Mediaboss Marketing

Mohammada Khan, 42, a truck driver, said in a telephone interview that he had lost six members of his family including two children and two women in the airstrike, which hit a minibus in which they were fleeing. We got to the area of the bombing and put their body parts in a truck and brought them to Jalalabad city, where we buried them this morning, he said. There were no ISIS members in the area. It was not a valley or a mountainous area. It was a clear area, and they should understand that people in the vehicle are civilians, as the car was a civilian car.

Mr. Khan added, But it was Gods will, so we cannot say anything.

On July 24, Afghan officials said, nine civilians were killed in an American airstrike on a prayer ceremony held in Haska Meena, near the border with Pakistan, by relatives of ISIS members who had been killed.

The American military asserted that that strike, too, targeted fighters. This is the second false claim of civilian casualties in the same district within the last three weeks, the military said in a news release.

As American airstrikes continue at a rapid pace, there have been a number of such episodes in recent months.

Claims of civilian deaths from airstrikes have occurred this year in Kunduz in the north and in Helmand Province in the south, often as a result of fighting in areas where it can be difficult to distinguish insurgents from civilians.

Haska Meena District, also known as Dih Bala District, is in a rugged area neighboring Achin District. Achin was long a stronghold of the Islamic State and was where the United States dropped the so-called mother of all bombs in April, the largest conventional bomb ever deployed, on a tunnel and bunker complex where insurgents had taken refuge.

That led Islamic State fighters to seek new refuge, including in the Tora Bora cave and tunnel complex in Nangarhar, which Osama bin Laden once used as a hide-out. The Islamic State fighters are believed to be relatively few, and in the Nangarhar area they fight against both the Afghan government and the more numerous Taliban insurgents.

The United States military has deployed Special Forces and airstrikes against Islamic State militants in Afghanistan and says it has killed dozens of the groups leaders and hundreds of fighters this year.

Casualties among Afghan civilians, especially women and children, have risen to a record this year, according to a recent report from the United Nations. Most of those deaths have been attributed to insurgents, particularly through suicide bombings, rather than to airstrikes and other pro-government actions, the report said.

Rod Nordland contributed reporting from London.

A version of this article appears in print on August 12, 2017, on Page A6 of the New York edition with the headline: Afghans Say U.S. Strike Hit Civilians.

See the rest here:
US Airstrikes in Afghanistan Are Said to Kill 16 Civilians - New York Times

By Ronald E. Neumann By Ronald E. Neumann August 9

Ronald E. Neumann was ambassador to Afghanistan from 2005 to 2007.

In theory, U.S. strategy in Afghanistan has been to train an Afghan army that can fight al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and now the Islamic State and then largely to withdraw. After 16 years, its not surprising that many people think that strategy has failed. In fact, it hasnt really been tried.

The Bush administration didnt think such a force was needed. The Obama administration not only didnt execute its own strategy, it also only grudgingly provided the resources necessary to avoid outright failure. The Trump administration has not increased those inadequate resources. In short, the strategy of trying to build an Afghan security structure that could successfully combat the Taliban only began six years ago and then was undercut after four years scarcely enough time to build a whole new army.

When I left Afghanistan in 2007, our target of a 216,000-strong Afghan army and police force was unmet. This security force included no serious air force, artillery, logistics or medical services, since it was designed on the assumption that the war was largely over. Our advisory presence was small in the army and almost nonexistent in the police. Iraq was soaking up all available resources, and my warnings that the fighting was about to get worse were ignored. Only in fall 2009 did the Obama administration decide to build to the current goal of 352,000 security personnel, including essential supporting forces. That effort did not begin to receive funding and equipment until a year later.

These expanded goals were only really pursued for four years and were heavily undercut by policy shifts. Virtually every aspect of the training was rushed and under-resourced. The development of essential support functions, from logistics to artillery to air, was delayed for a year so that all available training facilities could be devoted to getting infantry into the battle. U.S. and NATO training teams never reached much over 50 percent of required personnel, and even that low level took several years to achieve. Advisory teams were delegated to the National Guard and Reserves rather than the regular U.S. Army, a clear indication that this was a lower priority effort. Proper advanced training for these teams took several years to set up.

Then, the decision to end U.S. involvement in active combat by 2014 converted a conditions-based strategy to one driven by Washington timelines. Withdrawal of advisers consistently outpaced the readiness of the Afghans to take over. By 2014, many of our forces were devoted to getting packed up and out of the country rather than to the fighting. But worse was yet to come.

Critically, Afghan security forces trained with U.S. and NATO forces, and thus learned to fight as we do with air support. But from January 2014 to November 2016, that air support was withdrawn. The Obama administration declared that we are no longer at war with the Taliban. This nonsensical phrase, which I heard from senior officials at the National Security Council, left the Taliban free, except in the most extreme circumstances, to reinforce, maneuver and mass for attacks.

Only at the end of 2016 was the administration sufficiently shocked by the failure of its strategy to lift the prohibition on air support and end further withdrawals. But this left in place a greatly reduced U.S. and NATO force sufficient only to prevent immediate defeat. Since the Trump administration has largely maintained this inadequate force, it is puzzling that the White House wonders why it has not achieved a different result.

Our commanders may perhaps be faulted for not arguing harder against the political mistakes of Washington. I believe that they tried but found that the Obama White House resented every effort to speak truth to power. The Afghans can be seriously criticized for allowing politics to intrude much too far into senior military appointments (something that is being reversed by President Ashraf Ghanis appointment of battle-tested commanders). Nonetheless, our advisory presence still does not cover every Afghan army corps, nor their subordinate brigades. Much of the rush to failure has been Washington-driven.

Even a great effort to correct the mistakes of the past would not produce results on the battlefield for a year or more. Whether this can or should be done deserves serious debate. But that discussion should be based on a clear understanding of what has and what has not already been tried in Afghanistan.

Follow this link:
America keeps on failing in Afghanistan - Washington Post

Augusta mother of three and Maine Army National Guard wife Michelle Ouellette couldnt be prouder of the man she married even if his multiple oversea deployments have brought different challenges for her family.

Ouellette was surrounded by her children while her husband, Col. Bryan Ouellette, commander of the 120th Regional Support Group said goodbye to visiting family, friends, local and state dignitaries and other service members at the units send-off Friday at Hampden Academy.

Every time hes gone something different breaks at home, she said with a knowing smile on her face. Is is easier? Yes and no. Its a familiar routine when he leaves, but its different every time.

Thirty-five members of the 120th are heading to Afghanistan, after a period of training at Fort Hood, Texas. Two-thirds of the 35 soldiers have deployed before.

The soldiers will manage facilities, provide administrative and logistical support for troop services and provide security during their year-long deployment.

Master Sgt. Harold Whitten of Enfield, the units readiness noncommissioned officer, played with his 10-month-old grandson, Landon Nickerson, during the entire ceremony. He said he was getting in all the one-on-one time with the child that he could before he had to leave.

Whitten is also on his third deployment. He said he joined the military because everyone else in the family did. My father was in, my grandfather was in, uncles were in.

He went to Bosnia in 1997 and Iraq in 2003. His brother, Maj. Jeffrey Whitten, who works at the Armys Regional Training Institute in Bangor, sat behind him in support.

Maj. Megan Colleen Swanger, an engineer plans officer, is leaving on her second deployment. She went to Iraq as an active duty member of the 10th Mountain Division in 2009. Her parents, her best friend and boyfriend and both sets of their parents were at the ceremony in support.

Everybody took time off, Swanger said. Were enjoying all things Maine. We ate a lot of lobster to prepare of the departure.

Col. Ouellette said that some of the soldiers, including Swanger, were tapped from different Maine Guard units to fulfill the jobs required for the deployment.

Ouellette also deployed with the unit, formerly known as the 240th Engineer Group, when it last mobilized in 2006 in support of Operation Enduring Freedom to Afghanistan.

At that time, instant messaging was something new, his wife said.

It was such a treat if he was on at the same time, she said. This time, We made sure his Facetime was set up already so the family can communicate via video face-to-face.

In July, it was announced that six members of Bangor-based Detachment 3, 2nd Battalion, 641st Aviation Regiment would also be heading to Asia this fall. There are 28 members of the Maine Air National Guard currently overseas, Brig. Gen. Douglas Farnham, adjutant general for the Maine National Guard and commissioner of the Maine Department of Defense, Veterans and Emergency Management, said.

More:
Bangor Army Guard unit heading to Afghanistan - Bangor Daily News

That seems to be just what Sen. John McCain is now suggesting -- adding troops for counterterrorism, increasing US airpower and targeting the enemy, the Taliban and its allies al Qaeda and ISIS directly. And with the President's national security adviser en route to Bedminster to meet with Donald Trump, it's not a moment too soon. We've previously made a similar commitment. The shooting ended in Korea 64 years ago, though since no peace treaty was ever signed, we are still technically at war with North Korea and we still have more than 23,000 troops there.

We might even be fighting a hot war there again before long.

Today, the consequences could be even greater.

That led to a war that lasted nearly the entire decade of the 1980s, a quagmire that was often likened to Russia's Vietnam War. Thousands of young men returning in body bags and a national revulsion in Russia for the Kremlin's obsessions with Afghanistan were important contributors to the end of communism and the breakup of the Soviet Union.

Still, let's assume Donald Trump is wise enough to follow the recommendations of his sainted generals and keep -- or even more importantly, enlarge -- America's troop presence there in limited combat, as well as advisory roles, just as we are doing now, to some effect, in Syria.

First, under no circumstances must we tip our hand, as President Obama did in Iraq and again in Afghanistan, and suggest that there's a firm deadline to our presence there.

Now, in Afghanistan, we have a new opportunity not to make the same mistake twice. We must let the bad guys think our presence is forever and that our resources know no bounds. Don't give the bad guys an open-and-shut reason to just wait you out. You need to say one thing and sound like you mean it. We'll stay until the end, no matter how bitter it might be and the bad guys are beaten (just like the US is doing now with ISIS) or until our side in the Afghan stew can really take up the fight and win it.

This time, the stakes could be even higher. Imagine a Taliban back in power in Kabul that decides just the perfect present for their new allies and friends from ISIS -- who helped them return to power -- might be a small nuke that North Korea is willing and may very soon be able, to put on the black market. Then we are talking an existential threat to the American heartland that will make 9/11 seem like a distant memory.

What you need to do is tell your generals, sooner rather than later, you want to stay in Afghanistan until victory is won. Then, define what that victory should look like and why it is so deeply important to the world's security.

At the same time, we can't ignore the civil society component. It's certainly not a pretty picture. According to last month's quarterly report to Congress of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), Afghanistan's domestic revenues declined some 25% over a year earlier and "covered about 40 percent of total government expenditures."

Moreover, the largest single product of the largest economic sector, agriculture, was the production of opioids, which according to SIGAR nearly doubled to $3.02 billion last year from $1.56 billion a year earlier. We must find a way to build a viable economy independent of the Taliban.

Gen. Mattis and Gen. McMaster are supposed to come pay their respects to Mr Trump in Bedminster, New Jersey, on his working vacation this week. While perhaps overshadowed by Korea, it's still a perfect time to lay all this out for him. The President must not waste any more time, or waffle any further over a decision.

Be decisive and make the right choice, as painful as it may appear. For the alternative may be far more painful. Not just in the long run, but far more immediately than might ever be imagined. Sometimes, hardball does work.

Visit link:
How Trump can win in Afghanistan - CNN International

McCain's Afghan strategy includes adding more US troops for counterterrorism missions, increasing US airpower to aid Afghan forces and providing the US military with broader authority to target enemy forces including the Taliban, the Haqqani Network, Al Qaeda and ISIS.

The Arizona Republican also would have the US military advising Afghan forces at the Kandak, or battalion level, which is about 600 troops.

"We must face facts: we are losing in Afghanistan and time is of the essence if we intend to turn the tide," McCain said in a statement. "We need an integrated civil-military approach to bolster U.S. counterterrorism efforts, strengthen the capability and capacity of the Afghan government and security forces, and intensify diplomatic efforts to facilitate a negotiated peace process in Afghanistan in cooperation with regional partners."

McCain wants the US to enter into an agreement with the Afghan government for an enduring US counterterrorism presence in Afghanistan, and he wants to put more pressure on Pakistan to stop providing sanctuaries to the Taliban and Haqqani Network.

The goal, he says, is to create security conditions in the country that would bring the Taliban to the negotiating table.

Defense Secretary James Mattis pledged he would give McCain an Afghan strategy by July, but there has been no public sign that such a strategy has materialized.

McCain outlined his plan as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act, the bill he leads as chairman of the Senate armed services committee.

McCain's amendment is a "sense of Congress" provision, which means it would not force the Trump administration to take any action. But if it's adopted in the bill, it would provide a symbolic marker that Congress wants an enduring US counterterrorism presence in Afghanistan.

CNN's Ryan Browne contributed to this report.

Original post:
John McCain announces his own strategy for Afghanistan - CNN