Ernie Pyle
Ernie Pyle's timeless wartime columns ...
Ernie Pyle's timeless wartime columns ...
No July 4 hot dogs with the Iranian Mullahs ...
Mark Steyn, U.S. sclerotic and ineffectual, declining into societal dementia ...
Nicholas Schmidle asks some hard questions about Nawaz Sharif ...
The CIA's war against President Bush was motivated by ass covering, or by political
NSA Director Keith Alexander, a three-star general, is expected to earn a fourth star when he
NSA Director Keith Alexander, a three-star general, is expected to earn a fourth star when he
Providing electronic devices for IEDs ...
Police watched from a distance and did not intervene ...
Been there, done that in the Middle East ...
Matt Sanchez - repealing DADT would be a disaster.
Too much U.S. largesse has created corruption in Afghan government.
Dan Riehl weighs in on language, thinking and security from terrorism ...
The U.S. is seeking to hire a merchant ship to deliver hundreds of tonnes of arms to Israel
Sharif brothers on Baitullah Mehsud's hit list.
No Georgian destruction of Tskhinvali, contrary to lying Russian claims.
Nuclear yield within six to twelve months.
McNeill ties length to Pakistan tribal region, likely to be protracted anyway.
Multinational force press release on Sadr City operations and seizure of weapons and munitions.
"We will fight them to the end."
War on terror not popular with Pakistani population.
U.S. presence expanding Southward in Iraq.
Its full steam ahead for Iran.
And SECDEF Gates continues to press this issue.
Pajamas Media exclusive: how your tax dollars fund terror.
Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary Graduate executed in Afghanistan.
Nearly 1000 dead from harshest Afghan winter in 30 years.
Attacks in Baghdad down 80% according to Iraqi Army.
Lack of appropriate defense spending a grave situation.
Olmert claims Iran still on target to construct nuclear weapon.
Promoted to Army Vice Chief of Staff. Well deserved.
Must read on Israeli Army shame and lawyer happiness with war against Hezbollah.
Libyans joining jihad in increasing numbers.
How relevant will Maliki be to Iraq's future?
Maj. Gen. Gaskin: "The positive trends are permanent."
Abizaid questions whether Maliki can bring unity to Iraq.
From the Multinational Force, more on Operation Lion Pounce.
An important ally in Iraq has been assassinated.
Israel to show Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff nuclear intelligence on Iran.
Cabinet approves proposed agreement with U.S.
Prof. Kingsley Browne on his new book.
Major General Robert Scales: "Outcome is irreversible"
Mullen says military needs larger slice of GNP to modernize.
For siding with the U.S. against al Qaeda.
Terrorist poses as bride. Ugh!
Legislation in trouble.
Al Qaeda documents discovered near Syrian border.
Shameful people jeer disabled veterans in swimming pool.
Saudi jihadist in Iraq tells his personal story.
Concerning Iranian meddling and Quds.
Michael Yon breaks bread with General Petraeus.
Ralph Peters on the advancements in Iraq.
War between al Qaeda and Hezbollah.
Traumatic brain injury not recognized.
Ballistic Sensor Fused Munition.
High intensity electronic warfare.
Iranian weapons are a sign of continued Iranian meddling in Iraq.
U.S. forces in Iraq are using a high-resolution, thermal/infrared sensor system.
Washington Post profiles AQI (al Qaeda in Iraq, or al Qaeda in Mesopotamia).
Taiwan may not be as secure as we would like to think.
Be thankful your daughter isn't be raised in Basra.
Pastor discusses rules of engagement and sacrificial U.S. deaths.
In counterinsurgency (COIN), patience is a virtue. But violence has decreased so fast in
In Command Structure Changes for Afghanistan we discussed the possibility that Secretary of Defense Gates would demand changes in the strategic alignment of U.S. forces in Afghanistan. Promotion of General Petraeus to Commander of CENTCOM without a realignment of U.S. troops to his direct command (they currently report to NATO command) removes the possibility for any strategic changes needed to make the campaign successful.
There are further developments in the potential realignment of forces, and General McNeill has made his position known.
The top NATO commander in Afghanistan said on Wednesday he favored talks to end the rotating command among allied forces in the violent south of the country, where the United States has added more troops.
U.S. Army Gen. Dan McNeill also said he still needed more troops and aircraft for his 50,000-strong force, declaring he was a “fairly frugal dude” and only asked for what he needed.
“I am in favor of a dialogue by the policymakers and the politicians about the consideration of one country leading a multinational headquarters in the south,” McNeill told reporters in Washington by videolink from Kabul.
But as soon as McNeill said these words, politics seemed to spell the end of the potential realignment.
NATO will continue to rotate command of its troops in the violent South of Afghanistan despite U.S. generals’ concerns that the arrangement disrupts operations, the Pentagon said on Wednesday.
To minimize problems caused by the changeovers, each nation with major troop contingents in the South will take command for one year rather than the current nine months, Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell told reporters.
The announcement appeared to end a debate within NATO that some diplomats saw as an attempt by the United States to take charge of southern Afghanistan, the scene of the heaviest fighting between allied troops and Taliban insurgents.
The new arrangement does mean the United States will command NATO forces in the South — but not until late 2010. The Netherlands and Britain will each have a year in charge first after Canada’s command ends this November.
So the debate has ended with politics as the winner, and the U.S. will take over in the South where the Marines were recently deployed, but not until 2010. Next in the tortured story, the Marines may be looking at a realignment of forces to focus on Afghanistan.
The Marine Corps may begin shifting its major combat forces out of Iraq to focus on Afghanistan in 2009 if greater security in Iraq allows a reduction of Marines there, top Pentagon officials said yesterday.
Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Adm. Michael G. Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that the proposal by the Marine Corps commandant, Gen. James Conway, to focus his force on Afghanistan — which they rejected late last year — could be reconsidered.
“Should we be in a position to move forces into Afghanistan, I think that certainly would come back into consideration,” Mullen said at a Pentagon briefing. He said that he understands it is challenging for the Marines to have “a foot in both countries” and that Conway seeks to “optimize the forces that he has,” but stressed that any shift is likely to occur “down the road.”
Gates said he agrees that the Marine Corps shift is “a possibility” for next year. He explained that when he earlier said the change “wouldn’t happen on my watch,” that was not an unchangeable policy decision — he meant it would not unfold until 2009, when he plans to step down.
But by then the Afghan troops are supposed to take over operations. “Afghanistan’s national army will have the manpower to take the lead in fighting the Taliban by early 2009, helping NATO forces move toward a support role, the general in charge of Afghan troop training said.”
So NATO stays in charge, while more U.S. Marines are deployed to Afghanistan - under NATO control without a coherent strategy - and the U.S. takes over operations in the South in 2010, but this is irrelevant because by this time the Afghan troops will have taken charge.
Got it? Actually, with this plan, The Captain’s Journal has a different prediction in mind. The Taliban win because of our inept vacillations and political games.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Prev | List | Random | Next · Join Powered by RingSurf! |
On May 27, 2008 at 8:32 pm, trollsmasher said:
I was under the impression that a part of US Forces in Afghanistan were still outside ISAF command? In my humble opinion U.S. Forces except those training Afghan forces should be placed outside the NATO command structure. NATO has proven to not be the best warfighters but seem to do a credible training job. Lets just hope the German ROE do not rub off on them.
Also did anyone notice that the offical press of Afghanistan is calling on the U.S. to start sustained attacks into the FATA against Taliban and AQ training camps and C3. This has to be done.
On May 27, 2008 at 10:48 pm, Herschel Smith said:
All U.S. troops are under the authority of NATO. You’re right, that the NATO forces do appear to be good at training, force protection and Kabul security. They should focus on this, split the forces into NATO and U.S., and let the U.S. focus on the Taliban and population with U.S. forces reporting to CENTCOM but matrixed as necessary to NATO for selected missions. Otherwise, the Petraeus promotion will make no difference.
On May 30, 2008 at 10:19 pm, Aercdr said:
A large number of US troops are here in Afghanistan under Operation Enduring Freedom, not ISAF. Those forces do come under CENTCOM. There is a “dual-hatted” command structure that has an American general performing both duties. US troops include SOF and a wide-variety of other forces.