Also, Defense Secretary Bob Gates last month expressed reticence over Americanizing a war that he said badly needed an Afghan face. So maybe it’s not surprising that he would support giving McKiernan most but not all of his requested increase.

That sounds insane.
If Bob Gates actually said that, it would be a case of him talking nonsense. Who on this planet thinks that there is a number between 0-30000 US troops that could go anywhere on earth that could make Afghanistan any more of an American war than it is today ?
Was it dutch up until now ? Is there someone who recalls the overthrow of the Taliban as an internal Afghan uprising ?
This is just someone talking shit.

Says a true shit-talker. Click the link if you think he didn’t say it.

If I think he didn’t say it ?
What do I click if I think he didn’t mean it ?

Actually, fuck Gates.
Got any links for someone other than YOU who could suggest they think that a decision to send 23000 troops to Afghanistan instead of 30000 could in any way, shape, form, reality or universe be informed by a desire to not “Americanise” the campaign too much ?

Just someone else who could possibly have made a connection between an allocation of 7000 less troops and that being the basis for it. Someone who wouldn’t be surprised if that was the reason, as opposed to something else like troop readiness and availability for deployment.

Because one of us is certainly talking shit.
One of us has just pulled some random nonsense out of our arse so we can sound like we’re really analysing this on deep and insightful level that differentiates every other political blog discussing this. And getting called on it.

I don’t understand why you feel that the Dutch are doing enough of their share in Afghanistan. Where are figures to back this up?

It’s obviously my analysis, but if you really think that Gates isn’t concerned about putting the U.S. too far out in front of the Afghans in the war effort, I encourage you to check out any of the other coverage of his January testimony at the Senate Armed Services Committee; or read his submitted statement. I don’t see how it’s too far afield to link the concerns he expressed in the hearing to the troop decision.

pretty fuckin rude …

pretty fuckin rude …

Fkn a. When was I not ?

I don’t see how it’s too far afield to link the concerns he expressed in the hearing to the troop decision.

Yeah, but the decision is between 23000 and 30000.
If he put in 0 or 100000, the Afghans, NATO forces, everyone is still in the same situation they were beforehand. Screwed without the US, who launched the invasion pretty much singlehandedly and have since been the most visible forces there.

Bust out your Getty image bank. What’s come out of Afg in 7 years that doesn’t look like an Americanised campaign ? What’s gonna look different if 20000 vs 30000 troops are added ?
I don’t know what’s getting published in the local dialects, but the gear rolling through villages is universally open to interpretation. That ain’t gonna look any different until it’s all local boys under the Afg flag.

For the concept you’re talking about, you know what this looked like in Iraq. There was no 7000 more or less US troops making a difference between Iraqi forces being able to lead operations, which was the first time a local face was put on operations in any meaningful way. That was primarily the result of a long, long training program that developed huge numbers of local forces and the switch out of the FOBs.

If there were 7000 less combat troops being deployed because 7000 advisers were going in their place to train up the Afghan forces like the campaign depended on it, you might have a point.
If they did that you might have even been able to write another one of those “holy shit isn’t this a great idea” posts.