I understand the U.S. military's need to win over the "hearts and minds" of the Afghan people in order to gain confidence and collaboration from them. The Taliban is so entrenched that unless people view the U.S. as a true ally the average Afghan can't be expected to befriend the American's, risking their lives by making the Taliban angry. We need the village warlords and elders who can choose to cooperate with the Taliban to see the U.S. as an asset to their people. From my vantage point however, it is going to take a lot more soldiers in Afghanistan to manage the violence of the Taliban while similtaneously winning the hearts and minds of the people. We have the dual responsibility of protecting people from the Taliban's destruction of the roads, hospitals, schools, jobs and other necessities for those in both rural areas and cities.
What is the point in deploying less then the necessary amount of troops, and loosing more young soldiers then any one family can bare? If we are going to fight the Taliban and "restore order and democracy" then we should have started in Afghanistan where we knew the terrorist were definitely training, not Iraq. What a waste of lives and resources. Ironically, I'm not an advocate of war, really, but if you are going to be involved in one, give it your best shot so that those out there aren't sitting ducks.
How many are enough? How many are too many?
ReplyDelete"Only the dead have seen an end to war."
Plato