"Taking our eye off the ball...."

[USN_Squid]

John Kerry and others are constantly saying we stopped looking for OBL and were distracted by the war in Iraq. Gen. Tommy Franks ran the war in Afghanistan and has this to say about that. From here:


As we planned for potential military action in Iraq and conducted counterterrorist operations in several other countries in the region, Afghanistan remained a center of focus. Neither attention nor manpower was diverted from Afghanistan to Iraq. When we started Operation Iraqi Freedom we had about 9,500 troops in Afghanistan, and by the time we finished major combat operations in Iraq last May we had more than 10,000 troops in Afghanistan.

[Pokerface]

... and 150,000 in Iraq.

An extra 500 men is not keeping your eye on the ball. It's swinging with a bit more fervor, maybe (to try to jam the situation into the given metaphor).

[leejo]

May I humbly suggest that anyone who thinks Afghanistan is "the ball" is a f*&$ing idiot. The Taliban had to go. The training camps had to go. That's really about it. Devoting 100,000 men to play grab-ass all over Afghanistan's land-locked, pitiful expanse would be pointless and foolish. We have enough people there to do the job, and not a man more.

[luna]

Very humble, Leejo.

[USN_Squid]

Originally Posted by Pokerface

... and 150,000 in Iraq.

An extra 500 men is not keeping your eye on the ball. It's swinging with a bit more fervor, maybe (to try to jam the situation into the given metaphor).

Just read this as an interesting aside:

The Afghan campaign will go down in military history as a textbook implementation of Unconventional Warfare techniques to achieve with a small number of SOF operators what the entire Soviet Army could not. This was set in motion within a month of the precipitating event, which is all the more amazing. Not all Presidents would take the risk of confronting our enemies in Afghanistan in such a manner. He managed to kill Usama bin Laden without martyring him, which has allowed the US to continue to pursue AQ elements in the tribal border regions under the pretext of revenge. The President also understands very well that without the boogeyman, his momentum on the GWOT would be jeopardized by squishy liberal opponents.

As a SEAL Reservist, I have tried to maintain contact with my friends in the Teams who have remained on active duty. This President has authorized SOF operations that were unthinkable with the prior administration. If I told you the places my friends have been, you would be shocked. President Bush’s risk tolerance for operations in support of the GWOT is satisfyingly high. While John Kerry promises to double SOF which is impossible, the President has shown a detailed understanding of what the SEALs are up to and how they are getting it done.

Link

[leejo]

Great post! Good news!

RE: my earlier comments on Afghanistan, I think one must take the position of a CINC who's thinking in terms of affecting a region, not just picking at one little hotspot after another. What is the center of gravity? Where is the key terrain? Hitting Afghanistan was the 1st priority because there was a direct link between the Taliban and UBL, but otherwise, it's a landlocked backwoods country. Yes it's important to round up the AQ remnants there and to foment good government, but it's no longer the main focus of the global war.

If you're serious about changing the middle east - peacefully if possible and by force if necessary, try to pick another spot on the map that does not involve Israel, has good seaports, has neighboring allies who will grant staging and overflight permission for the necessary buildup, and which territory happens to allow access to most, if not all, of the area nations of concern.

SH didn't recognize that the bullseye was on his forehead or he might have saved himself by complying fully with UN sanctions. Some of our "allies" didn't help him see it. Too bad. Good riddance.

EDIT: Another very serious message that is important to deliver, I believe, to nations interested in waging asymmetric war against the US and its allies is that such wars may become symmetrical very quickly. Certain nations have an interest in supporting and funding terrorism while maintaining "plausible deniability" so that they can degrade our economy and international power over time. Their hope is that we will maintain the pattern of "proportional" responses and only target those responsible when certain proof of their involvement exists, like a criminal proceeding. Bush's doctrine casts a much wider net and forces these governments to pick their friends and actions much more carefully.

[leejo]

Hey squid, any thoughts on how those British boats loaded (I presume) with the latest global positioning navigational systems wandered into Iran a few months ago? Those sailors seemed a little more chisled than average...

[USN_Squid]

Originally Posted by leejo

Hey squid, any thoughts on how those British boats loaded (I presume) with the latest global positioning navigational systems wandered into Iran a few months ago? Those sailors seemed a little more chisled than average...

Wasn't that the group of Brits that had "got lost" in the Karun River Delta on the Iranian side? I don't remember the details. Here's the story on it: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040621/D83BI0OG1.html

Just to be clear here, I was quoting from http://froggyruminations.blogspot.com/ in my last post. I am not and never was in the teams. Navy yes, SEALs no.

[Pokerface]

And you know the irony? Showing me the corpse of Bin Laden would more than likely get Bush my vote in a heartbeat. But if all I have to work with is a blog's worth of circumstantial evidence... Kerry in '04 it is.

[en4rcment]

Wait a minute...

Was that your BLOG Squid? Do you know the author or are you just taking that piece of internet musings and trying to legitimize it? I can make a blog tomorrow and call myself a Delta Force Operator and then spew anything I want about administration support/non-support of the military.

Unless you are or know the author...that is rather weak evidence...


Now I wanna read about that Brit boat in Iranian territory...those SAS guys are pretty sneaky...

[CingularDuality]

Originally Posted by en4rcment

Wait a minute...

Was that your BLOG Squid? Do you know the author or are you just taking that piece of internet musings and trying to legitimize it? I can make a blog tomorrow and call myself a Delta Force Operator and then spew anything I want about administration support/non-support of the military.

Unless you are or know the author...that is rather weak evidence...

There's an easy way to confirm: did the "SEAL" use the word "operator" like you did? If he did, then he's not a real specops guy, as they believe the misuse/overuse of that term is silly. Real SEALs would tell you that operators are the little ladies that connect your telephone calls when you dial "0".

[USN_Squid]

Originally Posted by en4rcment

Wait a minute...

Was that your BLOG Squid? Do you know the author or are you just taking that piece of internet musings and trying to legitimize it? I can make a blog tomorrow and call myself a Delta Force Operator and then spew anything I want about administration support/non-support of the military.

Unless you are or know the author...that is rather weak evidence...


Now I wanna read about that Brit boat in Iranian territory...those SAS guys are pretty sneaky...

As I began that post I said "Just read this as an interesting aside". It is not my blog, but the guy is a real Seal and has some good insights. I read it and though it was interesting. I didn't realize there was some verificiation needed to quote anything on our forums. I thought it was interesting and related to the thread so there you go.

[USN_Squid]

Originally Posted by Pokerface

And you know the irony? Showing me the corpse of Bin Laden would more than likely get Bush my vote in a heartbeat. But if all I have to work with is a blog's worth of circumstantial evidence... Kerry in '04 it is.

What do you think about the idea that Iraq is not just an effort to rid Saddam of WMD but a strategic wedge of Democracy in the heart of the Totalitarian Islamic world?

[en4rcment]

Originally Posted by USN_Squid

As I began that post I said "Just read this as an interesting aside". It is not my blog, but the guy is a real Seal and has some good insights. I read it and though it was interesting. I didn't realize there was some verificiation needed to quote anything on our forums. I thought it was interesting and related to the thread so there you go.

Riiight...but then you failed to put the quote in quotes (or HTML quote format) so if you read it, it looks like you are saying that YOU are a Navy Seal reservist.

Obviously there is no verification needed, but you know how many people pretend that they are ex-military or law enforcement on the internet...I would probably be more convinced if I got to hear all of the "locations" that this administration has authorized operations in...but as luck would have it...I'm still awaiting my security clearance...

Anyways, SEALS live for action. They aren't very happy sitting around on ready teams with no missions to go on. The blog author (let's pretend he actually IS a SEAL for a minute) is only supporting the administration because his active friends are finally getting some action. If I was a SEAL ( Shut up!..I could be a SEAL...OK...but I can dream... ) I would obviously support any administration that gave us "work" and pumped money into our SEAL teams...

You were right. An interesting read, but not strong enough evidence to help us decide who to vote for in Nov...

---------

[USN_Squid]

Originally Posted by en4rcment

Riiight...but then you failed to put the quote in quotes (or HTML quote format) so if you read it, it looks like you are saying that YOU are a Navy Seal reservist.

Which is why I said this in my follow up:

Originally Posted by usn_squid

Just to be clear here, I was quoting from http://froggyruminations.blogspot.com/ in my last post. I am not and never was in the teams. Navy yes, SEALs no.

Originally Posted by en4rcment

You were right. An interesting read, but not strong enough evidence to help us decide who to vote for in Nov...

This was just another piece of the puzzle. I think it's also pretty clear from what this blogger says he supports the Administration for many more reasons than his buddies get to see some action. I wish I had a silver bullet to give everyone the evidence they need to decide who to vote for, but I don't. You (and I mean me too) just have to read all we can and go from there.