| Line 3: |
Line 3: |
| | ''For the Soviet invasion and war, 1979-89, see [[Soviet-Afghan War]]. For politics and society, see [[Afghanistan]]. | | ''For the Soviet invasion and war, 1979-89, see [[Soviet-Afghan War]]. For politics and society, see [[Afghanistan]]. |
| | | | |
| − | "[[Operation Enduring Freedom]]" easily defeated the Taliban in late 2001 and it seemed the war was over quickly. But the Taliban regrouped, especially in the southern provinces, with sanctuaries inside neighboring [[Pakistan]] in remote areas where the government of Pakistan had little authority. By 2003 the insurgency in the south was in operation, funded by [[opium]] production. Important factors for the return of insurgency include the initial mistakes made in 2001; radical Islamic support from Pakistan; weaknesses of the [[Hamid Karzai]] government, especially its feeble and corrupt national army and police; the question of legitimacy and offenses to traditional tribal and [[Islam]]ic values and beliefs; and, finally, the extent to which NATO forces became part of the problem by angering the tribes. The insurgency controlled numerous areas and engaged in terror attacks on civilians and guerrilla warfare against American and NATO forces. [[Al-Qaeda]] terrorists--the only [[Arab]]s in Afghanistan--had been welcomed by the Taliban in 1999 and built there bases there. They have been largely destroyed or fled to Pakistan, according to the U.S. Army, having fewer than 100 people left in Afghanistan.GOD IS ATHEIST AND SOCIALIST! FCCK CONSERVAPEDIA! GOD IS ATHEIST AND SOCIALIST! FCCK CONSERVAPEDIA! GOD IS ATHEIST AND SOCIALIST! FCCK CONSERVAPEDIA! GOD IS ATHEIST AND SOCIALIST! FCCK CONSERVAPEDIA!Onistan's prisons to recruit members and even plan operations. McChrystal alerted Washington that he urgently needs more forces within the next year; without them, he warned, the eight-year conflict "will likely result in failure."<ref> Bob Woodward, "McChrystal: More Forces or 'Mission Failure'' [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/20/AR200909200920.html ''Washington Post'' Sept 21, 2009] </ref> | + | "[[Operation Enduring Freedom]]" easily defeated the Taliban in late 2001 and it seemed the war was over quickly. But the Taliban regrouped, especially in the southern provinces, with sanctuaries inside neighboring [[Pakistan]] in remote areas where the government of Pakistan had little authority. By 2003 the insurgency in the south was in operation, funded by [[opium]] production. Important factors for the return of insurgency include the initial mistakes made in 2001; radical Islamic support from Pakistan; weaknesses of the [[Hamid Karzai]] government, especially its feeble and corrupt national army and police; the question of legitimacy and offenses to traditional tribal and [[Islam]]ic values and beliefs; and, finally, the extent to which NATO forces became part of the problem by angering the tribes. The insurgency controlled numerous areas and engaged in terror attacks on civilians and guerrilla warfare against American and NATO forces. [[Al-Qaeda]] terrorists--the only [[Arab]]s in Afghanistan--had been welcomed by the Taliban in 1999 and built there bases there. They have been largely destroyed or fled to Pakistan, according to the U.S. Army, having fewer than 100 people left in Afghanistan. |
| | + | |
| | + | [[File:Mcchrystal.jpg|thumb|250px|General [[Stanley McChrystal]].]] |
| | + | In Aug. 2009, General [[Stanley A. McChrystal]], the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, said the Afghan government was riddled with corruption and NATO was being undermined by tactics that alienate civilians. He called the Taliban insurgency "a muscular and sophisticated enemy" that uses modern propaganda and systematically reaches into Afghanistan's prisons to recruit members and even plan operations. McChrystal alerted Washington that he urgently needs more forces within the next year; without them, he warned, the eight-year conflict "will likely result in failure."<ref> Bob Woodward, "McChrystal: More Forces or 'Mission Failure'' [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/20/AR200909200920.html ''Washington Post'' Sept 21, 2009] </ref> |
| | American policy was increasing set by Defense Secretary [[Robert Gates]], originally appointed by President [[George W. Bush|Bush]] in 2006 and reappointed by President Obama in 2009. Gates fired the commander General David McKiernan in May, 2009, replacing him with McChrystal. [[File:Afg-2009.jpg|thumb|350px|Obama plan to add 30,000 troops in early 2010]] Gates insisted on dropping the old strategy of hunting down insurgents and instead adopting a '''counterinsurgency''' strategy that focused on protecting local civilians and training Afghan soldiers and police to take over the job. Gates convinced Obama, who ordered 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan in Dec. 2009, with a deadline of 18 months, at which time a transition to Afghan responsibility would begin. Liberals thought Obama and Gates were making a big mistake--heading into another quagmire like [[Vietnam War|Vietnam]]. However liberal Democrats in Congress will not try to block Obama's proposals. Most conservatives, on the other hand, see victory in Afghanistan as a vital national goal and approve the new strategy, while voicing objections to the 18 month deadline. | | American policy was increasing set by Defense Secretary [[Robert Gates]], originally appointed by President [[George W. Bush|Bush]] in 2006 and reappointed by President Obama in 2009. Gates fired the commander General David McKiernan in May, 2009, replacing him with McChrystal. [[File:Afg-2009.jpg|thumb|350px|Obama plan to add 30,000 troops in early 2010]] Gates insisted on dropping the old strategy of hunting down insurgents and instead adopting a '''counterinsurgency''' strategy that focused on protecting local civilians and training Afghan soldiers and police to take over the job. Gates convinced Obama, who ordered 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan in Dec. 2009, with a deadline of 18 months, at which time a transition to Afghan responsibility would begin. Liberals thought Obama and Gates were making a big mistake--heading into another quagmire like [[Vietnam War|Vietnam]]. However liberal Democrats in Congress will not try to block Obama's proposals. Most conservatives, on the other hand, see victory in Afghanistan as a vital national goal and approve the new strategy, while voicing objections to the 18 month deadline. |
| | | | |