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)
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
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. The final deadline for our crucial Summer Campaign fundraising drive is just days away, and we’re falling short of our must-hit goal. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
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.