SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
A U.S. soldier fires an anti-tank rocket during a live-fire exercise in Zabul province, Afghanistan, in July 2010. (Photo: U.S. Army/flickr/cc)
Top Trump Advisors Propose Expanding 15-Year Afghanistan War
Military advisors want to boost troop numbers in longest war in U.S. history
May 09, 2017
America's longest war isn't ending anytime soon--in fact, it's about to expand.
President Donald Trump's top military advisors have put forth a plan to boost U.S. troop numbers in Afghanistan by 3,000 to 5,000, the Washington Post reported late Monday. The U.S. currently has 8,400 troops in Afghanistan.
"The definition of insanity is repeating the same strategy and expecting different results. Decades of the military approach by the U.S., NATO, and Russia and others before have never worked," said anti-war group Peace Action. "Why would Trump want to continue wasting American blood and treasure in Afghanistan?"
"I cannot believe this is an actual headline in the 16th year of the longest war in the history of the republic," tweeted MSNBC's Chris Hayes in response to the news.
The plan also empowers the Pentagon, rather than the White House, to unilaterally decide on troop numbers and how to use those troops in the battlefield.
Furthermore, it would "give the military far broader authority to use airstrikes to target Taliban militants. It would also lift Obama-era restrictions that limited the mobility of U.S. military advisers on the battlefield," wrote the Post.
"The plan comes at the end of a sweeping policy review built around the president's desire to reverse worsening security in Afghanistan and 'start winning' again, said one U.S. official, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations," the Post reported.
The increase in American troop numbers may be accompanied by a rise in NATO troop levels as well, added the New York Times: "NATO nations would also be asked to send thousands of troops, and the precise number of American forces deployed would probably depend on what those allies were prepared to do."
The White House has yet to approve the plan.
On Twitter, journalists, politicians, and commentators condemned the new plan. They also speculated that it could in part be an attempt to distract from Trump's ongoing Russia scandal, and noted that Trump's voters--many of whom supported the president's campaign trail promises to shrink U.S. military involvement around the world--may not be pleased by the latest war news:
\u201cUS in endless war in Afghanistan for 15 years. @POTUS needs to explain how more US troops will make any difference. https://t.co/FDos6pM17W\u201d— Ted Lieu (@Ted Lieu) 1494337672
\u201cTrump restarting the Afghanistan War is classic 'Wag The Dog' \u2014 a colluding criminal desperate to change the Trump-Russia narrative. @maddow\u201d— Bill Madden (he/him/\u00e9l) \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\udde6 (@Bill Madden (he/him/\u00e9l) \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\udde6) 1494292992
\u201cUnder-reported today amid Yates, but a change in approach in Afghanistan that Trump base likely didn't expect https://t.co/ZBbYyyEgSi\u201d— Maggie Haberman (@Maggie Haberman) 1494296572
Why Your Ongoing Support Is Essential
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
America's longest war isn't ending anytime soon--in fact, it's about to expand.
President Donald Trump's top military advisors have put forth a plan to boost U.S. troop numbers in Afghanistan by 3,000 to 5,000, the Washington Post reported late Monday. The U.S. currently has 8,400 troops in Afghanistan.
"The definition of insanity is repeating the same strategy and expecting different results. Decades of the military approach by the U.S., NATO, and Russia and others before have never worked," said anti-war group Peace Action. "Why would Trump want to continue wasting American blood and treasure in Afghanistan?"
"I cannot believe this is an actual headline in the 16th year of the longest war in the history of the republic," tweeted MSNBC's Chris Hayes in response to the news.
The plan also empowers the Pentagon, rather than the White House, to unilaterally decide on troop numbers and how to use those troops in the battlefield.
Furthermore, it would "give the military far broader authority to use airstrikes to target Taliban militants. It would also lift Obama-era restrictions that limited the mobility of U.S. military advisers on the battlefield," wrote the Post.
"The plan comes at the end of a sweeping policy review built around the president's desire to reverse worsening security in Afghanistan and 'start winning' again, said one U.S. official, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations," the Post reported.
The increase in American troop numbers may be accompanied by a rise in NATO troop levels as well, added the New York Times: "NATO nations would also be asked to send thousands of troops, and the precise number of American forces deployed would probably depend on what those allies were prepared to do."
The White House has yet to approve the plan.
On Twitter, journalists, politicians, and commentators condemned the new plan. They also speculated that it could in part be an attempt to distract from Trump's ongoing Russia scandal, and noted that Trump's voters--many of whom supported the president's campaign trail promises to shrink U.S. military involvement around the world--may not be pleased by the latest war news:
\u201cUS in endless war in Afghanistan for 15 years. @POTUS needs to explain how more US troops will make any difference. https://t.co/FDos6pM17W\u201d— Ted Lieu (@Ted Lieu) 1494337672
\u201cTrump restarting the Afghanistan War is classic 'Wag The Dog' \u2014 a colluding criminal desperate to change the Trump-Russia narrative. @maddow\u201d— Bill Madden (he/him/\u00e9l) \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\udde6 (@Bill Madden (he/him/\u00e9l) \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\udde6) 1494292992
\u201cUnder-reported today amid Yates, but a change in approach in Afghanistan that Trump base likely didn't expect https://t.co/ZBbYyyEgSi\u201d— Maggie Haberman (@Maggie Haberman) 1494296572
America's longest war isn't ending anytime soon--in fact, it's about to expand.
President Donald Trump's top military advisors have put forth a plan to boost U.S. troop numbers in Afghanistan by 3,000 to 5,000, the Washington Post reported late Monday. The U.S. currently has 8,400 troops in Afghanistan.
"The definition of insanity is repeating the same strategy and expecting different results. Decades of the military approach by the U.S., NATO, and Russia and others before have never worked," said anti-war group Peace Action. "Why would Trump want to continue wasting American blood and treasure in Afghanistan?"
"I cannot believe this is an actual headline in the 16th year of the longest war in the history of the republic," tweeted MSNBC's Chris Hayes in response to the news.
The plan also empowers the Pentagon, rather than the White House, to unilaterally decide on troop numbers and how to use those troops in the battlefield.
Furthermore, it would "give the military far broader authority to use airstrikes to target Taliban militants. It would also lift Obama-era restrictions that limited the mobility of U.S. military advisers on the battlefield," wrote the Post.
"The plan comes at the end of a sweeping policy review built around the president's desire to reverse worsening security in Afghanistan and 'start winning' again, said one U.S. official, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations," the Post reported.
The increase in American troop numbers may be accompanied by a rise in NATO troop levels as well, added the New York Times: "NATO nations would also be asked to send thousands of troops, and the precise number of American forces deployed would probably depend on what those allies were prepared to do."
The White House has yet to approve the plan.
On Twitter, journalists, politicians, and commentators condemned the new plan. They also speculated that it could in part be an attempt to distract from Trump's ongoing Russia scandal, and noted that Trump's voters--many of whom supported the president's campaign trail promises to shrink U.S. military involvement around the world--may not be pleased by the latest war news:
\u201cUS in endless war in Afghanistan for 15 years. @POTUS needs to explain how more US troops will make any difference. https://t.co/FDos6pM17W\u201d— Ted Lieu (@Ted Lieu) 1494337672
\u201cTrump restarting the Afghanistan War is classic 'Wag The Dog' \u2014 a colluding criminal desperate to change the Trump-Russia narrative. @maddow\u201d— Bill Madden (he/him/\u00e9l) \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\udde6 (@Bill Madden (he/him/\u00e9l) \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\udde6) 1494292992
\u201cUnder-reported today amid Yates, but a change in approach in Afghanistan that Trump base likely didn't expect https://t.co/ZBbYyyEgSi\u201d— Maggie Haberman (@Maggie Haberman) 1494296572
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.