Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Afghanistan Troop Reinforcements Can't Wait

From Investor's Business Daily:
The president's decision to withhold more troops over the country's less-than-pristine election is nothing but stalling. For our soldiers, desperate for reinforcements, it's a slap in the face.

No doubt, a legitimate government, complete with free and fair elections, would be good for Afghanistan. Its Aug. 20 vote was loaded with trouble because the Taliban sliced off purple-inked fingers to discourage voting and because a United Nations electoral watchdog found widespread voter fraud.

Yes, correct the problems. But holding U.S. troop reinforcements hostage isn't the way to do it. Elections aren't why we have troops in that country. They're there to fight a war against terrorists that President Obama once declared to be "necessary."

Time is growing short, and the Taliban insurgency is gaining ground. Pakistan has struck hard against the Taliban in its western region, a campaign that could drive more terrorists into Afghanistan and make our war harder. Terrorist recruiting is up and the Taliban doesn't lack money. The Pentagon consensus is that the window to win is closing and the opportunity will be lost soon.
More at the link.

Also, at the new Washington Post's Democratic-heavy poll, "U.S. Deeply Split on Troop Increase for Afghan War." (Via Memeorandum.) Actually, Americans aren't split, if you look at a reputable survey. See IBD, "Americans, In Reversal, Now Back Afghan Troop Surge":

RELATED: Hot Air, "WaPo/ABC Poll Uses Skewed Sample to Show Public-Option Support." And the Los Angeles Times, "Karzai Bows to Pressure, OKs Runoff."


Mr. Fawkes said...

More troops won't solve what is a cultural problem and not a military one.