Should the Troop Levels in Afghanistan be Increased?

The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, has requested to President Obama that the U.S. send more troops to fight the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. This past Sunday there were insurgent attacks in a remote area which killed eight American soldiers over the weekend. National Security Adviser Jim Jones didn't endorse calls by General Stanley McChrystal to send 40,000 additional servicemembers to join the 68,000 already committed. Jones stated "It would be, I think, unfortunate if we let the discussion just be about troop strength." Jones said that just sending more troops alone wouldn't be the only solution.

The pressure is increasing on President Obama to send more troops to Afghanistan. Obama hasn't yet declared what he will do in regards to strategy and troop strength. Prominent Republicans such as Senator John McCain have supported McChrystal's call for more troops in Afghanistan. Jones said that the decision to send more troops would be made "in a matter of weeks." Jones claimed that Afghanistan is not in danger of falling to the Taliban and the Al-Qaeda presence there is diminished.

Should President Obama grant McChrystal's request to send more troops to Afghanistan? There's no doubt when U.S. soldiers are being killed in insurgent attacks that something must be done to replace the presence of those soldiers that are deceased. However, sending an additional 40,000 troops isn't going to rectify the situation alone. The problem is the "no-win" strategy that Obama and his predecessor George W. Bush have adopted in both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Also, the Bush administration implemented "nation-building" policies in both countries in the hopes that both countries would become democracies. America's troops have been training the Afghans in building up their security forces when it comes to fighting the Taliban.

Sending more U.S. troops without a dramatic change in strategy and goals will be worthless. All that will be doing is placing more American soldiers' lives on the chopping block. I know it's not popular in this day to fight a real war. However, that's the nature of wars. Radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh made a comment in one of his television show in 1992 that the purpose of going to war is to kill people and break things. That's the truth. The objective of war is to using crushing force to break down the enemy and prevail. If that mindset is not used when it comes to fighting a war, then you're endangering the lives of the U.S. troops for nothing. There must be a military objective for victory when fighting a war. There are numerous ways to accomplish that goal, but a quick and decisive victory must be the bottom line when going to war. We shouldn't be engaging ourselves in a "police action" when fighting a war. There's a price to be paid when waging a war. If the purpose is not to defeat the forces of evil, then it's a waste of time. One of the reasons why America has a low-standing in world opinion is due to the fact we've fought a long and protracted war in both Iraq and Afghanistan with no end in sight.

I remember back in 2004 when then presidential candidate and U.S. Senator John Kerry spoke of fighting a "sensitive" war. There's no such thing as a sensitive war. Wars are ugly and devastating. You can't dress it down. War is not meant to be pretty. It should be used when either all means of diplomacy have failed or we have such an imminent threat that if we don't join forces with our allies the whole world or the Western Hemisphere could be destroyed in a nuclear showdown. It requires strong and resolute force to defeat the forces of evil. The U.S. mission in Afghanistan should be to destroy the Taliban and any Al-Qaeda presence that's there. I don't believe the U.S. should be engaging in "nation-building" in Afghanistan because their culture and religion won't allow a true democracy to ever take place there. It's a waste of time. The U.S. mission must be to destroy the Taliban completely and to remove the Al-Qaeda threat in that country. If the Obama administration isn't going to do that, then he should send the U.S. troops home.