Free Markets, Free People


NATO Promises 7,000 Additional Troops For Afghanistan

Except it really doesn’t.  In fact, among those 7,000 “additional” troops promised are 1,500 which are already in country and the 500 the British had already promised.  So it’s 5,000 additional troops in reality.   Nothing to sneeze at but certainly not the 10,000 desired.  As expected many will come from former Eastern bloc nations:

1,000 from Poland; 600 from Italy, plus more Carabinieri to work with Afghan police (something which worked well in Iraq – ed.). Slovakia is sending a small deployment …

Non NATO nations are sending detachments as well – South Korea is sending a small one and a surprisingly large one of about 1,000 is coming from Georgia.

The clinker?

An undisclosed number of the new troops will steer clear of the fighting because they are barred by their countries from combat operations. And two allies, the Netherlands and Canada, still plan to withdraw nearly 5,000 troops in the next two years, offsetting the infusion.

But it sounds great on paper, doesn’t it?

~McQ

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

6 Responses to NATO Promises 7,000 Additional Troops For Afghanistan

  • I wonder how much the Georgians consider their involvement to have the fringe benefit of real-world training for their troops.

  • Speaking as an American of Slovak ethnicity, way to go Slovakia.

  • Actually, on paper, it looks worse because you have time to look at it more closely.

    This plan is about the worst one that he could have done.   But he’ll just blame Bush….

  • Hey! Didn’t Obama say that he would assemble an “international coalition” to fight the war in Afghanistan? So…he lied?

    That’s what happens when we have a leader whom the rest of the world just does not respect. I could have sworn that Demmies said that things would change with a President in office who listened to the world rather than telling them what to do. I must have misunderstood them.

  • The good news is the Taliban keeps killing high-ranking Pakistani officers and their families. The Paks will fight a lot harder when they are being threatened personally.

  • The phrase “coalition of the bribed” is buzzing around in my head for some reason…

    I am grateful for any troops that the various nations want to send.  Even if they aren’t doing direct combat operations, I think that they can help in establishing something like a professional army and police force in that poor country.  From my brother’s experience working with the Carabinieri in Bosnia (they were known respectfully as “The Brute Squad”!), I’m very glad to have those tough, professional Italians along.  I’m also pleasantly surprised that Poland and Georgia, who have very good reasons to NOT cooperate with a president who’s knifed them in the back, are still helping.

    All that being said, the relative handful of additional troops from our allies is disappointing to say the least when one considers how often we were promised that Imeme would get everybody to trip over themselves to help us out.  It also seems laughable in contrast to the boastful, self-congratulatory rhetoric coming out of the White House: to hear Imeme, Gates, the Hilldabeast, and others, one would think that veritable armies of allies are on the way to crush the Taliban and help Imeme meet his goal of losing bugging out withdrawing by the next presidential election 2011.