Washington, Oct 9 (ANI): Though the U.S. has a distinct fighting advantage in fighting the global war on terrorism in Afghanistan, possessing more firepower, superior weapons and a larger fighting force, critics say the ongoing deliberations at the White House in Washington are putting American troops at a distinct disadvantage-and in harm's way.
"When the Taliban see us acting in an unsure manner, they're able to go out to all the villages and different people and say America is going to pull out," Representative Duncan Hunter told Fox News, adding that Taliban forces will use that argument to gain support.
"Counterinsurgency policy means we go in and get the Afghan people on our side. Make friends. The opposite of that is nobody wants to be our friend," said Duncan, a Marine who served in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Obama is currently weighing whether sending more troops to Afghanistan, as requested by General Stanley McCrystal, the top U.S. commander there.
The president's war council appears to be divided. Some support Gen. Stanley McChrystal's request for up to 40,000 more troops on the ground, while others favor scaling back the effort and focusing on attacking Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
There are also political considerations for Obama: many of his fellow Democrats oppose an escalation while Republicans, who are largely opposed to his domestic agenda, largely support a troop buildup.
The Taliban, on the other hand, have no such domestic considerations. Bent on regaining control of Afghanistan by any means necessary, they do not have to face the same issues or political ramifications of their decisions.
"That hits the nail right on the head," said Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, a former Army intelligence officer who served under McChrystal and is now a reservist with the Center of Advanced Defense Studies. "We're dealing with an enemy that doesn't have to worry about oversight."
"The current policy is not going to win us the war," Shaffer said.
The dilemma facing the White House isn't new. Ever since Vietnam, administrations have struggled with Americans' low tolerance for casualties. (ANI)
"When the Taliban see us acting in an unsure manner, they're able to go out to all the villages and different people and say America is going to pull out," Representative Duncan Hunter told Fox News, adding that Taliban forces will use that argument to gain support.
"Counterinsurgency policy means we go in and get the Afghan people on our side. Make friends. The opposite of that is nobody wants to be our friend," said Duncan, a Marine who served in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Obama is currently weighing whether sending more troops to Afghanistan, as requested by General Stanley McCrystal, the top U.S. commander there.
The president's war council appears to be divided. Some support Gen. Stanley McChrystal's request for up to 40,000 more troops on the ground, while others favor scaling back the effort and focusing on attacking Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
There are also political considerations for Obama: many of his fellow Democrats oppose an escalation while Republicans, who are largely opposed to his domestic agenda, largely support a troop buildup.
The Taliban, on the other hand, have no such domestic considerations. Bent on regaining control of Afghanistan by any means necessary, they do not have to face the same issues or political ramifications of their decisions.
"That hits the nail right on the head," said Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, a former Army intelligence officer who served under McChrystal and is now a reservist with the Center of Advanced Defense Studies. "We're dealing with an enemy that doesn't have to worry about oversight."
"The current policy is not going to win us the war," Shaffer said.
The dilemma facing the White House isn't new. Ever since Vietnam, administrations have struggled with Americans' low tolerance for casualties. (ANI)
Oneindia Login