This is why Dunford has risen so high: he can see the blazingly obvious facts while most people in the Washington establishment work tremendously hard not to see clear and unmistakable truths.
Anyway, al Qaeda and other Islamic jihad groups are more assertive and aggressive than ever, all around the world. Of course they will be more active in Afghanistan after U.S. forces leave than they are while American troops are there. But the presence of U.S. troops there doesn’t do anything to lessen their capacity to bide their time and wait us out, and we are there in service of a corrupt and ungrateful Sharia regime that it is pointless to support. U.S. troops should leave Afghanistan now, and should have long ago, and be redeployed in more intelligent and realistic ways to contain the jihad threat.
“US commander in Afghanistan sees ‘significant’ risk of Al Qaeda returning,” by Anna Mulrine, Christian Science Monitor, July 17, 2014:
Washington — In America’s longest war, words like “victory” have long faded from the US military’s lexicon.
But even by these standards, the prospects that the top US commander on the ground offered Thursday for Afghanistan’s future were notably less than robust.
The current pace of withdrawal of US troops from the country “could result in Afghanistan forces being sustainable,” Gen. Joseph Dunford told lawmakers, a phrase that fell short even of faint praise.
Recommended: Are you smarter than a US Marine? Take the recruitment quizThere is an equally good chance, too, that even after 13 years of war, Afghanistan could revert back to being a safe haven for terrorists, he said.
When asked to rate the possibility that Al Qaeda-affiliated fighters could migrate back to Afghanistan after US forces draw down and resume training operations in pre-9/11 mode, Dunford called that risk “significant.”
He told senators, too, that he did not necessarily support President Obama’s decision to announce a withdrawal date for US forces in Afghanistan.
“I think all of us in uniform, including the Afghans, would have preferred for that to be a bit more ambiguous,” he said in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee.
Dunford was called to testify because he is nominated to be the next commandant of the Marine Corps, the service’s top officer. But during his confirmation hearing he faced tough questions about his current job commanding US war efforts.
During his testimony, Dunford acknowledged that he is “not confident” that Afghan security forces will be able to sustain themselves after US troops leave.
That’s because the Afghan military is still not particularly skilled at doing things like budgeting, or ordering spare parts for their vehicles, or paying their soldiers, Dunford said.
The other big problem is that it does not have its own intelligence capabilities or a developed aviation system. Though it is in need of special operations forces to fight insurgent operatives and lingering Al Qaeda elements, the Catch-22 is that it cannot adequately develop these forces without intelligence or aviation assets, Dunford explained.
Women are also not faring well in Afghanistan, especially when it comes to integrating them into key government jobs, including military positions. “That’s not a particularly good news story,” Dunford told lawmakers.
The goal has been to have the Afghan national army and police force be comprised of 10 percent women, but the number is currently closer to one percent. “I wouldn’t for a minute understand the cultural challenges,” he said, “that are going to make progress for women very slow.”
There are some reasons to be hopeful in Afghanistan, however – and reasons why the country is not necessarily destined to follow the path of Iraq, Dunford said.
These reasons include, most notably, the fact that both of Afghanistan’s presidential candidates actually want US troops to stay. So, too, do regional powers, with the exception of Iran, he added.
What’s more, Secretary of State John Kerry’s mediating role in Afghanistan may have helped to avert a civil war, Dunford told lawmakers. Instead of creating parallel governments that could have competed with each other – and could have led to a “significant” possibility of civil war – the two leading presidential candidates have agreed to a power-sharing arrangement.
That is vital, because there will be no progress without political reconciliation, Dunford told lawmakers.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R) of South Carolina, a leading hawk in Congress, seconded this sentiment. “If there’s a failure to get this election closed out, no amount of American troops is going to make Afghanistan successful,” he said. “As a matter of fact, if that doesn’t happen, I’ll be the first one to say, ‘Get the hell out of there.’ ”
Say it now.
Myxlplik says
Dunford’s internal monologue
http://youtu.be/k5VZjT0JE70
PRCS says
“This is why Dunford has risen so high”
No, it’s not. His rise through the ranks is the result of several decades of noteworthy, exemplary service.
Marine Corps General John Allen’s rise to four star general was also the result of decades of impeccable service. But several events while serving as ISAF commander make clear that even those who have risen to the top can be clulessly idiotic at times:
“General Allen clearly has now idea how weak and pusillanimous his repeated apologies in this video will make him appear to many, if not most, of “the noble people of Afghanistan.””
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/02/afghanistan-enraged-crowd-of-2000-rallies-shouting-die-die-foreigners-over-alleged-quran-desecration
JIMJFOX says
It’s not useful to delineate between terrorist organisations. No matter what they call themselves their agenda is always the same, Islam and sharia. Therefore whether it’s Al Qaeda, Taliban, Boko Haram, ISIL/ISIS/IS is irrelevant, we can’t claim any one is better or worse than any other.
So, when you have Taliban why worry about Al Qaeda??
Vapourking says
Let me help you out Mr Dunford with your significant risk theory, they will return when the US pulls out cut your losses and get out.
I hope the West and the US in particular have learned some valuable lessons about Islam.
What were we hoping to gain from those 2 wars? Meddling in the ME is pointless especially when you ignore the elephant in the room.
Newsflash to our Western leaders Islam is the problem, while Islam exists the jihad threat will exist.
Islam’s parasitic nature is its Achilles Heal, remove the host and Islam collapses.
Petro dollars, foreign aid, insane western immigration polices are Islam’s host atm. For the greater good of humanity and with future generations in mind history is were Islam belongs,1400 years of lunacy is enough.
Ban Islam in the west, remove anyone wishing to practise, no foreign aid, develop our shoal oil reserves and turn our backs on Islam. Your in the naughty corner for a while, call us when you learn how to behave like a human beings and wish to contribute to this world.
Ok I admit calling us might be difficult without basic western tech like a phone, don’t worry Allah will guide you.
Uri says
Amen, Vapourking!
Myxlplik says
Let’s not forget, going to war in the Middle East’s primary purpose was to fight against this ideology away from home, “We’re fighting them there, so we don’t have to fight them here.” In leu of draconian measures at home, I presume.
What people don’t really get is that these wars have been an attempt to keep the Islamic world in the international fold in regards to flow of people, ideas, and trade. I think the in leu part, the other option was to isolate it, cut it off… we preferred to attempt to not have two worlds, an Islamic one and a Western one. It seems though, that in spite of our best efforts cutting off the gangrenous wound is the only option left.
AnneCrockett says
In other news, Gen. Dunford suggests that in all likelihood if it rains tomorrow the ground will be wet.
Arafat says
General Dumbford is aptly named.
Myxlplik says
Remember, the General lives in a world where, any verbal analysis between Islam as an ideology and the threat we face is a sure way to get barred from entering countries, getting the insane accusation of racism levied against you, being fired and having your pension suspended.
So he chooses his words carefully, which is why I linked the video up there. Sarcasm.
Walter Sieruk says
One of the main reasons that there be a high risk of al Qaeda returning to Afghanistan is the Obama keeps on ,always, giving orders that are in contradiction to what the generals that by keep that understand what it need to be done to keep that country free from the threat , evils and terrors of al Qaeda and the Taliban.
So in the future America may not be that safe because al Qaeda bases might be restored in Afghanistan. What a terrible President Obama is. Obama should be impeached , removed for office and the tried for treason