Follow BeltwayBlips on Twitter
More Troops for Afghanistan
The Page by Mark Halperin —
Getty 13,000 support troops will be dispatched to Afghanistan , in addition to the 21,000 announced in March.
Report: 13,000 Troops Deploy to Afghanistan
Taylor Marsh —
... They’re called “enablers,” to refer to support troops deployed beyond combat forces, which won’t sit well with anyone just hearing the term. But you can’t have combat forces deployed without them.
From the Washington Post:
But in an unannounced move, the White House has also authorized — and the Pentagon is deploying — at least 13,000 troops beyond that number, according to defense officials.
The deployment does not change the maximum number of ...
Newspaper Roundup for Tuesday, October 13, 2009
CNSNews.com Headlines —
... CNSNews.com Newspaper Roundup for Tuesday, October 13, 2009 Tuesday, October 13, 2009 By Susan Jones, Senior Editor Washington Post: Support Troops Swelling U.S. Force in Afghanistan Additional Deployments Not Announced and Rarely Noted Washington Times: ...
The Note's Must-Reads for Tuesday, October 13, 2009
The Note —
... Says No to Another Presidential Bid” LINK
The Washington Post’s Mary Beth Sheridan: “Clinton Lends Voice To N. Ireland Peace” LINK
NY Daily News Michael Saul: “Secretary of State Hillary Clinton vows to never run for president again” LINK
The Associated Press' Matthew Lee: "Clinton in talks with Russians on Iran" LINK
FOREIGN AFFAIRS:
The Washington Post’s Ann Scott Tyson: “Support Troops Swelling U.S. Force in Afghanistan” LINK
The Wall Street Journal's Anand Gopal: "Afghan Quits Post on Election Board" LINK ...
White House Authorized 13,000 Support Troops for Afghanistan
Politics Daily —
... when exactly the increase in support troops was authorized, but it was clear that Obama made the call and that the additional number was not part of the original authorization.
The support personnel are mostly doctors, engineers and military police. Defense experts said the military typically calls for thousands of support troops for every combat brigade of about 4,000. Support troops are often in high demand, and, the Post noted, still needed badly in Iraq.
Support Troops Swelling U.S. Force in Afghanistan [Washington Post] ...
Support Troops Swelling U.S. Force in Afghanistan
Democratic Underground Latest Breaking News —
... members expected to soon be in Afghanistan: 68,000, more than double the number there when Bush left office. Still, it suggests that a significant number of support troops, in addition to combat forces, would be needed to meet commanders' demands. It also underscores the growing strain on U.S. ground troops, raising practical questions about how the Army and Marine Corps would meet a request from Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan. Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20... This cannot continue. Any soldiers ...
The ultimate simplicity of Afghanistan
BuzzFlash.org - Progressive News and Commentary with an Attitude | Fight Ignorance: Read BuzzFlash —
... , which opened: "the United States is falling far short of [Obama's] goals to fight the country’s endemic corruption, create a functioning government and legal system and train a police force currently riddled with incompetence." Indeed, even following the "deployment of 17,000 additional American troops [actually, make that 34,000, reports the Washington Post this morning], many civil institutions are deteriorating as much as the country’s security." ...
Shoring Up Afghan Effort
The Page by Mark Halperin —
Associated Press White House to dispatch 13,000 non-combat support troops to Afghanistan .
Snowe Watch: A chance for GOP support, and a new old enemy for White House
The Note —
ABC News’ Rick Klein reports: Sometimes adding two cents breaks the piggy bank. Some piggy banks probably need to be broken. But then you're sent home. The health insurance industry's last-ditch attempt to derail health care reform shattered at last the illusion of all the stakeholders working together. Yet it's not likely to have changed a vote in the ...
Tuesday Links
The Political Carnival —
... Washington Post: Support Troops Swelling U.S. Force in Afghanistan President Obama announced in March that he would be sending 21,000 additional troops to Afghanistan. But in an unannounced move, the White House has also authorized — and the Pentagon is deploying — at least 13,000 troops beyond that number, according to defense officials. ...
Reason Morning Links: Baucus Bill Faces Committee Vote, More Troops
in Afghanistan, Fighting With Fox
Hit & Run —
• The White House
spars with Fox News.
•
Senate Finance Committee to vote on Baucus health care bill
today.
• Regulators, private firms
take aim at payday lenders.
• Obama quietly increases troop deployments to Afghanistan
by another 13,000.
•
Washington Post columnist Eugene ...
ThinkFast: October 13, 2009
Think Progress —
... In March, President Obama announced that “he would be sending 21,000 additional troops to Afghanistan.” “But in an unannounced move, the White House has also authorized — and the Pentagon is deploying — at least 13,000 troops beyond that number, according to defense officials,” the Washington Post reports. “The additional troops are primarily support forces, including engineers, medical personnel, intelligence experts and military police.” ...
Democrats and Afghanistan: What's at Stake
Commondreams.org Views —
... arguing for a withdrawal timetable from Afghanistan, but that option is not even part of the Washington debate. The only issue is whether to escalate and, if so, by how much. The Washington Post ...
The WonkLine: October 13, 2009
Wonk Room —
... The Washington Post reports that the White House has authorized at least 13,000 more troops for Afghanistan, “primarily support forces, including engineers, medical personnel, intelligence experts and military police. Their deployment has received little mention by officials at the Pentagon and the White House, who have spoken more publicly about the combat troops who have been sent to Afghanistan.” ...
Troop Numbers
The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan —
As an assessment of military strategy, support troops may not be the best indicator of what will work or not. But as a political matter, it surely matters that many more Americans will be sent to Afghanistan this year by Obama than the headline number. The WaPo has an excellent primer ...
Afghanistan Decision Time
MyDD —
Let's get some facts straight about what has happened in Afghanistan since Obama has become President. Back in March, Obama announced his Afghanistan "solution" would be to send an additional 21,000 troops. However, we learn from the WaPost today that "in an unannounced move, the White House has also authorized -- and the Pentagon is deploying -- at least 13,000 troops beyond that number, according to defense officials." That's an additional military persence 34,000 that Obama has already sent to Afghanistan, with plans for a total of 68,000 troops by the end of 2009. As you can see from the chart beside here, the war escalation is happening in ...
The Surge
Mudville Gazette —
This Washington Post story has caught the attention of political bloggers - I can never tell what newspaper stories will. The only "new" part of this one is someone has decided to figure out how many "support troops" or "enablers" have been sent to Afghanistan this year. Since it does note briefly that this "new" number "does not change the maximum number of service members expected to soon be in Afghanistan: 68,000" I'm a bit confused by the excitement level. If there's a story here it's that once again, most major media journalists really aren't very good at tracking and reporting what goes on in the nation's wars. ...
Incrementing To Imperial Failure
Newshoggers.com —
By Steve Hynd
There are two important stories about Afghanistan today which between them set the inevitable scene for American disaster on the sub-continent. The first is the Washington Post's revelation of hidden incrementalism by the Obama administration:
President Obama announced in March that he would be sending 21,000 additional troops to ...
Conflating the Afghanistan Numbers -- By: Pete Hegseth
The Corner on National Review Online —
This morning, The Washington Post reported (and The Huffington Post predictably amplified) that an additional 13,000 combat "support" troops will be sent to Afghanistan, bringing the actual total increase approved by Obama in March of this year to 34,000. In total, this addition "raised the number of U.S. troops deployed to the war zones of Iraq and Afghanistan above the peak during the Iraq "surge" that President George W. Bush ordered."
Fancy math, but none of this is particularly significant.
Combat troops--like the 21,000 additional troops announced by President Obama earlier this year--always necessitate additional support units. As ...
Tuesday's Mini-Report
Political Animal —
TUESDAY'S MINI-REPORT.... Today's edition of quick hits: * Russia isn't quite on board yet with the U.S. plans regarding Iran. * When President Obama sent 21,000 additional troops to Afghanistan in March, he also approved sending an additional 13,000 support troops , which the Pentagon is now deploying. * AHIP seems to be getting increasingly desperate to derail health care reform. * Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) used to say the public option isn't worth pursuing because it doesn't have 60 votes. Now he's saying it's not worth pursuing because he just doesn't like the idea . * A couple of House Blue Dogs explain why they're breaking with their ...
The Early Word: How? The Question of Afghanistan
The Caucus —
It’s back to the Situation Room Wednesday for President Obama and his national security team. The president and a dozen or so advisers will spend three hours talking out strategy options against an increasingly violent insurgency that is wreaking havoc across Afghanistan and Pakistan. Mr. Obama said Tuesday that he would make a decision “in the coming weeks” about how he will handle the Afghan war as it enters its ninth year. The Times’s Peter Baker wrote ...
Afghanistan, More or Less
Hit & Run —
With Obama sliding in
another 13,000 troops (please note in that link to a
Washington Post story the always-objective paper's
permanent "AfPak War" story hed and subhed, with subhed reading
"combating extremism in Afghanistan and Pakistan"--that's
speaking approved euphemisms to power, Post!) and Gen.
McChrystal thinking that
another ...
100,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan during 2011-2013
Open Left - Front Page —
President Obama will increase the American military presence in Afghanistan yet again:
Tonight, after months of conferences with top advisors, President Obama has settled on a new strategy for Afghanistan. CBS News correspondent David Martin reports that the president will send a lot more troops and plans to keep a large force there, long term.
The president still has more meetings scheduled on Afghanistan, but informed sources tell CBS News he intends to give Gen. Stanley McChrystal most, if not all, the additional troops he is asking for.
McChrystal wanted 40,000 and the president has tentatively decided to send four combat brigades plus thousands ...
