If this article is accurate, Trump is now fully a captive of the swamp. The Afghanistan misadventure has no purpose, no focus, and no goal. The Taliban and the Islamic State and other forces that want the Americans out are never going to give up, and there is no chance whatsoever that Afghanistan is going to become a stable, secular republic granting equality of rights to women and non-Muslims. Numerous American troops have been murdered by their Afghan “allies” whom they were trying to train. There is simply no way to distinguish Afghan forces who are actually on our side from jihadist infiltrators. Instead of increasing our commitment there, which is only going to destroy more lives and waste more money, Trump should be pulling our troops out and working on containing the jihadis there. But the swamp has prevailed.
“Trump’s Afghanistan Speech Kicks Off Post-Bannon White House Era,” by Ros Krasny, Bloomberg, August 20, 2017:
Donald Trump will make a prime-time speech about Afghanistan and South Asia on Monday as he looks to get his presidency back on track following the departure of chief strategist Stephen Bannon and a week of tumult over his response to white-nationalist violence.
The president ends his 17-day “working vacation,” spent largely at his golf resort in New Jersey, and returns to Washington Sunday night with his popularity at a low ebb. Monday night, he’ll “address our nation’s troops and the American people” at 9 p.m. Washington time, according to a White House statement….
Details of the revised U.S. Afghanistan policy were hashed out Friday at Camp David, the presidential retreat in Maryland, where Trump assembled his defense and national security teams for an hours-long meeting.
“Important day spent at Camp David with our very talented Generals and military leaders. Many decisions made, including on Afghanistan,” Trump said Saturday on Twitter.
A key point is whether Trump is prepared to commit more troops to America’s longest-running conflict, which the U.S. initiated after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Bannon, who opposed an expanding presence, wasn’t at the Camp David meeting and departed as Trump’s chief strategist on Aug. 18.
Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster back a proposal to add troops focused on training Afghan special forces. It’s intended to show a U.S. commitment to stay in the country, prod Taliban fighters to the negotiating table and stem the increased presence of terrorist groups including Islamic State.
Mattis was careful not to preempt his boss on the Afghanistan speech when he spoke to reporters on a military aircraft Sunday en route to Amman. He said he was satisfied with the process of formulating the new war strategy while not giving details….
bratfalean says
America in Afganistan is good only for cut drug rout!India and Russia will resolve jihad problem in Afganistan-Pakistan because is self interest!
balam says
Trump is not only in the SWAMP but he is surrounded by a few CROCKS .It is not wise to send more troops to Afghanistan .It is wiser to withdraw the American forces from Afghanistan altogether .You can never turn the SNAKES into HUMANS .American lives are precious and matter a lot. Let the Muslim countries destroy themselves. Who cares!!!
EYESOPEN says
Concur.
Fair views TH says
US Secret Service says it is running out of money to protect Trump, his homes and family.
So get the hell out of all the Islamic hellholes asap to save money and the soldiers’s lives.
Scarido says
Let Muslims destroy themselves? Typical red neck retard!
TL says
Follow the money back to poor, persecuted conservative pests who have a financial interest in military contracting. There is our problem.
Krazy Kafir says
What a disaster McDhimmi is.
Daniel Triplett says
Notwithstanding our 1400 year continuing war with the Ummah, a kinetic war with Iran is inevitable. We can either wait for them to glass Tel Aviv, Manhattan, or DC as they promise, or we can destroy their nuke production facilities and existing warheads first. Either way, we will have war.
For those who insist on a conventional solution for the coming war with Iran, we must strategically control and occupy the Iraq and Afghanistan territories to sandwich Iran. This is an indispensable requirement for a conventional war.
Conventional wars require forward deployed assets and Forward Operating Bases. We can’t drive tanks across the ocean. We can’t fly Special Ops Forces and Infantry Troops on helicopters from North Carolina to Iran and back. A conventional war is 90% support and logistics, which means secured bases, Search and Rescue, hospitals, lodging, chow halls, supply depots, ammo dumps, and 1000 other elements must be close to the action — in addition to the combat forces themselves, which must be stationed up front close to the enemy.
For those who don’t wish to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan, considering we must use kinetic force to defeat Iran, this leaves just one option: Nuclear Ordnance.
And we’re just talking about Iran here. This doesn’t begin to address the much larger problem of the Islamic ideology, Pakistan, North Korea, the 57 OIC states, Dar al-Islam, or the tens of millions of Ummah living among us, many of whom are un-deportable citizens.
I haven’t heard a containment strategy yet that will work.
To begin, isolation and containment gave us a nuke-tipped ICBM armed North Korea, the most ostracized, contained, isolated state on Earth. We also face a nuclear armed Pakistan with 130 – 200 warheads. Iran is moments away from their own arsenal. Containment doesn’t solve these problems.
Moreover, Dar al-Islam has a minimum 26,000 mile long land and sea perimeter. How can we possibly contain Muslims within that? We don’t have the military, money, method, time, or the Will to patrol that kind of perimeter. We can’t even prevent aliens from breaching our 1933 mile long Southern border.
Further, Europe as it is can’t prevent Muslim border crossings, on top of the Angela Merkel immigration disaster. The European — Asian land border is 3850 miles long.
Europe’s Mediterranean border is nearly impossible to fully patrol. The Greek coastline alone is 8498 miles long. Notwithstanding the NGO boats that actually pick up Muslims in African territorial waters to hand-deliver to Europe, hundreds and thousands of boats make it from Africa to Europe on their own now.
While the native-European population continues its steep decline, the African population will explode from 1 Billion today to 4 Billion by 2100. If Europe can’t repel the invasion today, how can they possibly repel an invasion four times the size?
Are we going to just kick the can down the road so our grandchildren can fight a much larger more lethal enemy?
I see only one strategy for victory in this epic crisis, which I’ve repeated ad nauseum.
Daniel Triplett says
Imagine what the Nazi and Japanese Empires would look like today had our grandfathers done nothing.
WorkingClassPost says
Dan, one thing I’m unsure about.
I know that much has been done to make nukes ‘cleaner’.but how far can that go?
I would not for a minute trust our leaders and paid experts on this topic.
So my question is: whatever happened to nuclear fallout?
In any hot exchange there would be multiple strikes and changing wind and atmospheric conditions, so predicting and containing contamination would be impossible.
We’ve already seen the harm caused from using depleted uranium shells, but full-on nukes seem infinitely worse.
Daniel Triplett says
Trinity (the first test) = 18 – 20kt
Little Boy (Hiroshima) = 12 – 18kt
Fat Man (Nagasaki) = 18 – 23kt
Total Number of Above Ground Nuke Weapon Tests (all countries) = 521
Largest Nuke Weapon ever tested Above Ground = Tsar Bomba 50,000kt
Average yield of a US Nuke today = 200kt
(Although most of our weapons are adjustable yield [Dial-a-Death], 200kt is usually enough to accomplish the objective)
Hundreds of nuke weapon tests have been performed above ground. The Earth as a whole remains undamaged.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were quickly rebuilt. Today they’re thriving metropolises.
I’m not trying to understate the adverse ramifications of nuclear weapons. Obviously, those who are targeted, along with the Earth to a degree pay a price.
But, the bottom line is we have no other choice. I estimate between 20 – 30 nuke strikes total, at 200kt each will be required to force Dar al-Islam’s surrender to Allied terms. The planet itself would receive negligible damage.
Daniel Triplett says
Or put another way:
So far, a total of 479,103kt of nuclear ordnance has been detonated above ground.
Compared to the 4000 – 6000kt total I estimate is required to win the war.
WorkingClassPost says
Ok, but those test sites were chosen for their remoteness and suitable weather conditions.
Not sure I’d want to be anywhere near such an event.
And by that I mean ,+1000 miles upwind.
Daniel Triplett says
100 atmospheric (922 underground) nuclear weapon devices have been detonated at the Nevada Test Site, just 30 miles from the nearest town, and 65 miles from Las Vegas.
As always, we consider weather and wind patterns when selecting and striking targets. We did for Hiroshima and Nagasaki; we did before then, and we’ve done so ever since.
Nuclear weapons are an effective method to frighten the enemy, destroy their vigor/morale, and break their Will to Fight–quickly, with zero Allied casualties. The first side losing its Will to Fight loses the war by definition.
I don’t want to be near a nuke blast either. No one does. That’s the point.
Sons of Liberty says
We can’t be the one who starts a nuclear conflagration ! And make no mistake it would be a conflagration , not to mention an economic collapse brought on by a nose diving stock market . However , you are right , that OBAMA in his ignorant treasonous deal has virtually assured that Iran will have a nuclear weapon. We must have INTELLIGENCE CAPABILITIES and we must build the most advanced anti missile defense system in the world. We then MUST ASSURE IRAN , that if a nuclear weapon goes off in an American city their country will cease to exist. This means if they hand one off to terrorists , which is our greatest threat , they will be held accountable ,..with certain destruction ! But we must not start the war , then we are the aggressor and who knows who will retaliate ,…China , Russia , North Korea.
Daniel Triplett says
We didn’t start this war. The Ummah did, 1400 years ago.
We’re already in a nuclear war, like it or not. It won’t be a “nuclear conflagration” if we’re the only side doing the strikes, which my strategy guarantees.
Iran will hit us with nukes, whether or not we strike them first. They promise to do so daily, especially every Friday. They’d be pleased to be martyred in retaliation, giving them a guaranteed path to the highest level of Paradise. They don’t care if there country ceases to exist. Spreading Islam is worth more to them than their country or their lives.
We need not wait until enemy ICBMs are airborne, or worse yet as you say, wait until “a nuclear weapon goes off in an American city” before we defend ourselves.
If somebody is pointing a loaded gun at you, you’re not required to wait for the bullet to hit you before killing him first.
Iran and North Korea are threatening us with nuke weapons. They’re pointing a loaded gun at us, and that’s provocation enough. This therefore makes our first strike defensive, not preemptive.
Daniel Triplett says
Here’s the big picture strategy, if you’re interested:
“Total War: Extinguishing Islam from Earth”
by Maj Daniel Triplett
https://medium.com/@dantriplett/islamic-jihad-is-total-war-for-all-marbles-6c858098b76e
David A says
My best argument for your thesis is two fold. One, we can likely destroy their nuclear capacity without nukes. Two, dies following your course bring China and or Russia into a global war?
My choice would be first attempt to make Russia, China, India and others very clear on our commitment to take out Iranian and Korean nuclear capacity, demand a suppression and radical overturning of Islamic doctrine to a few rare historic interpretations of Sharia etc… as an internal only battle between good and evil, enforce this resolute reformation in the US, Russia, China and willing EU nations and put immense pressure on Islamic nations to due likewise, and point out the vast benefits of this to the EU, Russia China etc… while reminding them of the inevitable consequences of not doing this.
Daniel Triplett says
The Iranians study the limitations of our conventional ordnance, and build their most important facilities to exceed those limitations. They’re not stupid.
A conventional strike means risking pilots and expensive airplanes. If they get shot down, that means we must risk Search and Rescue assets go get them. We’d need all kinds of support as a backup. Iran would abuse US POWs horrifically.
Iran has formidable air defenses, so the risk to our aircrews and aircraft is high.
On top of that, the Battle Damage would likely not accomplish our objective.
Why mess with all that when we can simply use standoff nuke weapons launched from a submerged US Submarine? One MIRV UGM-133 Trident II (D5LE) with 10 warheads would guarantee our objective within 4 to 24 minutes, with zero risk to Allied life.
A nuke weapon is an efficient standoff weapon. It’s just a weapon. False propaganda has demonized them. What difference does it make how we kill a man or destroy a structure? Our choice of weapon should be the most efficient weapon that accomplishes our war objectives and ends the whole mess the soonest. Nuke weapons are arguably the most humane anyway, because they yield instantaneous destruction of property and lives.
Moreover, our nuclear deterrence effect is impotent unless we demonstrate our will to use them on occasion.
Risking 50 airplanes with 200 aircrew and 2500 bombs makes no sense when we can simply use 1 bomb with zero risk to our lives.
As I’ve said, an Alliance with China, Russia, and India is indispensable. We also need France, UK, and Israel to get on board.
Western Civilization will face staggering consequences without such an Alliance willing to use overwhelming force to extinguish the global threat.
I have articulated my best proposed Allied strategy for North Korea in the essay.
Altering Nazism was impossible.
Altering Shintoism was impossible.
We will never alter Islam either. It’s Eternally immutable.
We can only extinguish the Islamic ideology entirely through forced criminalization.
Our grandfathers already demonstrated to us how this works.
Irene Brekelmans says
I wish Trump all the best, he has to deal with shadow cabinets, mega companies and who is profitting from wars. Remember with Irak, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld who made lots of money from that war. It is crazy, but when things don’t work out for the “elite” they want to go to war, war always covers different reasons for it. Why is the USA still in Afghanistan, they can not win, it costs them lives of their own soldiers, Afghans kill even Americans on their own compound.
When you relly know what is going on after the decisions to go to war, you are going to be sick. I would think that the US has enough problems at home. It would be a better idea to pull all your troups and equipment out..
Be alert after the solar Eclips, it moves all over the states, ask astrologers what it means after today you get the 40 nights and then september, and it will be a hectic year ahead and you will need all the strenght you have.
I want to send Robert Spencer all the strength he needs to keep this all going, it is not nothing and I thank him and all the other commentators for all the work you have put in. At a certain point we all have to unite. Take care. !!!
ploome says
We have been in Afghanistan 17yrs, training them and this is still not enough? Anyone think maybe they are on the other team?
Dehne mclaugjlin says
Yes.
WorkingClassPost says
RACH. I am white, and I wouldn’t want to live among KKK either.
But you are certainly right, they are probably just as unpleasant, but far less of a threat.
John A. Marre says
That includes giving them money and weapons. So Trump is on the side of the enemy.
jack cohen says
the surge 2: Afghanistan
Debi Brand says
I sure hope, in preparing these soon-to-be deployed 4000 “difference-makers,” they will be given McMaster lead Qur’an-kissing classes. And all in line with such.
Such skills are their only hope for succeeding in their mission, unlike all the thousands who have preceded them into and out of Afghanistan, to say little of Iraq.
jewdog says
Safe zones need to be established in Afghanistan – ones without Sharia, or Islam. Then invite the real refugees in, and open up the country up for immigration. After all, they attacked and we conquered it fair and square. Any other solution is just a finger in the dyke.
Debi Brand says
“Safe zones need to be established in Afghanistan – ones without Sharia, or Islam. Then invite the real refugees in, and open up the country up for immigration. After all, they attacked and we conquered it fair and square. Any other solution is just a finger in the dyke.”
Indeed, and for such reasons, Trump’s new strategy, just that: “Safe zones … to be established in Afghanistan – ones without Sharia, or Islam.”
… no? you mean he is not implementing that?
The latter, he’s doing the latter…?
“just a finger in the dyke,” and that finger in the form of a few more flagged-draped coffins sent home, a few more amputees…
WorkingClassPost says
I did type RCH, honest…
What did the Roman day, “Who will check the spellchecker?”
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
Keep it Trump. Your base will punish you and you won’t know what hit you!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLm4AMHwLWs
Eric says
We should withdraw from Afghanistan. We can continue to give economic and military aid to the central government there but no USA troops. If we control our borders we can stop terrorist attacks here. Trumps plan will only expand the war. We will be attacking inside Pakistan proper. Us getting India involved will be us taking sides in the Indo-Paki dispute. Pakistan has nuclear weapons. Getting India involved is to further encircle China. All of this puts the USA into deeper manure than it is already in. Trump is betraying his base.
Eric
Eric says
Trump will not reveal the number of troops involved. No president should be allowed to conduct wars in secret. Congress should stop all presidents from usurping its war powers. Its time to repeal the AUMF from 2001. Get out of Afghanistan now!
Eric
Eric says
What is the point of having USA troops in Afghanistan when we are allowing Pakistan , Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states to continue to finance and arm the Taliban. Get out of Afghanistan now!
Eric
moeped says
Industrial military complex is too powerful to overcome. Trump is but one man, surrounded by traitors. He didn’t give them Syria so he gave them a win with afghanistan. Baby steps might be the only way to win the long game.
Savvy Kafir says
There should be NO American soldiers in Afghanistan, unless it’s a few special forces guys slipping in & out covertly, selecting targets for bombs & missiles.
UNCLE VLADDI says
This dissects Trump’s capitulation to the swamp in detail:
http://islamexposed.blogspot.ca/2017/08/trumps-afghanistan-strategy-for.html
Njoi!