Afghanistan Security No Longer Deteriorating
EmailABC News' Luis Martinez reports: Gen. Stanley McChrystal believes that the security situation in Afghanistan remains serious, but is no longer deteriorating, which is how he’d characterized it last summer. He also says that even though there’s been significant progress, he’s “not prepared to say we’ve turned a corner.” McChrystal, the top US and NATO commander in Afghanistan is in Istanbul for a meeting of NATO Defense Ministers, including Defense Secretary Gates. He made his comments to print and radio reporters traveling with Gates. McChrystal says he has no official metrics to back up his assessment, but is basing it on intuitive metrics. “I’m not prepared to give you numbers,” he said. ”But I’m prepared to tell you that what I see and what I feel gives me that sense. ” He also says he’s not prepared to say that NATO is now winning in Afghanistan, though he’s confident “that we are going to see serious progress this year.” Asked by ABC’s Diane Sawyer in Afghanistan last month if momentum had shifted, McChrystal said, ” I believe were doing that now. I believe that we have changed the way we operate in Afghanistan we changed some of our structures and I believe that we are on the way to convincing the Afghan people that we are here to protect them.” Recent statements from Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, and the Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, have pointed to the Taliban’s expanding influence in Afghanistan. McChrystal said he hadn’t seen Adm. Mullen’s statement, but he agreed that the Taliban are making a significant effort to expand their influence, though he noted the Afghan government, with US help, was mounting a similar effort as well.” According to McChrystal the surge of 30,000 forces into Afghanistan this year is continuing because the military services “are working miracles” and “absolutely moving as fast as physically possible” to get the troops into the country. McChrystal described the war in Afghanistan as “a war of perceptions” where influencing the Afghan population and insurgents was more important than Taliban body counts or how much land you capture. The important thing is to influence Afghan perceptions because it could lead to a shift in momentum. “This is all in the minds of the participants and I mean, the Afghan people are the most important, but the insurgents are another one,” he said. McChrystal indicated that was one reason why military officials in Afghanistan have not been shy in telegraphing that NATO forces are planning to take on the Taliban holdout of Marjah, in central Helmand Province. He admitted it might be an unconventional approach, but that it was an attempt to signal to the Afghan population that “we are expanding security where they live.” McChrystal added that word of a coming offensive was also a signal to the Taliban and druglords in the Marjah area, “that it’s about to change. If they want to fight, then obviously that will have to be an outcome, but if they don’t want to fight, that’s fine too.” He said he’d prefer the Taliban see “the inevitability that things are changing” and that there’s an opportunity for them to make a choice about what they’re going to do, “before suddenly in the dark of night they’re hit with an offensive.”
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
Good news that I hope everyone can get behind. Hopes and prayers that our men and women over there remain safe as they bravely work to keep us safe.
Thank you, troops.
Posted by: Jen B. | February 4, 2010, 4:35 pm 4:35 pm
If only he wouldn’t have waited months to make a decision, maybe security would have been “no longer deteriorating” and more lives could have been saved months sooner. That’s what happens when you play politics with national security. And, yet another reason America has soured on Obama and his liberal allies in Congress. November and 2012 can’t come soon enough!
Posted by: Anonymous | February 4, 2010, 5:17 pm 5:17 pm
If only he wouldn’t have waited months to make a decision, maybe security would have been “no longer deteriorating” and more lives could have been saved months sooner.
____________________________________
Obama put an additional 16,000 troops into Afghanistan within months of being elected.
If only Bush and Cheney hadn’t relegated Afghanistan to the back burner in favour of Iraq, the Taliban and al Qaeda would not have been able to regroup and become stronger – and we might not be dealing with the continuing mess they left behind.
Posted by: tierra | February 4, 2010, 6:27 pm 6:27 pm
Apparently I was wrong about everyone being able to get behind this and take it as the good news that it is. Finger pointing from both sides.
Can’t we all just take a breath and be happy that our men and women in the armed forces are being presented with a more optimum outlook? They are kids, parents, siblings, and friends. Make what they are dedicating their time to worth it for a millisecond.
Posted by: Jen B. | February 4, 2010, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm
Well, at least we have one successful make-work program. Now, if only we could get them to do something useful for the US, we’d be on the right track.
Posted by: Flash Override | February 4, 2010, 7:24 pm 7:24 pm
tierra wrote: “If only Bush and Cheney hadn’t relegated Afghanistan to the back burner in favour of Iraq, the Taliban and al Qaeda would not have been able to regroup and become stronger – and we might not be dealing with the continuing mess they left behind.”
.
So did they regroup and become stronger before or after they were allowed to “escaped” from Afghanistan while Bush and Cheney turned their attention to other things?
Posted by: gk | February 4, 2010, 7:57 pm 7:57 pm
Can’t we all just take a breath and be happy that our men and women in the armed forces are being presented with a more optimum outlook? They are kids, parents, siblings, and friends. Make what they are dedicating their time to worth it for a millisecond.
Posted by: Jen B.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I’m with you Jen! I’m all for good news. This petty nastiness is out of control.
Posted by: wow | February 4, 2010, 11:15 pm 11:15 pm
If only he wouldn’t have waited months to make a decision, maybe security would have been “no longer deteriorating” and more lives could have been saved months sooner. That’s what happens when you play politics with national security.
Posted by: Anonymous
I submit the above post as a prime example of Republicans and the ‘right’ vainly attempting to rewrite recent history, 2001-1/20/09……. it would be laughable if it weren’t so sad and dishonest.
Posted by: Oh Say, Can You See? | February 5, 2010, 12:12 am 12:12 am
So did they regroup and become stronger before or after they were allowed to “escaped” from Afghanistan while Bush and Cheney turned their attention to other things?
Posted by: gk | Feb 4, 2010 7:57:38 PM
______________________________________
The escaped in Afghanistan on Bush and Cheney’s watch and they regrouped and got stronger in Afghanistan and in the border area of Pakistan – both. Have you not researched this at all?
Posted by: tierra | February 5, 2010, 1:05 am 1:05 am
tierra: “If only Bush and Cheney hadn’t relegated Afghanistan to the back burner in favour of Iraq, the Taliban and al Qaeda would not have been able to regroup . . .”
Here we are in Obama’s second year and you guys are still blaming those “mean” men, Bush and Cheney. Blaming them falsely at that. By the time we invaded Iraq in March of 2003, al-Qaeda and the Taliban had been largely defeated. It wasn’t until a few years later that the Taliban had a resurgence, primarily from bases bordering and inside Pakistan. To act as if we left a thriving Taliban/al-Qaeda in Afghanistan to fight in Iraq is a total left-wing fabrication.
All of us acknowledge that the situation has been deteriorating for some time now and had been getting increasingly worse until recently after General McCrystal’s troop request had been mostly fulfilled. Therefore, it is fair to criticize a president who appoints a general, ignores his urgent request for troops for 3 months, and then turns around and validates the request by fulfilling it almost completely. It is reasonable to assume that if Obama had fulfilled the general’s request a month after it had been submitted, we would have been talking about a better security situation at the beginning of December, not the beginning of February. A lot of lives were lost in 2 months.
No president should take that long to decide on an urgent security request from the military. The only reasonable conclusion one can draw is that Obama didn’t want his Democratically unpopular Afghanistan decision to interfere with health care, his only true and clear priority for his first year in office. Make no mistake — the unnecessarily long delay is a case of intentional recklessness, not deep deliberation as Obama would have you believe — please. We need a president who takes the war on terror seriously and that won’t play politics with our national security.
Posted by: Anonymous | February 5, 2010, 11:55 am 11:55 am
Jen B.: “Apparently I was wrong about everyone being able to get behind this and take it as the good news that it is.”
No you weren’t. I can get behind the president fulfilling a national security request from our military leaders on the ground and that translating to a better security situation. I think we all can. What I can’t get behind is his 3 month delay in making a decision only to aid the passing of health care, and I never will.
Jen B.: “Make what they are dedicating their time to worth it for a millisecond.”
Let’s not confuse very reasonable criticism of the president’s unnecessarily long and politically-motivated delay in helping secure our troops for not supporting the troops. Many of the troops also disliked the delay. It meant they weren’t getting the resources they needed to complete the mission. Nice way to turn it around on them. It really shows you care. Like I said, if the president and liberals would have headed the advice of those urging for a decision sooner, we could have been talking about a better security situation in December not February.
Posted by: Anonymous | February 5, 2010, 12:08 pm 12:08 pm