Murtha: Um, we need 600,000 troops to pacify Afghanistan
posted at 9:35 pm on March 3, 2009 by Allahpundit
In fairness, he’s not wildly above the estimate of 400,000 given by the former NATO commander there. But since Obama’s European admirers aren’t so admiring that they’re going to send more troops, the estimate might as well be a million or more. Iraq anti-war strategy redux: We don’t have enough boots on the ground so we can’t win so let’s come home.
The Pennsylvania Democrat, who chairs the powerful subcommittee that funds the military, said his figure was based on the country’s history of rigorous fighting and its size.
“That’s what I estimate it would take in a country that size to get it under control,” Murtha said in an interview…
Murtha also said he’s uncomfortable with President Barack Obama’s decision to increase the number of troops in the country by 17,000 before a goal was clearly defined. But he says he anticipates a plan will be developed to train Afghan security forces, and then the U.S. military will get out. He said he sees Afghanistan has more of a diplomatic mission, than a military one.
“I think you’ll see a change,” Murtha said. “I’m confident you’re going to see them only adjusting for a short period of time with these additional troops.”
My knowledge of conditions inside the country is, shall we say, highly imperfect, but as I understand it, the Afghan security forces aren’t anywhere near the levels of competence or manpower of their Iraqi counterparts. Unless Murtha’s talking about some sort of cosmetic effort to train whoever we can train in, say, six months before hurriedly redeploying to Okinawa or wherever, then the “training” here is going to take years and years and years. Which makes me think “training” is just his version of a fig leaf for Obama’s surge, to give the incoming troops some sort of finite mission the completion of which will be grounds to start agitating for withdrawal. Those stirrings I mentioned a few weeks ago are really starting to stir now.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
#include <stdio.h>
int main(int argc, char * argv[]){
for(;;){
::printf(“Obama is the legal and sworn ”
“President of the United States\n”);
}
return 0;
}
unclesmrgol on March 3, 2009 at 11:15 PM
Where does the money come from to keep the terrorists going?
Saudi Arabia
What is the one country in the Middle East that the Obama administration is almost guaranteed not to get tough on?
Saudi Arabia
We might as well bring everyone home.
WisCon on March 3, 2009 at 11:22 PM
You know that’s what you wanted to say.
MB4 on March 3, 2009 at 11:32 PM
What we really need is for the Iraqi Army’s training to include “live ammo exercises” in Afghanistan.
cthulhu on March 3, 2009 at 11:32 PM
I swear that Murtha reminds me of the Drunk Uncle that comes over every holiday season when you were a kid.
So far this ass has been zero for nine on predictions and no I don’t think the law of averages is going to catch up to him on this one.
jukin on March 3, 2009 at 11:37 PM
simple solution: nuke fata.
reliapundit on March 3, 2009 at 11:51 PM
Nah, its stunning how we can keep electing A$$#@!%$ over and over again …………
Benjamin9 on March 4, 2009 at 12:05 AM
Why is Murtha still talking?
More to the point, why does anyone still listen?
juanito on March 4, 2009 at 12:09 AM
Mattel toys (M-16)and festive flash grenades.
.
On the plus side.
The ragheads say “Run!! it’s the 666 infantry. and they take prisoners.”
darktood on March 4, 2009 at 12:16 AM
USSR under estimated Afgan security forces once as well.
If the US wants to be successful they have to also show that we can do more then “kick butt and chew bubble-gum”
Killing the japs/gooks/kruts (slang used as an illustration) while easy to do, does not work in today’s wars.
We are not fighting a country, but rather a culture/religon spread across many countries. Where killing infidels is perfectly acceptable.
As a result our troops need to learn more about the Muslim culture (which they have done rapidly), if only to show respect to the Afgan avg Joe.
Our Politicians back home also need to help build/re-build some sort of infrastructure in Afghanistan if they ever want to win that war.
F15Mech on March 4, 2009 at 12:23 AM
OK…. then lets put in 600K troops for 2 years… and SOLVE the dang problem.
No half a$$… no limited ROE… go in and kick butt and don’t bother with names.
Total war, not limited war. So the Islamic culture what it means to start a war with America…
You know… like it used to be…
We LEVELED Germany and Japan…. not to mention the South in the Civil War…
Besides… since Barry wants to spend money… its better to spend it on this than on Acorn…
Romeo13 on March 4, 2009 at 12:32 AM
Ex-Marine!
Johan Klaus on March 4, 2009 at 12:36 AM
Murtha, one of the few, the disgraced, the EX-marine
AZfederalist on March 4, 2009 at 12:53 AM
well I’m not a military expert, but i don’t see how we can’t seal the border with Pakistan and destroy the drug fields. Doing these two things would improve our chances at success immeasurably.
Also, we should not compare ourselves to the Russians. The Russians had a much more difficult task in trying to install of puppet government there. And they are a vastly inferior army.
DarkKnight3565 on March 4, 2009 at 1:15 AM
Murtha needs to return his Eagle Globe and Anchor to the Drill Instructors at Paris Island/MCRD San Diego
Dragoonchris on March 4, 2009 at 1:24 AM
Wrong
Sad to say poppies are the cash crop like Corn is the crop of choice to a US farmer. (and mainly because it is the only crop Afgans can get to market) because of the poor infrastructure
If we just take them out, like you suggest, we will manage to take out their livelihood in a single strike, and in the process take out any chances we have.
Russia thought/tried force disfiguration/killing of Afgan children was a good idea.
F15Mech on March 4, 2009 at 1:39 AM
One bomber, one bomb brings that country into the 14th century.
2Tru2Tru on March 4, 2009 at 1:48 AM
Poppies are the primary source of income to the Taliban. It is less important to the average Afghan farmer. In fact, Karzai has reportedly made great progress in eradicating opium farms. We eliminate the major source of funding for our enemies, our enemies become less dangerous, no?
DarkKnight3565 on March 4, 2009 at 1:53 AM
Armies at least as far back as Alexander the Great have tried to conquer Afghanistan and have failed, and they didn’t have touchy-feely rules of engagement to follow. What makes us so sure we will ever succeed? Especially with it now in the hands of Obama and friends.
Common Sense on March 4, 2009 at 2:56 AM
Honestly, Allah… is this a disinformation campaign?
‘Allah’ is an Atheist. How ironic. And don’t you dare chastise me for bringing it up; you shove it in our faces every day. As if we CARE.
Much like your knowledge of religion. But, as you understand it………..
You give opinions, which is fine. You admit you don’t know much background to support your opinions. Fine. But you give yourself too much credit:
Time to change your handle. A more appropriate moniker would be ‘Sardonicpundit’.
Ugly on March 4, 2009 at 3:13 AM
The arab/persian/muslim enemies (there are many and they are independent) can be almost entirely defanged by retaking the gulf oil fields that they stole in the forced nationalization waves. Further, they will not stop attacking us so long as they retain the fields. It’s that simple.
progressoverpeace on March 4, 2009 at 4:45 AM
We are not fighting a country, but rather a culture/religion spread across many countries.
WTF- KILL THE RAGGSZ
AMERICAN VETERAN on March 4, 2009 at 5:06 AM
Do the democrats have any legitimacy on Foreign Policy at all?
From getting us into Vietnam, then protesting against it and riding the failure of the politicians (not our Soldiers who never lost a battle) in using the difficulties of war to gain political power. They turned their backs on our Soldiers,this country and by cutting funds, left over 3 millions people to be slaughtered.
————————————————
democrats called Reagan a war monger,illiterate,stupid,and accused him of trying to start a nuclear war.Now he is credited with bringing down the Soviet Union and creating a
strong economy.
————————————————
democrats spent the Clinton administration appeasing or flat out ignoring the threat the jihadist posed to not only this country but the world.They slashed our military and intelligence while Osama declared war on America and attacked us at will.
Osama and Saddam used Clintons ineffective bombings as recruitment tools,gaining more strength and legitimacy while attacking their targets at will.
Clinton policies of police action combined with the Gorelick wall were a failure and also allowed over 8 opportunities to take the most dangerous terrorist in the world,Osama, to slip through our hands.
This incompetence and weakness lead to the planning of the worst attack on American soil that was finally accomplished
a few months into Bush’s administration on 9/11/01.
——————————————————
democrats spent most of the 90′s and up until they voted for the Iraq war telling the world how dangerous Saddam was with his WMD/Nuclear programs,ties to al-qaeda,and how dangerous it was for the region and our country if he stayed in power.
When the Iraq war starting getting tough (insurgency),the democrats sold out their country,stabbed our Soldiers in the back by using the difficulties of war as a sledge hammer against the Bush administration in their pursuit of Congressional seats and then the White House.
The democrats and their friends in the press pushed their idiotic conspiracy theories such as “Bush lied” and “the war is for oil”,claiming Bush tricked them into going into Iraq,while at the same time ignoring and purposely blacking out the democrats railing against Saddam and the hundreds of videos and speeches of democrats saying the same things about Iraq that Bush said.
democrats opposed the surge (with Obama and Biden leading the way) their leader Harry Reid even went to the Senate floor to announce the war lost with our Soldiers on the battlefield.
Now that Iraq is won,they want to pretend it was their obstruction of the President and their calls for surrender at every turn that really brought the success we now see in Iraq.
I just don’t see how any intelligent American with any knowledge of history,can even stomach a democrat making any Foreign Policy decisions or sending our Soldiers off to war.
democrats past history and current policies of capitulation
show that they don’t have the intelligence or the backbone to do what it takes to defend our country against our enemies, much less win a war.
Baxter Greene on March 4, 2009 at 5:12 AM
I despise Jack Murtha but he is not that far off. Obama has set us on a course that will lead to a disaster eventually.
Jdripper on March 4, 2009 at 7:25 AM
In fairness, he’s not wildly above the estimate of 400,000 given by the former NATO commander there.
That’s a stupid statement!
apoole on March 4, 2009 at 7:32 AM
Obama, meet your Vietnam …
It’s too bad you told everybody this was THE WAR America should really be fighting, not Iraq where we won.
tarpon on March 4, 2009 at 8:29 AM
That right you so lightly throw around is earned by the military and preserved by the military, you idiot.
Wade on March 4, 2009 at 8:45 AM
Murtha knows all about insurgencies.
He’s the proud bearer of both the Viet Cong’s highest award and also struts about with Al Qaeda’s “Order of Allah” medal for his efforts to defeat the American Occupation in Iraq.
Seriously, when this country was serious, men like Murtha were tarred, feathered and ridden out of town on a rail.
John Murtha is a traitor who deserves to be thrown bodily out of the country.
NoDonkey on March 4, 2009 at 8:50 AM
Anybody know/remember how many troops the British used and expended trying to ‘pacify’ AfganiStan during the Raj? Lots and lots, and the various Afghani tribes were less-well armed then than now. The Russkis were secretly supplying the tribes then(it was the time of “The Great Game”). Who’s getting them AK’s, DshK’s, RPG’s, etc. now? Perhaps Our Friends, the Chinese? Where’s ‘Bloody Lance’ Flashman when we neednhim?
GeneSmith on March 4, 2009 at 9:16 AM
Of course Murtha wants to send more troops to Afghanistan. He’s got to have someone to call “cold-blooded murderers”, and the guys they’re letting out of prison early in California just don’t fit the bill for him anymore.
leetpriest on March 4, 2009 at 9:16 AM
Old trooper is likely a civilian now, and his obligation (the same obligation you were probably too much of a coward to uphold yourself) has expired, as has his gag order.
Statements like this to former military:
Proves that you’re just another imbecile that doesn’t understand that members of the military are not granted rights during their service.
Rights to free speech are not granted to members of the military.
Rights to practice certain aspects of religion are not granted to members of the military.
Free press does not exist within the military.
So in essence, when a Soldier, Sailor, Airman, or Marine leaves service and tastes their newly EARNED (believe me, child, It’s earned) rights, a sense of pride is formed. Pride that isn’t easily toppled by some faggot on a blog.
Learn some respect.
leetpriest on March 4, 2009 at 9:53 AM
Commenter sez:
What make you think Marines need something that noisy? While the chances of this happening are rather remote, why not invite him to an ENLISTED Marine’s Birthday Ball? No fuss, no muss just a mysterious puddle on the floor easily removed by the cleaning crew later.
SeniorD on March 4, 2009 at 10:15 AM
Pray for the troops.
argos on March 4, 2009 at 10:15 AM
“USSR under estimated Afgan security forces once as well.”
The Russians went in at the request of the Socialist leaning Afghanistan government, and always fought on the Afghanistan government’s side.
“Anybody know/remember how many troops the British used and expended trying to ‘pacify’ AfganiStan during the Raj? Lots and lots, and the various Afghani tribes were less-well armed then than now.”
Not as many as you would think. And the Brits were less well armed then than now.
The 600,000 figure has been listed by some in the counter insurgency community as the minimum number required to deal with the ratbags. They need to come up with a better answer than pure manpower. It will never be available.
davod on March 4, 2009 at 11:17 AM
How long has Murtha and Barnie been room mates?
Cybergeezer on March 4, 2009 at 11:52 AM
They build their own. Better quality control as well.
darktood on March 4, 2009 at 1:39 PM
I am sorry to say this but i really wonder if
murtha was ever a real marine…
all i hear from murtha is either
i dont sell out for only 50 grand
or
we cant win..
Im sorry but my son has more balls than murtha does..
jcila on March 4, 2009 at 2:20 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2