Now come reports that NATO does not have enough troops on the ground in Afghanistan. We hear every few days of more Taliban being killed, but, somehow, there is always another battle being fought with the Taliban. One starts remembering the body counts of Vietnam, which proved nothing. Is this the same? It's starting to sound like it.
Will the war history of Afghanistan be repeated, wherein no one has been able to defeat the natives no matter how positive matters seem?
1 comment:
Afghanistan seems to be degenerating into a second Iraq - only for 'insurgency' read 'Taliban'. The battle, had it been fought on one front, may have been winnable eventually, but Afganistan is the secondary war when it should have been the primary one, in fact, the only one. Karzai is buckling more and more under pressure from the islamists who are gaining popularity by providing what the coalition promised and failed to deliver. Where have we heard that before? Even the most optimistic NATO generals are talking a minimum five years to do the job - and we all know that means ten, or the eventual alternative of skidadling with our tails between our legs.
Post a Comment