In an amusing comment string at Milwaukee Journal Sentinel columnist Patrick McIlheran's blog, a clearly informed commenter writes:
Let's not forget the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan. The Taliban is regrouping and gaining an ever increasing foothold in the southern provinces. The fact that we didn't finish this job like we should have 5 years ago is also conveniently forgotten by conservative pundits.
Patrick responds:
You mean deteriorating, Mr Bigcat, in the sense that the Afghan army, with help from U.S. and British forces, retakes the only Taliban-held town in the country?
To be sure, NATO commanders in Afghanistan say they're short of troops at times and in places ... (it dribbles off into a series of non sequiturs and evasions trying to pass as withering insight).
Click through to the Associated Press story and you learn this:
But beyond demonstrating the progress made by the Afghan army and the psychological boost from recapturing a town previously lost, security analysts say Musa Qala, in the north of the desert province, has little strategic value and its capture does not affect the Taliban's ability to launch guerrilla strikes.
As if to demonstrate that point, the Taliban counter-attacked near Sangin, further south in Helmand, a town captured by British forces in April in an offensive to relieve British troops under siege in the town hall there for more than nine months.
"After fleeing Musa Qala the insurgents wanted to put pressure on Sangin district ... during 48 hours of fierce fighting, Afghan troops killed more than 50 terrorists," the Defence Ministry said.
"Among the enemy casualties, there were three foreign fighters and we have also killed three Taliban commanders ... NATO also used air power during the operation," it said.
NATO commanders have often complained they are short of troops on the ground and the relative weakness of Afghan forces, particularly the police, means it is hard to consolidate military victories and bring security to government-controlled areas. ...
A solid police presence in towns and districts is essential to stem the tide of suicide bombs that have killed more than 200 civilians in Afghanistan in this year alone, analysts say. ...
Taliban insurgents have launched more than 140 suicide attacks this year in a campaign to demonstrate to Afghans that their pro-Western government and international forces are incapable of bringing security to the country.
Would anyone with basic comprehension skills read that and sneeringly suggest we're winning in Afghanistan?
Would anyone with basic comprehension skills read a passage saying a troop shortage makes it "hard to consolidate military victories and bring security to government-controlled areas" -- and prevent suicide attacks killing civilians -- and translate it as "To be sure, NATO commanders ins Afghanistan say they're short of troops at times and in places"?
After reading this, it's easier to understand why McIlheran thinks we're winning in Iraq.
Comments