What do today's attacks say about Afghanistan in the months ahead?
Today, the Taliban claimed responsibility for an attack outside the largest U.S/coalition military installation in Afghanistan, which killed three contractors. It was the latest attack in what has already been a violent year against troops in Afghanistan.
It happened outside Bagram Air Base, which about 40 north of Kabul and is the capital of military operations. It was built by the Soviets during their time in Afghanistan and later the Taliban and the Northern Alliance fought for it during the civil war. There were reportedly two explosions Wednesday – a car bomb followed by a suicide bomb.
At the Pentagon, commanders and civilian leaders alike had warned that 2009 would be a violent. The secretary said it; so did the top commander there, Gen. David McKiernan. There will be more troops they argued, and those troops will go into places that foreign forces have not been before.
So far 31 American troops have been killed this year, compared to 155 in all of 2008, which incidentally was the deadliest year for the U.S. military in Afghanistan. Another 21 coalition troops have also been killed, compared to 139 last year.
That the rise in attacks is happening so early, so quickly and before the 17,000 troops President Obama has committed to sending into new parts of Afghanistan is troubling commanders at the Pentagon. Some fret the numbers are rising because the U.S. military and its coalition partners are finding a more sophisticated Taliban that has finessed its attacks while the U.S. military was focused on Iraq. What the numbers portend once the troops arrived is a very violent year, they say. Perhaps the strategy review under way in Washington on the way ahead in Afghanistan will find a way for the troops to do more without taking such a spike in fatal attacks.
I strongly believe that the enemy used us in Iraq as a deploy to sicken and thin out our military by poisoning us the U.S. with our own medicine, our bombs- and the depleted uranium.
I strongly feel that the enemy believes they are going to beat us, unfortunately there techniques are too much like our own; we will have to adopt new ones.
I trust the President and strongly endorse his anti-nuclear weapons ideas.
The U.S. is just going to have to get in there and cut the terrorists by the throat! Are you willing to do that for your country? The terrorist are...
Posted by: SGT MASON, ALISHIA | April 11, 2009 at 06:12 PM
"What do today's attacks say about Afghanistan in the months ahead?"
The attacks say that the indigenous population of Afghanistan has had enough of the US/NATO military occupation.
Posted by: Persona non grata | March 05, 2009 at 04:22 PM
"a more sophisticated Taliban that has finessed its attacks while the U.S. military was focused on Iraq"
This could easily have read that we have finessd our attacks while in Iraq. At least we have dealt with this in Iraq and are seasoned on what to look for and expect.
Suicide bombings failed in Iraq and ultimately led to the rejection of extremism in Iraq. It was the suicide bomber that was the single greatest contributing factor to the defeat of AQIZ. The civilians who ultimately suffered the greatest from these cowardly tactics ultimately tunned on the scumbags. It might just eventually be a tipping point in Afghanistan as well, there is no reason to believe the people of Afghanistan will not turn on suicide bombers and their puppet masters. Perhaps it should be part of our strategy review?
When the going get's tough... the weak quit.
Posted by: Sleep | March 05, 2009 at 12:42 AM