| − | 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. Washington is debating the new report by Gen. 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> Some 4,000 more American trainers will arrive by November, bringing the American troop level to 68,000. |
| | 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. 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. | | 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. 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. |