The Essentials of the Current War on Terror
Why the U.S. Military is Necessary in Iraq Afghanistan and Pakistan
Oct 21, 2009
According to the many architects of the current conflicts involving American troops around the world, but especially those in Iraq and Afghanistan, leaders have made the argument that there is a willingness and a need for the U.S. to have a military presence around the world. In the White House as well as in the Pentagon President Obama and Defense Secretary Gates have both commented on the "blood and treasure," that have been invested in various parts of the world by a kind and generous nation.
Some perhaps rightly, believe this to be a precious gift with complements of the people of the U.S. towards the call for peace, security and freedom from around the world. A call that many Americans have heeded and been willing to sacrifice, fight and die for on numerous occasions. But perhaps the current question now is, what shape will the war on terror take as the Obama administration has become fully engaged and completely in charge of what can only be determined Obama's War on Terror.
Iraq Wound Down
According to Tom Engelhardt, author and columnist for The Nation.com, the Obama administration is currently on point with "the official Obama-era target for an American withdrawal (as it was for the Bush Administration) in August of 2010--the moment by which, according to present plans, only American combat bridges are to be removed. Which then begs the question, is it time for America to declare victory and go home?"
As reported in the Los Angeles Times, President Obama recently reiterated his intention to remain committed to the planned time table for troop withdrawal from Iraq, as the President stated, "Here is what I can tell you, I will bring our troops out, one to two brigades a month. That is what I intend to do as President of the United States," Obama said.
However, a wound down Iraq will also include a permanent force of as many as 50,000 U.S. combat troops for clean-up and protection operations into the foreseeable future. During a recent New York Times interview democratic leader and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca) commented that, "What is important about this is that we are on a path to ending this war," Speaker Pelosi said.
A Ramp Up in Afghanistan and Pakistan
The request for increased troop presence in Afghanistan and eventually Pakistan is an all together different situation in the minds of many administration and pentagon officials. According to published reports in both the New York Times and Washington Post, General Stanley McChrystal the current Commander, International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and Commander U.S. Forces Afghanistan, plan includes a type of surge in troop strength for Afghanistan to the tune of about 40,000 to 60,000 fighting men and women. And for the past few weeks President Obama has been meeting with top level advisers from his cabinet, leaders in Congress and top military commanders.
The emerging program and method of implementation seems to be one that involves more American troops in the short run and the training and participation of more Afghan and Pakistani troops over the long run. While at the same time keeping an eye on the potential of the further destabilization of both the Afghan and Pakistani governments through incursions from the Taliban. In addition to trolling for nuclear proliferation from Pakistan to rogue nations like North Korea or Iran, and of course trying to negotiate both of these countries out of the nuclear arms business altogether.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
