Changes

The [[Obama Administration]] has made the war a high priority; indeed Obama sharply criticized the war in Iraq because for so long, he said, it diverted resources and attention from Afghanistan. In September 2009, the Pentagon pushed back against liberal Democrats who oppose sending additional combat troops to Afghanistan, telling Congress that success would probably require more fighting forces, and certainly much more time. Details are awaited of a new report by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the senior American and NATO commander in Afghanistan, who believes a properly resourced counterinsurgency war means more forces, more time and more commitment to the protection of the Afghan people and to the development of a strong Afghan government capable of defending its own country.<ref> Thom Shanker, [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/16/world/asia/16mullen.html?_r=1&th&emc=th "Military Chief Suggests Need to Enlarge U.S. Afghan Force," ''New York Times'' Sept. 16, 2009]</ref>  4000 more American 4,000 trainers will arrive by November, bringing the American troop level to 68,000.   

The [[Obama Administration]] has made the war a high priority; indeed Obama sharply criticized the war in Iraq because for so long, he said, it diverted resources and attention from Afghanistan. In September 2009, the Pentagon pushed back against liberal Democrats who oppose sending additional combat troops to Afghanistan, telling Congress that success would probably require more fighting forces, and certainly much more time. Details are awaited of a new report by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the senior American and NATO commander in Afghanistan, who believes a properly resourced counterinsurgency war means more forces, more time and more commitment to the protection of the Afghan people and to the development of a strong Afghan government capable of defending its own country.<ref> Thom Shanker, [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/16/world/asia/16mullen.html?_r=1&th&emc=th "Military Chief Suggests Need to Enlarge U.S. Afghan Force," ''New York Times'' Sept. 16, 2009]</ref>  4000 more American 4,000 trainers will arrive by November, bringing the American troop level to 68,000.   

===International role===

===International role===

More than 108,000 NATO troops are serving in Afghanistan in September 2009: 64,500 from the United States, 9,000 from Britain and 34,500 from other nations. In all, 1,386 troops have been killed.  Germany has 4000 troops based in the Kunduz region. NATO deaths include 830 Americans, and 214 British; 22 other countries that have sent forces to Afghanistan have suffered deaths among their troops, with Canada bearing the next greatest burden.

More than 108,000 NATO troops are serving in Afghanistan in September 2009: 64,500 from the United States, 9,000 from Britain and 34,500 from other nations. In all, 1,386 troops have been killed.  Germany has 4000 troops based in the Kunduz region. NATO deaths include 830 Americans, 214 British, and 130 Canadians; 22 other countries that have sent forces to Afghanistan have suffered deaths among their troops.

[[File:Afg-US1.jpg|thumb|320px|left|American Chinook helicopters from 101st Aviation Regiment depart from Forward Operating Base Ramrod in Kandahar]]

[[File:Afg-US1.jpg|thumb|320px|left|American Chinook helicopters from 101st Aviation Regiment depart from Forward Operating Base Ramrod in Kandahar]]

===US politics===

===US politics===

Democrats in Congress, led by Michigan Senator [[Carl Levin]] demand accelerated efforts to train and equip Afghan security forces before there is any more deployment of American troops. Mr. Levin said new goals should be established for Afghan security forces. The army, he said, should grow to 250,000 troops by the end of 2012, and the police to 160,000 officers by that date. The current targets are 134,000 army troops and 96,000 police officers by the end of next year.  The luke-warm Congressional Democrats are countered by Republicans, led by Senator [[John McCain]], who strongly supports the Obama position. McCain insists that more troops are "vitally needed" and that any delay in ordering more combat forces to the fight would put American lives at risk.

Democrats in Congress, led by Michigan Senator [[Carl Levin]] demand accelerated efforts to train and equip Afghan security forces before there is any more deployment of American troops. Mr. Levin said new goals should be established for Afghan security forces. The army, he said, should grow to 250,000 troops by the end of 2012, and the police to 160,000 officers by that date. The current targets are 134,000 army troops and 96,000 police officers by the end of next year.  The luke-warm Congressional Democrats are countered by Republicans, led by Senator [[John McCain]], who strongly supports the Obama position. McCain insists that more troops are "vitally needed" and that any delay in ordering more combat forces to the fight would put American lives at risk.