Benutzereinstellungen

Neue Veranstaltungshinweise

Central Asia

Es wurden keine neuen Veranstaltungshinweise in der letzten Woche veröffentlicht

Kommende Veranstaltungen

Central Asia | Imperialism / War

Keine kommenden Veranstaltungen veröffentlicht

US Troop Deaths in Afghan War Under Obama Now Twice That Under Bush

category central asia | imperialism / war | non-anarchist press author Mittwoch Oktober 19, 2011 21:56author by Megan Iorio - Just Foreign Policy Report this post to the editors

This weekend marked a new milestone for the war in Afghanistan: the total number of US troops killed in the war has doubled since President Obama took office, according to icasualties.org and our US Troops in Afghanistan: Obama vs Bush web counter. That means that two-thirds of the total US troop deaths have occurred in the last two years and eight months, which accounts for roughly a third of the duration of the war to date.

1728 US troops have died in Afghanistan since October 7, 2001, with 1153 of those deaths having occurred since President Obama's inauguration. 575 US troops died in Afghanistan during President Bush's term in office.

We've all heard the argument before: Bush ignored Afghanistan, Obama did what he promised by escalating the war, and since more troops means more deaths, we shouldn't be surprised by the increased death rate.

Back in June, when US deaths in Afghanistan under Obama reached 1000, I wrote a piece about this argument. I'm not going to address it further here, because there are more pressing issues of concern than looking to the past.

Just weeks before US troop deaths under Obama hit 1000, the President announced his strategy for a troop drawdown in Afghanistan. In this speech, he outlined a proposal for removing 10,000 troops at the end of this summer, with 23,000 more following at the end of next summer. After that, troops will “continue coming home at a steady pace as Afghan security forces move into the lead. Our mission will change from combat to support. By 2014, this process of transition will be complete, and the Afghan people will be responsible for their own security.”

What many Americans inferred from this passage was that all US troops will be out of Afghanistan by 2014. This is quite understandable, and was perhaps the intention of the passage. To say that, by 2014, “the transition will be complete” and “the Afghan people will be responsible for their own security” seems to suggest little or no role for the US military.

Unfortunately, this inference is invalid. The key statement here is that “our mission will change from combat to support.” It is this transition that will be completed by 2014 and not the transition out of Afghanistan. That means that there is still no deadline for the full withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan.

Furthermore, if the Pentagon gets its way, it will be a long time before our military leaves Afghanistan. In August, the Telegraph reported that the Pentagon was in negotiations with the Afghan government to leave 25,000 US troops in Afghanistan until at least 2024. Just to give you a little context: there were 25,000 US troops in Afghanistan in 2007. So, a drawdown to 25,000 troops by 2014 would merely be a return to 2007 troop levels. Funny thing that a support mission would require just as many troops as a combat mission!

But perhaps you're thinking that the support troops will have a different role than the combat troops.

Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates had something to say about that. When asked what the difference is between combat and non-combat troops, Gates said that non-combat troops have a “combat capability” and will engage in “targeted counterterrorism operations.” Which prompts the question: how, again, are non-combat troops different than combat troops?

In 2007, 111 US troops died in Afghanistan. Extrapolating from this data, if the US leaves 25,000 US troops in Afghanistan from 2015, the beginning of the support mission, until at least 2024, we may lose over a thousand troops under the guise of a support mission.

This is unacceptable. A recent CBS poll indicates that two-thirds of Americans support ending the war in Afghanistan within the next two years. If Americans knew that the war isn't coming to an end in 2014, if they knew how insufficient the proposed US withdrawal really is, I think that they'd be angry. I think they'd be angry enough to do something.

That's why we created a new site, countdowntodrawdown.org. Here, we plan to track the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, to educate Americans about the lack of a timetable for full withdrawal, and to mobilize Americans to demand an end to this war. You'll find a counter tracking the number of US troops still in Afghanistan, 10 facts about the US withdrawal, and a petition to President Obama.

Mark this grim milestone in the war by sharing this information with your friends and neighbors. With the Occupy protest movement gaining steam, and demands for ending the wars receiving more attention than they have in a while, this is the moment to make sure people know the reality of the situation we face so they can fight even harder and more effectively against it.

This page can be viewed in
English Italiano Deutsch
Neste 8 de Março, levantamos mais uma vez a nossa voz e os nossos punhos pela vida das mulheres!

Central Asia | Imperialism / War | en

Mi 03 Jun, 02:37

browse text browse image

Sorry, no stories matched your search, maybe try again with different settings.

imageCould Osama’s Death Really Mean the end of Afghanistan’s Occupation? Mai 27 by John E Jacobsen 0 comments

“Late Sunday night local time, two U.S. helicopters from Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) and carrying Team Six SEALs flew in low from Afghanistan… The raid began on the smaller of two buildings in [Bin Laden's] compound, where [Bin Laden's] couriers were believed to live. The raid then moved to the larger three-story building.

“Two Bin Laden couriers were killed, as was Osama Bin Laden’s son Khalid and a woman. Two women were injured. Children were present in the compound but were not harmed. U.S. officials said that bin Laden was asked to surrender but did not. He was shot in the head and then shot again to make sure he was dead.”

imageTibet and the World Mai 21 by Oisín Mac Giollamóir 1 comments

On March 10th, the 49th anniversary of the 1959 Tibetan uprising, 300 monks demonstrated in Lhasa, Tibet, demanding the release of a number of imprisoned monks. In doing so they marked the beginning of a brief period of rioting by Tibetans against the rule of China, and the Chinese Communist Party, over Tibet. These riots were violently suppressed by the Chinese state.
The riots and their suppression has been widely publicised in the media and sparked a series of international protests aimed at undermining the Beijing 2008 Olympics. These protests occurred along the route of the international Olympic Torch Relay causing the torch to be extinguished 5 times in France alone.

imageA Chinese anarchist on Tibet Apr 06 by EdwardW 3 comments

Even though I am from China, having lived their practically all my life, I can't claim to have the strongest analysis as I have not studied too deeply into the situation. So my opinion here is simply from glancing over pieces of information and my own anecdotes from traveling in China.

textAfghanistan - roots of a war without end Jul 18 by Anarcho 0 comments

Things are going from bad to worse in Afghanistan because of US imperial designs on Iraq. Not the first time that US imperialism has messed up that country. And now the British state stands to be further dragged into that war.

Sorry, no press releases matched your search, maybe try again with different settings.
© 2005-2020 Anarkismo.net. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by Anarkismo.net. [ Disclaimer | Privacy ]