US to keep 9,800 Afghanistan troops after 2014 & plans full troop withdrawal by 2016

[Devil Soul]

US to keep 9,800 Afghanistan troops after 2014

Barack Obama visited US troops in Afghanistan during a surprise visit to Kabul over the weekend

President Barack Obama is seeking to keep 9,800 US troops in Afghanistan after the US ends its combat mission in the country at the end of this year.

The US plan would reduce its current force of 32,000 by the end of 2014, halve that next year and remove nearly all troops by the end of 2016.

The remaining US military presence would train Afghan forces and support counter-terrorism operations.

But the plan depends on the Afghans signing a joint security agreement.

While current Afghan President Hamid Karzai has refused to sign such an agreement, the Obama administration appears to be confident either of the two candidates seeking to replace him would do so.

Mr Obama is to make a statement on his plans in a White House address at 14:45 local time (18:45 GMT).

Rajini Vaidyanathan, BBC News, Washington

It was always expected that the US would keep a force of around 10,000 in Afghanistan after the war formally ends. But can this increased presence continue the aims that America's longest war began with - containing the threat from al-Qaeda?

These remaining troops will provide training for Afghan forces, and also target the core remnants of al-Qaeda. Just how they will achieve the latter is the trickier question for the president, and one which requires co-operation from the Afghan government.

The US has yet to get the Afghan government to sign a bilateral security agreement, something this current plan depends on. But with a new Afghan president due to be elected soon, one of the biggest obstacles to this, President Karzai, will no longer be in the way.

The news will not affect the timetable for UK soldiers coming home, and all British troops are due to leave by the end of this year, the BBC has learnt.

At the weekend, President Obama paid a surprise visit to US troops in Afghanistan and on Monday at a Memorial Day ceremony he paid tribute to the more than 2,000 soldiers who have lost their lives in the country's longest war.

The Afghans have been in charge of security in some areas

Mr Obama noted the terrible toll the Afghan war has exacted when he led tributes on Memorial Day
The BBC's Mark Mardell, in Washington, says the announcement comes as Mr Obama finds himself under attack for a "weak" foreign policy, and as the president prepares to make a major speech on Wednesday setting out how he sees the country's place in the world post-Iraq and Afghanistan.

Initially, the US military presence would continue around the country in 2015, but be halved by the end of the year and consolidated around Kabul.

After 2016, the US would seek to keep 1,000 military members to staff a security office.

Afghanistan's run-off election between Abdullah Abdullah and Ashraf Ghani to replace Mr Karzai is set for 14 June.
BBC News - US to keep 9,800 Afghanistan troops after 2014

 

[Velociraptor]

And a whole fleet of drones to keep talibunnies at bay !

The entire discourse in pakistan was running on.."come 2014 when US moves out, we will teach evil yindoos some lesson" That entire thing went kaput in an instant I suppose

 

[nangyale]

Obama to announce plan to keep 9,800 US troops in Afghanistan after 2014
President to place initial residual force of nearly 10,000, declining floated proposal to withdraw all US troops from country

• Spencer Ackerman in New York
• theguardian.com, Tuesday 27 May 2014

Obama speaks during a troop rally after arriving at Bagram air field. Photograph: Evan Vucci/AP
President Obama has decided to seek an initial residual force of 9,800 US troops in Afghanistan after 2014, backing away from ending America's longest war until at least his final year in office.

Obama is expected to announce his plans for Afghanistan in a statement Tuesday afternoon, ahead of a broader foreign policy speech he will deliver at the US military academy at West Point on Wednesday, where he announced his Afghanistan troop surge in 2009.

The move represents the culmination of months of internal debate, which had alarmed many in the US military, and firmly rejects a floated White House plan to withdraw all US troops from the country. It also signals a desire by Obama to defer a firmer end to the Afghanistan war until the end of his presidency.

The placement of residual forces in Afghanistan would anchor the US in a conflict that has lasted longer than any other US war, and which many – even inside the Obama administration – consider peripheral to long-term US strategic interests.

Under the plan, the US military would no longer perform direct combat missions, as it has for the past 13 years, with the exception of “supporting CT [counter-terrorism] operations against the remnants of al-Qaida,” a senior administration official said. US special operations forces are almost certain to remain in the country for that purpose.

Beyond the counter-terrorism mission, the US will continue training the Afghan soldiers and policemen they have supported for years. A recent independent assessment by a thinktank close to the Pentagon found that the Taliban-led insurgency is likely to swell after this year’s troop drawdown is complete, necessitating up to a $6bn annual commitment to Afghan security forces to make up the difference.

According to the official, the residual force plan makes 2015 a hinge point for the future of the US presence in Afghanistan. At the end of 2015, the administration intends to reduce the 9,800 troops by “roughly half” and consolidate them in Kabul and the massive Bagram airfield, about an hour’s drive from the capital.

The official described both the counter-terrorism and training missions as “narrow.” But the parameters of those missions will likely be determined by the resilience of the Afghan forces against what experts expect to be a major Taliban challenge.

Though US officials do not talk publicly about it, Afghanistan has served as a launch pad for drone strikes in neighboring Pakistan. Obama’s plan involves the US leaving major airfields used for the strikes, such as those in Kandahar and Jalalabad, in a year. Obama has apparently paused drone strikes in Pakistan during 2014, though it is unclear if they will resume.

By the end of 2016, the last year of Obama’s presidency, the official said the US “will draw down to a normal embassy presence with a security assistance office in Kabul, as we have done in Iraq.” It is less clear what will happen to the thousands of contractors that support military operations in Afghanistan. In Iraq, thousands of contractors outlasted the US military presence.

Obama’s plan depends on Afghanistan’s next leader signing a bilateral security accord that outgoing president Hamid Karzai refused to endorse. Following a Memorial Day trip that Obama made to Afghanistan, the White House circulated news reports indicating that the two leading candidates, Abdullah Abdullah and Ashraf Ghani, intend to sign the deal, preventing a scenario that would have seen US troops lose their legal protections in Afghanistan.

“By the end of this year, the transition will be complete and Afghans will take full responsibility for their security, and our combat mission will be over. America's war in Afghanistan will come to a responsible end,” Obama told troops at Bagram on Sunday.

But the end is not yet in sight. Nor has the war proceeded as the administration had planned.

In 2009, Obama announced a surge of 30,000 troops, on top of over 20,000 additional troops that he’d deployed there weeks into his presidency. That surge, which left Afghanistan flooded with approximately 100,000 US troops, lasted until just before the 2012 election, and saw US resources poured into taking territory away from the Taliban and its allies in the south, but did not prompt the insurgency to seek a negotiated peace.

Administration officials say they never expected the war to result in a military victory. Obama officials spoke of reversing the Taliban’s “momentum” instead, a slipperier metric.

“By the summer of 2011, it will be clear to the Afghan people that the insurgency will not win, giving them the chance to side with their government,” war commander Stanley McChrystal predicted to Congress in December 2009. Less than a year later, McChrystal resigned after his staff disparaged their civilian counterparts to Rolling Stone’s Michael Hastings.

In March 2012, Nato leaders met in Chicago to finalize and announce the end of their “mission” in Afghanistan by the end of 2014, but stopped short of promising an end to the war. They pledged an “enduring commitment” to the country and to funding the Afghan security forces.

Behind closed doors, the White House and the Pentagon have often battled each other on Afghanistan.

Senior Pentagon officials have favored keeping a force of over 10,000 or more after 2014, fearing a fragility amongst the Afghans that more than five years of overhauled military mentorship has not prevented. They were alarmed to hear White House officials publicly talk in early 2013 about a “zero option” for troop levels in Afghanistan, which they thought signaled a reelected Obama washing his hands of the conflict he reluctantly escalated. In February, the White House formally instructed the Pentagon to plan for a full withdrawal.

The current commander, Marine General Joseph Dunford, has publicly warned that the Afghan forces still require significant mentorship. Dunford has pressed for a robust residual force, and Congressman Buck McKeon, an ally who chairs the House armed services committee, commented that Obama had “met the military’s request for forces in Afghanistan.”

Yet McKeon, a California Republican, said in a statement that providing a timetable for the future of the US in Afghanistan “doesn’t make a lick of sense strategically,” echoing a consistent criticism of Obama since the beginning of the Afghanistan troop surge.

By holding residual troop levels to just under the military request level and pledging to withdraw them in two years, Obama’s decision is reminiscent of the one he reached in 2009 on the surge itself – a decision that satisfied neither his critics nor his supporters.

The uncertain and deferred conclusion of the longest war in American history is certain to invite recriminations, particularly amongst a generation of soldiers, marines and airmen who survived the crucible of this war and the simultaneous Iraq war without a fixed point they can identify as a national victory.

Those recriminations, already begun in military debating circles, are likely to accelerate with the November publication of a memoir by a respected retired army three-star general, Daniel Bolger. The title of Bolger’s book is Why We Lost.

 

[nangyale]

And a whole fleet of drones to keep talibunnies at bay !

The entire discourse in pakistan was running on.."come 2014 when US moves out, we will teach evil yindoos some lesson" That entire thing went kaput in an instant I suppose

Now hold your horses will you.
Read the following. It sounds more like your dreams of endless war have just been blown apart.

Obama’s plan involves the US leaving major airfields used for the strikes, such as those in Kandahar and Jalalabad, in a year. Obama has apparently paused drone strikes in Pakistan during 2014, though it is unclear if they will resume.

The Americans will be vacating all of Afghanistan apart from Kabul and Bagram by end 2015. Then by the end of the Obama presidency that will be further reduced to just about a small security presence in Kabul.

 

[Velociraptor]

Now hold your horses will you.
Read the following. It sounds more like your dreams of endless war have just been blown apart.

The Americans will be vacating all of Afghanistan apart from Kabul and Bagram by end 2015. Then by the end of the Obama presidency that will be further reduced to just about a small security presence in Kabul.

No one is talking about an endless war.. I am just LOLing at the pathetic pakistanis who were peddling the discourse that US would completely leave afganistahn in 2014. They were ready to bake their cakes once they have left. Now they gotta wait another couple of years ..

 

[GR!FF!N]

that means,after 2014,there'll be some 15000 foreign troops will remain in AF.After USA,it'll be Turkey who will have more soldiers.

 

[nangyale]

No one is talking about an endless war.. I am just LOLing at the pathetic pakistanis who were peddling the discourse that US would completely leave afganistahn in 2014. They were ready to bake their cakes once they have left. Now they gotta wait another couple of years ..

Dude, the BSA had been under discussion for quite some time now. So anyone thinking that Americans will be leaving completely by the end of 2014 were overtly optimistic.
But then again 9,800 cannot cover as much as 30,000 who were not able to cover as much as 150,000 were able to cover.
Again read the following for reference.

A recent independent assessment by a thinktank close to the Pentagon found that the Taliban-led insurgency is likely to swell after this year’s troop drawdown is complete,

that means,after 2014,there'll be some 15000 foreign troops will remain in AF.After USA,it'll be Turkey who will have more soldiers.

The question then is how much each country is willing to commit for one year, and what difference that will make.
As you can see end 2015, America is planning on leaving all of Afghanistan apart from Kabul and Bagram.

 

[GR!FF!N]

The question then is how much each country is willing to commit for one year, and what difference that will make.
As you can see end 2015, America is planning on leaving all of Afghanistan apart from Kabul and Bagram.

dude,they're planning this strength to deploy on Afghanistan for long term,to train them,help them on various decision making etc.its just a "Wish" what you've posted,USA leaving Afghanistan by 2015.plus,ANA willn't need much help from ISAF after they could establish their own training bases and all..its mainly to help them until they could become self sustainable.leaving various airbase will point towards nothing as by then,ANA will have their own fleet of strike aircraft.

 

[nangyale]

dude,they're planning this strength to deploy on Afghanistan for long term,to train them,help them on various decision making etc.its just a "Wish" what you've posted,USA leaving Afghanistan by 2015..

Read again I said end 2015 they are leaving all of Afghanistan apart from Kabul and Bagram. It's not a wish it's what's written in black and white. Here I will help you. From the above article.

At the end of 2015, the administration intends to reduce the 9,800 troops by “roughly half” and consolidate them in Kabul and the massive Bagram airfield, about an hour’s drive from the capital.

That means beginning 2016 the US will have less than 5,000 troops only in two locations in Afghanistan and that's it.

plus,ANA willn't need much help from ISAF after they could establish their own training bases and all..its mainly to help them until they could become self sustainable.leaving various airbase will point towards nothing as by then,ANA will have their

own fleet of strike aircraft.

What you have written is what you wish. Can you kindly provide a link for your claim that ANA is getting its own fleet of strike aircraft.
Or did you just dream that up?

 

[Devil Soul]

US plans full troop withdrawal from Afghanistan by 2016-end
By AFP
Published: May 27, 2014

WASHINGTON DC: The United States plans to reduce its troop presence in Afghanistan to below the 10,000 troop level this year and to completely end its military intervention in the country by the end of 2016, a senior official said Tuesday. President Barack Obama was expected to announce the plan, which remains conditional to the Afghan government agreeing to sign a joint security agreement with its US ally, later in the day. “We will only sustain a military presence after 2014 if the Afghan government signs the Bilateral Security Agreement,” the senior administration official told reporters. “Assuming a BSA is signed, at the beginning of 2015, we will have 9,800 US service members in different parts of the country, together with our NATO allies and other partners,” the official continued. “By the end of 2015, we would reduce that presence by roughly half, consolidating US troops in Kabul and on Bagram Airfield. “And one year later, by the end of 2016, we will draw down to a normal embassy presence with a security assistance office in Kabul, as we have done in Iraq.” Obama visited US forces in Afghanistan on Sunday, and spoke briefly by telephone with outgoing Afghan leader Hamid Karzai, who is due to step down this year after a June election run-off. Both candidates in that run-off vote, Abdullah Abdullah and Ashraf Ghani, have indicated they would sign the security agreement proposed by Washington if elected president. Around 51,000 US-led NATO troops are currently deployed in Afghanistan supporting Kabul in its fight against Taliban rebels, who launched a fierce insurgency after being ousted from power in 2001.

 

[nangyale]

Mods can we merge this thread with the following.
US plans full troop withdrawal from Afghanistan by 2016-end
It's about the exact same topic.

@Manticore @WebMaster @Aeronaut

 

[GR!FF!N]

Read again I said end 2015 they are leaving all of Afghanistan apart from Kabul and Bagram. It's not a wish it's what's written in black and white. Here I will help you. From the above article.

you should get your english comprehension skill better.it means they'll reduce their presence by "Half" and will handover entire task to ANA while their force will keep its presence in and around Kabul.and thats what I said.no one will have to carry out ANA's task when ANA will take charge(they're already taking nearly all charges from ISAF).they'll just keep their presence for training and for some crucial decision making.same things Turkey will do.ANA will fight with Talibs now,just what they're doing right now.

ANA's main weak points are air support and proper connectivity.it'll take some time before they plug terrorist inflow properly,as it'll take significant amount of investment and time on these,just like what India did in Kashmir.

 

[nangyale]

you should get your english comprehension skill better.it means they'll reduce their presence by "Half" and will handover entire task to ANA while their force will keep its presence in and around Kabul.and thats what I said.

No you didn't. You lied through your teeth and when I showed you the mirror you started BS about English.
Here to help your foggy memory. This is actually what you said.

dude,they're planning this strength to deploy on Afghanistan for long term,to train them,help them on various decision making etc.its just a "Wish" what you've posted,USA leaving Afghanistan by 2015

So once again drill this into your thick skull. Mr Obama has decided that the US is gonna leave. and in two years time apart from some security presence they will be gone.

no one will have to carry out ANA's task when ANA will take charge(they're already taking nearly all charges from ISAF).they'll just keep their presence for training and for some crucial decision making.same things Turkey will do.ANA will fight with Talibs now,just what they're doing right now.

ANA's main weak points are air support and proper connectivity.it'll take some time before they plug terrorist inflow properly,as it'll take significant amount of investment and time on these,just like what India did in Kashmir.

About air support, they are not getting any fast jets. So stop parroting that story, if you have proof post it, otherwise shut it.

As far as Kashmir is concerned. It didn't had much to do with Indian prowess but more to do with Musharraf's and Bush's policies.

 

[Imran Khan]

and 9 drones also

 

[GR!FF!N]

No you didn't. You lied through your teeth and when I showed you the mirror you started BS about English.
Here to help your foggy memory. This is actually what you said.



So once again drill this into your thick skull. Mr Obama has decided that the US is gonna leave. and in two years time apart from some security presence they will be gone.

told you noob.my first and last post has literally no difference.they'll post these soldiers for long term for various training and decision making,even if,and thats a big IFF,they withdraw half of their strength.dude,you've some serious comprehension issue.

About air support, they are not getting any fast jets. So stop parroting that story, if you have proof post it, otherwise shut it.

As far as Kashmir is concerned. It didn't had much to do with Indian prowess but more to do with Musharraf's and Bush's policies.

air support doesn't need first jets as Talibs doesn't have any aircraft that they're going to intercept.as Air Support,its going to be Gunships and CAS aircrafts like Embraer A29B Super Tucano(which even USAF uses) which they're buying.they're asking and probably get more MI-35 as heavy gunship and Super Tunaco as strike aircraft.so stop acting like a jurkk and study before making comments.as per Kashmir,it has nothing to do with chut!y@ Musharraf's policy as even till date,Pakistan is pushing terrorists.we whacked their sorry @$$ fair and square,and that even without any airpower Pakistan resorted against their TTP.


Super Tunaco....


Super Tucano Wins Afghanistan Light Air Support Bid | Defense News | defensenews.com


Hardpoints:-

• 5 (two under each wing and one under fuselage centreline) with a capacity of 1,550 kg (3,300 lb)
• Rockets:
  • (4x) pods 70 mm (2.75 in) LM-70/19[158](SBAT-70[160][161])
  • (4x) pods 70 mm (2.75 in) LAU-68A/G[162]
• Missiles:
  • Air-to-air:
    • AIM-9L Sidewinder
    • MAA-1A Piranha
    • MAA-1B Piranha (under development) [157]
    • Python 3
    • Python 4
  • Air-to-ground:
    • AGM-65 Maverick[158]
    • Delilah AL [159]
• Bombs:
  • General-purpose bombs:
    • (10x) Mk 81[7]
    • (5x) Mk 82[7]
    • M-117[151]
  • Incendiary bombs:
    • BINC-300[152]
  • Cluster bombs:
    • BLG-252
  • Precision-guided bombs:
    • FPG-82 (under development)[153] Friuli Aeroespacial INS/GPS guidance kit for Mk 82.
    • SMKB-82[154] – INS/GPS guidance kit for Mk 82.
    • GBU-54 (under development)[155]
    • GBU-38 (under development)[155]
    • GBU-39 (under development)[155]
    • Paveway II[156]
    • Lizard – Elbit laser guidance kit.
    • Griffin – IAI laser guidance kit.
• Others:
  • Chaff & Flare (countermeasures)
  • FLIR AN/AAQ-22 Star SAFIRE II (Electro-Optical/Infrared Sensors)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_EMB_314_Super_Tucano

Gunships....

Defense.gov News Article: Afghan Air Corps Returns Mi-35 Helicopters to Flight

Afghan Air Force Mi-35 Gunship Helicopters at Jalalabad Airfield | Global Military Review

ANA use some 9 MI-35 and probably will get more(in fact,they asked India.now we've to see what Indian Govt will allocate for them via Russia).

Also,Mi-17 can be converted to Gunship using Stub Wing.they uses some 70 MI-24 and are in process to get more.



The intended user of the Russian helicopters is the Afghan National Security Forces Special Mission Wing, an aviation unit that supports counter-terrorism, counter-narcotics and special operations missions, Army officials say.

The Mi-17 helicopter, built by the Kazan Helicopter Plant in Kazan, Republic of Tatarstan, is a modified Russian Mi-8M Hip medium twin-turbine transport helicopter that also can function as a helicopter gunship.

Versions of this helicopter equipped with hardpoints can 3,300 pounds of bombs, rockets, and guns. Work on the contract will be done in Russia, and should be finished by the end of 2014.


U.S. Army to buy 30 Russian Mi-17 helicopters for use in high, hot areas of Afghanistan - Military & Aerospace Electronics

and then,this.................................

Drone strikes on terrorists to continue: Barack Obama - The Times of India