For the past several months, the news media has been reporting on the resurgence of almost Blitzkrieg attacks, mostly from deadly mortar fire upon the U.S. troops in Afghanistan, and it seems like the “surge” is working; at least for the Taliban. The American military Commanders in Afghanistan will need more troops and Presidential contenders Barack Obama and John McCain have mentioned about supporting the Pentagon request as well as by Commanders on the ground inside Afghanistan by backing the request to authorize up to two or three additional brigades to support the already 23, 000 soldiers presently there. Senator McCain likes to talk a lot about how much the “surge” is working and keeping the troops in Iraq as long as is necessary, and how he supported ‘George Bush’s War’ from the beginning, but it seems that no one was keeping their eyes on Afghanistan; that is, until recently.
As far as Iraq is concerned, ‘improvement’ is a far cry from ‘success,’ and rumors of raising the champagne glasses for a victory toast are a bit premature. It must be remembered that the issue of having an adequate troop level in Iraq persisted almost from “DAY ONE;” with Gen. Eric Shinseki (2003), L. Paul Bremmer, civilian head of the U.S.-led Coalitional Provisional Authority (2003), and more recently, by Lt. General Ricardo Sanchez (2007). The opposition to the increase to make Baghdad and the other provinces of Iraq more secure was Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense (2001), the Pentagon, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Vice-President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and lastly, by President George W. Bush.
What might appear to be apparent is not necessarily the reality because one of the important strategies is warfare is to ‘feint’ a retreat/defeat while you muster your forces for an unexpected massive assault or to redeploy your forces to attack the enemy at a weak spot when it least expects it or is not equipped to counterattack. It must be remembered that President Bush single-handedly declared a War on Global Terrorists, meaning, not just in Iraq but everywhere. If al-Qaida cannot exert its will to bring about a ‘Caliphate’ Iraq, it doesn’t matter that much because Iraq was more or less a secular society under Saddam Hussein and the Baathist political party; although the country was largely comprised of Sunni, Shiite, and Kurdish religious and ethnic groups.
It seems that al-Qaida and the Taliban are much better at playing chess than the Pentagon, State Department, and all the members of the prestigious think tanks in the West who specialize in Middle Eastern affairs because these Arabian Knights may have jumped across the military chess board to the nearest square in Afghanistan, where their Knight may have put the King [Bush] in check (jeopardy; politically speaking), and it my be checkmate for our brave and patriotic troops.
Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
July 27, 2008
pbks@hotmail.com
