The Pentagon replaced its top general in Afghanistan Monday as President Barack Obama tries to turn around a stalemated war. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he asked for the resignation of Gen. David McKiernan. Gates said new leadership is needed as the Obama administration launches its strategy in the seven-year-old campaign.
Replacing McKiernan will be Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who has had a top administrative job at the Joint Chiefs of Staff for less than a year. He is a former commander of the Joint Special Operations Command.
[8D] So what makes Stan " The man " any better than McKiernan, both their last names start with Mc...
Whenan officer puts on starshe becomes a political pawn. Changes in military leadership happen all the time. Cheney fired the C of S of the AF-a well deserved firing it was too.McKiernan willretirewith his rank and go on to big things in the defense industry.
The war in Afghanistan was allowed to languish too long. The Taliban contols more than one third of of that country. The chances oftaking Afghanistan back and holding it are iffy at best.
Unlike Iran, Afghanistan has been a NATO effort. Perhaps this has tied the hands of the US military there. But, as said above, when you are a general sometimes you are the scape goat for the failings of others.
Do you mean Iraq? I thought it was a coalition effort with the majority of the troops being american, but the US Commanded the effort or was it the Brits? My memory is good but it is short...lol
Somewhere NATO dropped the ball in afghanistan and I was curious to know who was holding it at the time.
Somewhere NATO dropped the ball in afghanistan and I was curious to know who was holding it at the time.
NATO did not drop the ball in Afghanistan. The real war on terror in Afghanistan was pawned off on a reluctant NATO while the US was distracted with Iraq. The US refused to put enough boots on the ground in Afghanistan to get the job done. Additionally, the last administration bought into a Saudi plan to "negotiate" with the Taliban. Senator McCainstated a few months ago that the US is losing the Afghan war.
Quote:
But McCain said on Wednesday, "When you aren't winning in this kind of war, you are losing. And, in Afghanistan today, we are not winning." He delivered his remarks at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington-based think tank.
In 2006 the US was warned by security experts that the war on terror was being lost.
WASHINGTON - The United States is losing its fight against terrorism and the Iraq war is the biggest reason why, more than eight of 10 American terrorism and national security experts concluded in a poll released yesterday. One participant, a former CIA official who described himself as a conservative Republican, said the war in Iraq has provided global terrorist groups with a recruiting bonanza, a valuable training ground and a strategic beachhead at the crossroads of the oil-rich Persian Gulf and Turkey.
"The war in Iraq broke our back in the war on terror," said the former official, Michael Scheuer, author of Imperial Hubris, a popular book highly critical of the Bush administration's anti-terrorism efforts. "It has made everything more difficult and the threat more existential."
Scheuer is one of more than 100 national security and terrorism analysts surveyed by Foreign Policy magazine and the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank. Asked whether the United States is "winning the war on terror," 84 percent said no and 13 percent answered yes. Asked whether the war in Iraq is helping or hurting the global anti-terrorism campaign, 87 percent said hurting. Eighty-six percent said the world is becoming "more dangerous for the United States and the American people."
Anyone who gives a hoot about the war in Afghanistan owes it himself to readthe House testimony of Anthony Cordesman:
US replaces general in Afghanistan
