- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
From the Baltimore Sun, Jan. 7:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-te.afghanistan07jan07,0,3288686.story?page=1&coll=bal-attack-headlines
This story, Afghan war needs troops, also seems to be the origin of the idea that the US will be reducing troop strength in Afstan to support the "surge" in Iraq.
The MND then looked rather silly in this CP story:
Canada hopes U.S. won’t cut troops in Afghanistan
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Canada/552487.html
From an LA Times story:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-gates13jan13,1,5040851.story?coll=la-headlines-world
The US troop reduction idea also produced this in the Crvena Zvezda Jan. 13:
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/170771
Nice effort to suggest (falsely) the US is going to leave Canada holding the Afghan bag--and undercut support for the mission.
Mark
Ottawa
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-te.afghanistan07jan07,0,3288686.story?page=1&coll=bal-attack-headlines
A senior U.S. Special Forces officer said the Canadians, even though they have tanks and light armored vehicles, refuse to dismount on foot patrols, which are considered more risky but more productive in establishing relationships with the local population...
One Special Forces officer, an adviser with the Afghan army, told of asking the Canadians for help in regaining the initiative in battle. "They refused to cross the river" to help, the officer said in a cold fury. "It is disturbing."...
John Morris, a spokesman for Canada's Expeditionary Forces Command in Ottawa, said it is "absolutely not true" that Canadians do not patrol on foot. He could not comment on any specific cases but insisted that Canadian forces operating in Afghanistan "are not subject to any geographic or movement restrictions."..
This story, Afghan war needs troops, also seems to be the origin of the idea that the US will be reducing troop strength in Afstan to support the "surge" in Iraq.
...a U.S. Army infantry battalion fighting in a critical area of eastern Afghanistan is due to be withdrawn within weeks in order to deploy to Iraq...
Conway [Marine Corps Commandant] said, he favored dispatching a Marine battalion here, a decision that must be approved by the new defense secretary, Robert M. Gates, and by the president.
"It has to be made pretty soon," Conway said. "We can't jerk the troops around and say, 'Hey, oh, by the way, you're going to Afghanistan in February.'"..
The MND then looked rather silly in this CP story:
Canada hopes U.S. won’t cut troops in Afghanistan
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Canada/552487.html
Canada’s defence minister is hoping the United States won’t shift combat troops from Afghanistan to boost its war in Iraq, although America’s top military official says it has no intention of doing so.
Gordon O’Connor said Friday that the possibility of fewer troops in Afghanistan was the main question he had regarding U.S. president George W. Bush’s plan to boost forces in Iraq by 21,500 troops.
"I don’t know if there will be any impact," he said after a speech to the Halifax Chamber of Commerce.
"My hope is they won’t draw any troops away from Afghanistan to reinforce Iraq. . . . That’s the only thing I’d think about."
The chair of the U.S. joint chiefs of staff said Friday there’s no plan to reduce its military presence in Afghanistan.
U.S. General Peter Pace, speaking at the Senate armed services committee, said the units going into Iraq "were already in the pipeline and they will be moved forward in the pipeline in a couple of months."
He said there are about 22,500 troops in Afghanistan right now and that won’t change, adding: "We will be able to maintain that."
Pace also testified that if it’s necessary, the U.S. military could draw from the National Guard and reserves to send more troops to Afghanistan....
From an LA Times story:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-gates13jan13,1,5040851.story?coll=la-headlines-world
Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, indicated that he was open to raising troop levels in Afghanistan as well as Iraq. Despite concerns that U.S. land forces are overstretched by their growing commitment in Iraq, the Pentagon could sustain an increase of forces in Afghanistan as well, he said...
The US troop reduction idea also produced this in the Crvena Zvezda Jan. 13:
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/170771
It's known that Bush's plan to dispatch 21,500 new troops to insurgent-ridden Baghdad and Anbar province means pulling an infantry brigade (up to 1,000 soldiers) out of eastern Afghanistan. The timing couldn't be worse, U.S. military officials have told U.S. reporters...
Yet the Afghan front is to be deprived of troops in order to bolster the failed mission in Iraq, says Logan [foreign policy analyst at the Cato Institute]: "There has always been an ambiguity of goals in Afghanistan."..
Nice effort to suggest (falsely) the US is going to leave Canada holding the Afghan bag--and undercut support for the mission.
Mark
Ottawa