Originally posted by funkedup
I was watching an interview show on Sunday (on I think MSNBC) where a former General and an author were both discussing Afghanistan. According to them the number of troops in Afghanistan is far too low for "nation building". They are able to maintain order for the most part, and they are quite able to defend themselves when needed, but both speakers agreed that they need more manpower to ensure the stability of the new government, to prevent local thugs from exercising power.
That's something, thanks Funked!
Any details on the declared "operation" in the media?
BTW, what did they mean by "nation building"? How many more troops do they need? Given the fact that USSR had the whole 40th Army there, plus many other troops, having support of Aghani regular army and police, and people knowing that Shuravi are good men?
Able to maintain order for the most part of what? Kabul? What are the current numbers of US troops there? How many provinces do they control? What is the situation with local warlords, not nessesary being Mujaheddin?
What about "traditional" ethnic conflicts between Pushtu, Uzbeks and Tajiks?
So far I see a usual media trouble failing to focus on more then one "event" (if you can call an intervention in Iraq an "event"). More to say, I see that media gets tired of the war news. On March, 20th, 99% of news were from Iraq or "coalition", their ambassadors and representatives, and now we see more local news then war reports.
