U.S. 'not winning' in Afghanistan, Defense Secretary tells Congress

[The Sandman]

The United States is "not winning" the war against Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told Congress on Tuesday, promising to brief lawmakers on a new war strategy by mid-July that is widely expected to call for thousands more U.S. troops.

The remarks were a blunt reminder of the gloom underscoring U.S. military assessments of the war between the U.S.-backed Afghan government and the Islamist militant group, classified by U.S. commanders as a "stalemate" despite almost 16 years of fighting.

"We are not winning in Afghanistan right now. And we will correct this as soon as possible," Mattis said in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee. Mattis acknowledged that he believed the Taliban were "surging" at the moment, something he said he intended to address.

Some U.S. officials questioned the benefit of sending more troops to Afghanistan because any politically palatable number would not be enough to turn the tide, much less create stability and security. To date, more than 2,300 Americans have been killed and more than 17,000 wounded since the war began in 2001.

The Afghan government was assessed by the U.S. military to control or influence just 59.7 percent of Afghanistan's 407 districts as of Feb. 20, a nearly 11 percentage-point decrease from the same time in 2016, according to data released by the U.S. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction.

A truck bomb explosion in Kabul last month killed more than 150 people, making it the deadliest attack in the Afghan capital since the Taliban were ousted in 2001 by a NATO-led coalition after ruling the country for five years.

On Saturday, three U.S. soldiers were killed when an Afghan soldier opened fire on them in eastern Afghanistan.

Reuters reported in late April that the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump was carrying out a review of Afghanistan, and conversations were revolving around sending between 3,000 and 5,000 U.S. and coalition troops there.


Deliberations include giving more authority to forces on the ground and taking more aggressive action against Taliban fighters.

Senator John McCain, the chairman of the Senate committee, pressed Mattis on the deteriorating situation, saying the United States had an urgent need for "a change in strategy, and an increase in resources if we are to turn the situation around."

"We recognize the need for urgency," Mattis said.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-afghanistan-idUSKBN1941Y1

 

[TMA]

The United States is "not winning" the war against Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told Congress on Tuesday, promising to brief lawmakers on a new war strategy by mid-July that is widely expected to call for thousands more U.S. troops.

The remarks were a blunt reminder of the gloom underscoring U.S. military assessments of the war between the U.S.-backed Afghan government and the Islamist militant group, classified by U.S. commanders as a "stalemate" despite almost 16 years of fighting.

"We are not winning in Afghanistan right now. And we will correct this as soon as possible," Mattis said in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee. Mattis acknowledged that he believed the Taliban were "surging" at the moment, something he said he intended to address.

Some U.S. officials questioned the benefit of sending more troops to Afghanistan because any politically palatable number would not be enough to turn the tide, much less create stability and security. To date, more than 2,300 Americans have been killed and more than 17,000 wounded since the war began in 2001.

The Afghan government was assessed by the U.S. military to control or influence just 59.7 percent of Afghanistan's 407 districts as of Feb. 20, a nearly 11 percentage-point decrease from the same time in 2016, according to data released by the U.S. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction.

A truck bomb explosion in Kabul last month killed more than 150 people, making it the deadliest attack in the Afghan capital since the Taliban were ousted in 2001 by a NATO-led coalition after ruling the country for five years.

On Saturday, three U.S. soldiers were killed when an Afghan soldier opened fire on them in eastern Afghanistan.

Reuters reported in late April that the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump was carrying out a review of Afghanistan, and conversations were revolving around sending between 3,000 and 5,000 U.S. and coalition troops there.


Deliberations include giving more authority to forces on the ground and taking more aggressive action against Taliban fighters.

Senator John McCain, the chairman of the Senate committee, pressed Mattis on the deteriorating situation, saying the United States had an urgent need for "a change in strategy, and an increase in resources if we are to turn the situation around."

"We recognize the need for urgency," Mattis said.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-afghanistan-idUSKBN1941Y1

All they need to do is to have enough control to allow for destabilization of Pakistan to occur along with containment of Russian and Chinese interests.

 

[Naara-e-Mastana]

All they need to do is to have enough control to allow for destabilization of Pakistan to occur along with containment of Russian and Chinese interests.

Time of destabilizing Pakistan are long gone .
.
Neither China nor Russia will agree with us until us leave Afghanistan . their allegations are that us is spying on them through Afghanistan .

 

[Sambit Chaudhary]

If by control he means to to make Afghanistan another California in the making then of course not but they certainly have succeeded in reducing the havoc of a mess that Afghanistan was under especially in the early 2000

 

[cloud4000]

Afghanistan is a lost cause. US should stop wasting soldier lives and taxpayer money on a country that is beyond hope. But I doubt Trump will leave, his ego won't allow it.

 

[TMA]

Time of destabilizing Pakistan are long gone .
.
Neither China nor Russia will agree with us until us leave Afghanistan . their allegations are that us is spying on them through Afghanistan .

No they ain't, not when traitors are in power.

 

[Sine Nomine]

@pakistani342
So more boots on ground.

 

[Naara-e-Mastana]

No they ain't, not when traitors are in power.

Then war is about to get bloody and costly for usa .

 

[Pandora]

what would 5000 more troops achieve that even 100000 Nato troops couldnt achieve after 2 decades? US lost miserably that is a fact.

 

[Spring Onion]

what would 5000 more troops achieve that even 100000 Nato troops couldnt achieve after 2 decades? US lost miserably that is a fact.

That would be symbolic presence which means US want to convey to Russia that she is not leaving Afghanistan.
in my opinion it is like a backup file US want to use later.
The Afghan invasion has become a bone stuck in the US throat

 

[Naara-e-Mastana]

That would be symbolic presence which means US want to convey to Russia that she is not leaving Afghanistan.
in my opinion it is like a backup file US want to use later.
The Afghan invasion has become a bone stuck in the US throat

But wont their "symbolic presence" have to face with Taliban ?

 

[pakistani342]

@pakistani342
So more boots on ground.

mmm difficult to say -- the number is 5,000 - 9,000 of US troops to try to double the ANSF Commandos and increase force multipliers like the Air Force.

There were even credible reports of asks unto 50,000.

The debate is contentious and to his credit, Trump and 1/2 of the West Wing seems dead against any escalation in Afghanistan -- they see it as good money after bad.

There are many complicating factors -- for Afghanistan to get breathing room there must be an Iran option, Russia option -- the current Administration has a hard line of Iran and Russia is consuming much of the political capital in DC. That increases the dependency on Pakistan but many of the folks McMaster has brought in (e.g. Lisa Curtis) have a very long history of being hard on Pakistan.

Further, it would require our NATO allies to contribute troops -- but after some of the: being raked over the coals by Trump part -- that's a more difficult ask.

And in Afghanistan -- it's been a log jam -- Hekmatyar seems to be in ascendency -- someone who had lost all relevance -- the old Northern Alliance group seems fragmented as ever -- Amrullah Saleh just quit as minister a few weeks after taking on his new position -- the streets of Kabul are clogged.

The statement by Ghani perhaps sums it up best: We are unable to understand what Pakistan wants -- it show that things are rudderless as there is no comprehension of what Afghanistan perceives as the belligerent.

It's a complete cluster fcuk -- but who the fcuk knows -- the world seems to survive somehow.

 

[Fledgingwings]

So much for a Super Power Army

 

[Oldman1]

Afghanistan is a lost cause. US should stop wasting soldier lives and taxpayer money on a country that is beyond hope. But I doubt Trump will leave, his ego won't allow it.

Probably 8 more years of conflict then.

Then war is about to get bloody and costly for usa .

Same for Pakistan. You guys blaming Taliban attacking Pakistan from Afghan side.

 

[Sine Nomine]

mmm difficult to say -- the number is 5,000 - 9,000 of US troops to try to double the ANSF Commandos and increase force multipliers like the Air Force.

There were even credible reports of asks unto 50,000.

The debate is contentious and to his credit, Trump and 1/2 of the West Wing seems dead against any escalation in Afghanistan -- they see it as good money after bad.

There are many complicating factors -- for Afghanistan to get breathing room there must be an Iran option, Russia option -- the current Administration has a hard line of Iran and Russia is consuming much of the political capital in DC. That increases the dependency on Pakistan but many of the folks McMaster has brought in (e.g. Lisa Curtis) have a very long history of being hard on Pakistan.

Further, it would require our NATO allies to contribute troops -- but after some of the: being raked over the coals by Trump part -- that's a more difficult ask.

And in Afghanistan -- it's been a log jam -- Hekmatyar seems to be in ascendency -- someone who had lost all relevance -- the old Northern Alliance group seems fragmented as ever -- Amrullah Saleh just quit as minister a few weeks after taking on his new position -- the streets of Kabul are clogged.

The statement by Ghani perhaps sums it up best: We are unable to understand what Pakistan wants -- it show that things are rudderless as there is no comprehension of what Afghanistan perceives as the belligerent.

It's a complete cluster fcuk -- but who the fcuk knows -- the world seems to survive somehow.

If US is considering an exit strategy,that must not be without drawing Talibans on Table because if they will leave without breaking Taliban,these groups would have a real moral boost and increase in popular support.