As Obama Demands Illinois Governor Resign, his Afghanistan Military Buildup begi

The following media release is from Defense Link and went public over the past 24 hours.

Gates: More brigades to Afghanistan by summer

Let us pray, that the political satire at the left was just that satire and electioneering. However, the Obama transition tends to be going into a few ultra-conservative directions that lead credence to his victory as President-elect will be but continuity of Bush’s failed foreign policies:
– Pro-Wire Taping
– Iraq Troops Flipflops are questionable.
– Influence of the Israeli lobby (ie. I love Isreal which translated means a permanent presence in Iraq)
– The one of immedicate concern to me is MORE TROOPS TO AFGHANISTAN!

Robert L. Hanafin
Major, U.S. Air Force-Retired
Staff Writer, VT

PS: I voted for Obama, so rest assured many who voted for him that feel the same way I do about the escalation of the War on Terror to Afghansitan (with or without THE DRAFT) are going to be paying very close attention to ensure WE get what we voted for OR ELSE!

Well, worse that could happen is the Dems get killed during the next mid-term elections for Congress, the best that could happen is the emergency of strong independent parties, because the American people are beyond fed up.

Afghanistan – The Pentagon is moving to get three of the four combat brigades requested by commanders into Afghanistan by summer, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said yesterday as he traveled here to meet with military leaders.

At the same time, Gates said a key "course correction" in the Afghanistan war for the administration of President-elect Barack Obama will be to build the Afghan army and better cooperate with Kabul on security operations.[What is the difference between Staying the Course and Course Correction? Still sounds like the Bush failed policy of staying the course to me!]

"I think there’s a concern on the part of some of the Afghans that we sort of tell them what we’re going to do, instead of taking proposals to them and getting their input and then working out with them what we’re going to do, so it’s a real partnership," Gates told reporters traveling with him to Afghanistan. "That’s an important aspect of this, that I think we need a course correction." [There’s that diversionary attempt to CHANGE Stay the Course to Course Correction – HUM?]

Gates was scheduled to meet with Gen. David McKiernan, the commander of U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan, and to gather with U.S. troops in Kandahar.
The meetings come as senior military leaders and the White House are pulling together a broad new military strategy for Afghanistan, one that would shift the focus from the waning fight in Iraq to the escalating Afghan fight.

Gates said he expects the troop levels in Iraq to remain fairly steady through the provincial elections early next year and "probably for some period of time after that."
While there is wide agreement that the military emphasis will now shift to Afghanistan, long regarded as the secondary priority behind Iraq, there is still debate on how best to do it.

Gates would not detail any of the findings that have surfaced in the strategy reviews. But the push to increase the size of the Afghan army is reflected in at least one of the ongoing studies.

The White House, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the incoming Obama administration and Gen. David Petraeus, commander of U.S. Central Command, all are conducting their own reviews. Obama has said getting more troops to Afghanistan is a priority.

Gates said he has no details on the expected deployments to Afghanistan next year, adding that he has not approved any orders for specific units. He said the Joint Chiefs may have identified the units, but he’s not aware of those decisions. [Say What? Obama’s Secretary of Defense is now aware of what unit his and Obama’s Joint Chiefs intend sending to Afghanistan – Yet such oplans may be on-going? When does Gates intend getting briefed on such deployments – when the decision is made and Obama accept his War on Terror?]

He added that he does not know when he will be able to send the fourth requested brigade. [However, rest assured Gates will continue to use and abuse those exhausted troops stuck in Iraq or supposedly resting in CONUS before he would ever dream to suggesting to Obama that a limited Draft is needed to acquire a brigade or so. As long as troops and military families are ready, willing, and able to BE ABUSED rest assured YOU WILL BE!]

Gates and other U.S. officials have endorsed efforts [Congress and the Obama administration] has in fact endorsed deploying the Endless Cannon to Afghanistan for the Pentagon Pork it provides] to pour four combat brigades and thousands of support troops into Afghanistan to stem the spike in violence and tamp down the resurgence of the Taliban.

Officials already had announced that one unit — the 3rd Brigade, 10th Mountain Division — would go to Afghanistan in January and that they would try to meet the rest of the troop requirements as soon as possible. But military leaders have resisted disclosing which units or how quickly they would go, saying much depends on how quickly troop levels can be cut in Iraq. A brigade is about 3,500 troops. [Time out, didn’t Gates say earlier on his visit to Afghanistan that he plans no troop level cuts in Iraq in order to find the additional two brigades needed? Then where is the Pentagon going to get the bodies? If two brigades equal 7,000 troops, are there at least 7,000 troops available in the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) and how many of them will seriously and voluntarily report for duty? My gut felling is that reliance on a Reserve that may or may not maintain contact with the Pentagon is iffy at best. The only other alternatives would be continuing Stop Loss (The Backdoor Draft), but regardless if opposed or embraced by Our Troops and families impacted, I seriously doubt the Pentagon can come up with 7,000 troop by preventing Lifers from retiring. I say Lifers as a term of endearment BTW, I am one. However, the real question remains that unless WE totally pull out of Iraq leaving a smaller residual force there is no other way to avoid THE DRAFT in the long run. I passionately agree with those who dream there will never be a DRAFT given the lack of American commitment to participate let alone endure a War on Terror, but what I’m saying is that the NEED for THE DRAFT will end the War on Terror. Reality is that despite a piss poor economy that provides a temporary increase in so-called volunteers for the Pentagon, it is just running out of young bodies to throw at the War on Terror.]

The U.S. is working to meet deadlines in its agreement with Baghdad that require combat troops to leave the cities by June and be out of the country in three years. As planned, the number of combat brigades in Iraq is dropping to 14 early next year, and Gates said that level will enable him to get a second brigade to Afghanistan by summer.

He said he’s not sure whether the third brigade will be redirected to Afghanistan from a planned tour in Iraq or if it can be found elsewhere.

Asked whether Marines may be tapped to go, Gates said the decision has not been made. [Gates can always use more Air Force and Navy as ground troops given they have no immediate mission, then quickly redeploy them to thier Air Power and Sea Power roles in event of a conventional threat. Heck, we also have the nuclear detterent against any conventional military threat although our nuke deterrent obviously did not stop North Korea, and Iran from thinking about becoming nuclear nations, and it did not prevent Isreal, Pakistan, and India from becoming nuke nations.]

The top Marine officer, Gen. James Conway, told The Associated Press this week that he believes there is a growing consensus that Marines could be used to fill part of the need in Afghanistan. If approved, he said, some could go there in early spring.

"It’s clear that the Marines want to be in the fight, that’s what you’d expect," said Gates, adding that it’s clear that the security situation has greatly improved in Iraq’s Anbar province, where the bulk of the Marines are. "I don’t have a problem with Gen. Conway’s desire to have a bigger part of the mission in Afghanistan for the Marine Corps." [For the record, remember that Gates fired the Chief of Staff of the Air Force and Secretary of the Air Force over the excuse of a nuclear aircraft overflying CONUS, but his real reasons were Air Force leadership lack of enthusiasm about being asked to continue being Soldiers. Is Gates going to put more pressure on Air Force and Naval leadership to get more involved in the ground war and less concerned about continuing to get the bulk of Pentagon pork?]

He said he will wait for recommendations from his military leaders.

Gates’ stop in Afghanistan was designed initially as a farewell tour to visit troops as he prepared to leave office. But that changed when he was asked to stay on by Obama, making Gates the new administration’s Republican [Bush War] holdover in the Cabinet. [Nothing symbolizes the shift from the War on Terror being Bush’s War to Obama’s War than keeping Gates onboard].

During a NATO meeting in October, Gates asked allies to consider increasing troop levels in Afghanistan next year during the elections, a move that has been made for past votes, both there and in Iraq. Gates said the increase would be temporary, and it was not clear how many forces would be needed or who would provide them.
At the same meeting, the allies also agreed on to step up their operations to combat Afghan drug lords who fuel terror networks.

http://www.defenselink.mil

To those Pro-Peace groups undecided about taking a position or stand for or against escalation of the War on Terror (really the War on Afghanistan), I say WARNING – Obama’s Secretary of Defense has begun planning the Obama military escalation into Afghanistan II even before he takes office. To Bush Bashing alumni, I say are WE going to give the same attention and focuse to Obama as we gave to Bush. Because it is no longer Bush’s War!!!

Afghanistan tends to remain off the public radar, including the Pro-Peace movement because there are not enough coffins coming back in the dead of night, realively few U.S. troops are dedicated to Afghanistan, compared to Iraq – YET, and it is suppose to be a NATO Operation. That’s the biggest joke, and I mean that literally.

Do a Google search of Afghanistan War Cartoons, and one will find that the strongest Pro-Peace sentiment tends to come from those NATO nations opposed to their troop involvement let alone escalation into Afghaistan. I frankly was surprised for I really thought I would find more U.S. Pro-Peace sentiment towards Afghanistan despite the ties between 911 and Afghanistan. Is the Obama going to USE 911 the same way as the Bush administration did or is there going to be as in Secretary Gates’ words, "a course correction" that embraces 911?