talks and also with the Taliban. I believe with proper reforms in the Afghan political system, ceding southern and eastern provinces to the Taliban and giving more autonomy to non Pashutn provinces in the west and in the north, peace can be achieved. The Taliban movement is showing some syntoms of exhaustion just like the Afghan government.

Of course many hardcore terrorists will refuse this. Those people must be obliterated along with their relatives and supporters.

Its the same plan with a different name:
Trump's 'new' Afghanistan policy is more of the same - LA Times



Firdousi,
Your listening to your tajik leaders like amruallah saleh too much. Those people are cold hearted and want to continue the money making scheme at the expense of his own people. All your doing is creating more Taliban and prolonging the suffering of people.
Afghanistan Again? | HuffPost

A prominent Afghan diplomat doesn’t think so. Shukria Barakzai, a longtime member of the Afghan parliament now serving as Afghanistan’s ambassador to Norway ― herself a victim in 2014 of a Taliban*suicide bomber*― told me only weeks ago, “The Taliban are so over! They just want to go home, but you Americans won’t let them.”**
She reminded me that the Taliban are not some invading army. (That would be us.) They are Afghan citizens, distinguished from their countrymen chiefly by their extreme religious conservatism, misogyny, and punitive approach to governance. Think of them as the Afghan equivalent of our own evangelical right-wing Republicans. You find some in almost every town. And the more you rile them up, the meaner they get and the more followers they gain.* But in times of peace ― which Afghanistan has not known for 40 years ― many Taliban most likely would return to being farmers, shopkeepers, villagers, like their fathers before them