Thread: Russia helping Taliban and hurting U.S. in Afghanistan, top general says

Russia helping Taliban and hurting U.S. in Afghanistan, top general says

Richard Lardner

The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan said Thursday he needs a "few thousand" more troops to better accomplish an integral part of the mission, and he complained that Russian meddling is complicating the counterterrorism fight.

Gen. John Nicholson didn't provide the Senate Armed Services Committee with an exact number of additional forces, but said they could come from the United States or other countries in the American-led coalition in Afghanistan, where the war is now in its 16th year. He said they are necessary to properly train and advise the Afghan military and perform work now handled at greater cost by contractors.

There are currently about 8,400 U.S. troops conducting counterterrorism operations against insurgents and training the Afghan army.

Nicholson said he had discussed troop levels with Defense Secretary James Mattis and Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Nicholson said he believes the Trump administration will be open to a level based on requirements, rather than a predetermined figure. Republicans criticized President Barack Obama for trying, in their view, to cut the number too sharply before he left office Jan. 20.

But the idea of sending more Americans to the war zone may not go over well with a public frustrated by the length and cost of the conflict.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., citing figures from the special inspector general for Afghanistan reconstruction, said the war is costing U.S. taxpayers $13 million a day.

Nicholson also disclosed that a U.S. special forces soldier was "severely wounded" in fighting Thursday in Sangin, the Taliban heartland in southern Afghanistan.

He gave an example of how additional forces would be used. Nicholson said that because of troop level limits, the aviation brigade that deployed to Afghanistan was able to bring its helicopters, pilots and staff, but had to leave its mechanics behind at Fort Riley in Kansas. Contractors were hired instead at a cost of "tens of millions of dollars," forcing the soldier mechanics to sit at home, he said, and affecting the Army unit's readiness.

Nicholson said there is a 2-1 ratio of contractors to troops in Afghanistan.

In response to a question from Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., Nicholson said he doesn't have enough troops to provide proper oversight of all those contractors.

Nicholson contended that Russia has been publicly legitimizing the Taliban by claiming that the militants are fighting Islamic terrorists while the Afghan government is not. He called that a "false narrative" and argued that Moscow's goal is to undermine the United States and NATO in Afghanistan.

Afghan security forces have reduced by one-half the number of IS fighters and by two-thirds the amount of territory the extremists hold, according to the commander.

He said declined to say in the open hearing whether Russia is providing support for the Taliban and in what way.

Afterward, Nicholson told The Associated Press he was referring to classified intelligence. He would not discuss the matter further.

The Russians recently invited representatives from the Taliban, China, Pakistan and other countries in the region to Moscow for meetings about Afghanistan's future, but did not include officials from the Kabul government, Nicholson said.

"A peace and reconciliation process should be Afghan-led," the general said.

Despite Moscow's overtures, Nicholson said many Afghans don't view Russia favorably, dating to the Soviet invasion and occupation of Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989.

Several Republican senators on Thursday urged President Donald Trump to pursue a "tough-minded and principled policy toward" Russia. They want Trump to maintain current U.S. sanctions against Russia, rebuke Moscow for its continued aggression in Ukraine, and not enter into any military or diplomatic agreement with Russia on Syria's future until Moscow ends its "support for the murderous regime" of President Bashar Assad.

Nicholson described the security situation in Afghanistan as a "stalemate."

"Can we win?" asked Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.
Yes, Nicholson said. He described victory as a stable, centralized Afghan government and destruction of al-Qaida and IS.

Leaving before then means it's "just a matter of time" before terrorists launch another attack on the United States from safe havens in Afghanistan, he said.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...nt=oft02a-1la1

Let the "other" countries send them a "few thousand" troops and let them pay for it.

Better yet, put uniforms on YOUR military age fighting men and women and send them out to fight the battle on your soil.

No more US troops, no more US treasure!

That's kind of bizarre or at least ironic since it was the US at one time that was backing the Taliban, including OBL himself, in confronting the USSR in Afghanistan.

Makes you wonder why we ever fought the Russians out of Afghanistan. They actually know how to restore order in these places and could have probably defeated those Afghan fighters (Al Qaeda and OBL) if we'd stayed the hell out of it.

Our guys can't train these people. They've been trying to train the Afghan Army for 16 years. Americans trained our Armed Forces for WWII in 6 weeks, so what the hell is going on over there? Poppies? Drug money? Something aint right here and Russia knows it.

US troops march through Latvian town, woo border guards with arms & equipment (VIDEOS)

Published time: 10 Feb, 2017 06:32

Get short URL

© Ruptly
Around 160 US and Latvian paratroopers followed by armored vehicles paraded through towns near the Russian border, in the two-day Latvian leg of NATO’s Baltic drills. Troopers were seen showing off US equipment to border guards and kids.

The march kicked off on Tuesday, February 7 and concluded on Wednesday as part of the exercises dubbed Bayonet Vanguard. The drills took place all across the Baltics, said to be aimed at enhancing cooperation between Latvian and US soldiers, who were to prove their skills in winter conditions.

At the march’s final destination, the city of Rezekne, located just 63 kilometers (39 miles) west of the Latvian-Russian border. The US military was filmed marching and then showing off to locals with an open air equipment showcase staged in a local park.

In a video uploaded by YouTube user sirokez, armored vehicles, tanks, and Humvees are displayed in the snow, while several children eagerly climb inside. One even shoulders a MANPAD (Man-portable air-defense system).

The troopers are then seen offering several female border guards helmets with night and thermal vision optics to try on, as well as a bulletproof vest, both of which seem to amaze them.

As deployment of dozens of soldiers and heavy machinery into a city of 30,000 might have caused apprehension among residents, the Latvian authorities warned citizens in advance.

Посмотреть изображение в Твиттере

Читать
NBS @Latvijas_armija

Sargs.lv: 173rd Airborne Brigade Conducts a Winter March “Bayonet Vanguard” across the Baltics: http://www.sargs.lv/Zinas/Military_News/2017/02/02-01.aspx#lastcomment …
23:36 - 1 февраля 2017

• 
  
• 
  1515 Ретвитов
• 
  2424 отметки «Нравится»

The military drills, known as Bayonet Vanguard, took place in Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia from February 6 to 9. Each leg of the exercises included a 50-kilometer march with US and host country troops.

READ MORE: NATO buildup in E. Europe threat to Russian security, increases risk of incidents – Moscow

The drills, along with the recent buildup of US-NATO forces and armored vehicles in eastern Europe, was said to serve as proof of Washington’s commitment to European security in the face of alleged Russian “assertiveness.”

Moscow has described the deployments of NATO tanks and troops close to the Russian border as a “threat,” saying that they “gravely increase the risk of incidents.”

“This deployment is of course a threat for us,” Deputy Foreign Minister Aleksey Meshkov said in an interview with RIA Novosti. “And who said that it will end with this? We don’t have such information.”

https://www.rt.com/news/376903-latvia-drills-us-troops/

Well, gee, I don't guess we'd be too happy with Russian troops a few miles from our borders showing off their stuff to Mexicans or Canadians. Until the United States foreign policy incorporates an adult understanding of Russia, we'll continue to look stupid. I sure hope Trump straightens out NATO and makes Russia our friend again. If more Americans would take the time to read up on Russia's history, their role in WWII, the real reason for much of the things they did that we didn't understand after the war but had we had all the facts we would have understood, then everything would be much better.

TELL THE TRUTH STATE DEPARTMENT. TELL THE TRUTH CIA. STOP LYING TO US ABOUT RUSSIA. STOP IT.

If I were Trump and I found even one state department or CIA officer or official telling a lie about Russia, they would be fired and prosecuted so fast their heads would spin right off their necks.

Military refused Trump’s bid to parade missile launchers at inauguration

By Yaron Steinbuch
January 20, 2017 | 9:22am | Updated


The US military shot down President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration team’s bid to have tanks and missile launchers rolling down his parade route Friday, according to a report.

“They were legit thinking Red Square/North Korea-style parade,” an inauguration team source told the Huffington Post, referring to grandiose military parades in Moscow and Pyongyang that are often considered displays of bellicosity.

Trump has made showing off US military might part of his platform.

The military “may come marching down Pennsylvania Avenue,” Trump told the Washington Post this week. “That military may be flying over New York City and Washington, DC, for parades. I mean, we’re going to be showing our military.”

Several sources involved in his inaugural preparations told HuffPost that Trump wanted to ensure his first day as commander-in-chief was marked by an unusual display of military hardware.

But military officials balked because of the optics of having tanks and missile launchers rumbling down Pennsylvania Avenue — and because the tanks, which often weigh more than 100,000 pounds, would destroy the roads, the source said.

“I could absolutely see structural support being a reason [not to use tanks],” a Department of Defense official said. “DC is built on a swamp to begin with.”

Defense Department spokeswoman Valerie Henderson referred questions about the request to the Trump transition team.

Trump adviser Boris Epshteyn told the site that the inaugural committee worked closely with the military “to render appropriate honors” for Trump’s swearing-in.

But he directed questions about “specific aspects” of the military’s role back to the Defense Department.

Although Trump’s ideas for the ground displays didn’t fly, the Pentagon was on board with plans for five military flyovers — one for each branch of the armed services, spokesman Major Jamie Davis told HuffPost.

The Air Force plans to fly four fighter jets: an F-35, an F-16, an F-22 and an F-15E. The Navy will fly four F/A-18 combat jets. The Army will fly four UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters. The Marines will fly four V-22 Ospreys. And the Coast Guard is looking at flying four MH-65 rescue helicopters, Davis said.

Stephen Kerrigan, who held top positions in President Obama’s first and second inaugural committees, said he was “shocked” to hear about the flyovers.

“It seems unnecessary and the optics don’t seem appropriate. … It’s very Red Square,” he told HuffPost.

Washington airspace is highly restricted and in the days after 9/11, planes flying over the city terrified people, Kerrigan said.

“If there are fighter jets flying over Washington, people are going to assume something bad is happening,” he said.

Obama did not use any military aircraft at either of his inaugurations, the Defense Department official said.

There also were no flyovers at President George W. Bush’s 2005 inauguration, but he did have a flyover during his 2001 opening ceremony two days before the inauguration.

President Ronald Reagan had considered including flyovers in his second inauguration in 1985, but one never materialized, the official said. Before that, the last president to include military flyovers during an inauguration was Harry Truman in 1949.

http://nypost.com/2017/01/20/militar...-inauguration/

But military officials balked because of the optics of having tanks and missile launchers rumbling down Pennsylvania Avenue — and because the tanks, which often weigh more than 100,000 pounds, would destroy the roads, the source said.

“I could absolutely see structural support being a reason [not to use tanks],” a Department of Defense official said. “DC is built on a swamp to begin with.”

I'm glad they didn't use military equipment displays in the parade. I don't think people in the United States would have really liked that. But what struck me was the reason above. Has no one given thought to the fact that roads in our nation's capital should be able to withstand the weight of tanks? What if we needed to get tanks into DC? Would they get stuck in the mud and rendered useless? Doesn't that leave DC an easy mark?

This is not information that should have been released by the US Department of Defense to the media and our enemies. We have truly a lot of stupid people working in high places in our government right now.

They can drive tanks down the streets but it will cause them to crack and deteriorate sooner than they would under normal wear and tear. Just like if they start running a lot of loaded trucks up and down a small neighborhood street that wasn't built to handle 80,000 truck all of the time.

Don't sure,but some troops from EU countries,as part of NATO, operated in Afghanistan under US direction, like Czech, since 2008.
I don't sure....why we are still in Afghanistan,but definitely, this is not my business...I'am not general..)

Soviet & Russia & USA & NATO.