"With Afghan control by 2014, Obama sees combat end" by Robert Burns and Julie Pace
Associated Press / November 21, 2010
LISBON, Portugal—President Barack Obama on Saturday said for the first time he wants U.S. troops out of major combat in Afghanistan by the end of 2014, the date he and other NATO leaders set for moving Afghans into the lead role in fighting the Taliban....
I thought we were leaving in 2011.
Related: Handing the Joint Over in Afghanistan
Turning the bases over to those guys?
As the U.S. experience in Iraq showed, insurgencies can prove more resilient than predicted and newly assembled government security forces can take longer than expected to become competent and experienced enough to stand on their own....
Especially if they are government created, directed, and funded.
See: US Paying Taliban For Protection
Good way to keep a war going though.
Afghanistan and its struggle against the Taliban dominated the NATO summit, which came just weeks before Obama is to receive an internal review of U.S. war strategy. The report is expected to conclude that despite slower-than-expected progress against the Taliban, the current approach is largely on track....
What my printed paper didn't tell me:
The summit also was notable for decisions it did not make. It stuck to the status quo, for example, on U.S. nuclear weapons in Europe. Germany and some other European allies want the U.S. to withdraw the estimated 150-200 nuclear bombs stored in five NATO countries. Allied leaders chose instead to put off any action to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in NATO strategy....
Yeah, WE get to have NUCLEAR BOMBS WHEREVER WE WANT while IRAN can NOT EVEN HAVE a POWER STATION!
--more--"
Web version substitute: Obama sees US combat in Afghanistan to end by 2014 (By Karen DeYoung, Washington Post)
I don't read WaPo or New York Times "updates" anymore.
I don't even like reading what they have given me:
"NATO invites Russia to join Europe missile shield" by Alan Clendenning
Associated Press / November 20, 2010
LISBON, Portugal—Two key unanswered questions about the missile shield -- will it work and can the Europeans afford it? -- were put aside for the present by NATO members in the interest of celebrating the agreement as a boost for NATO solidarity....
Again, what doesn't make the cut in the printed paper:
What remains in conflict, however, is the question of the future role of nuclear weapons in NATO's basic strategy.
As if they would ever seriously consider using them?
The document members agreed to on Friday says NATO will retain an "appropriate mix of nuclear and conventional capabilities" to deter a potential aggressor....
I can see why North Korea is worried now.
NATO and Moscow signed an agreement to expand the alliance's supply routes to Afghanistan through Russia and were expected to set up a new training program in Russia for counter-narcotics agents from Afghanistan and other Central Asian countries; and agree on a program to provide training to Afghan helicopter crews....
So RUSSIA has THROWN IN with the New World Order crowd, 'eh?
Web version substitute: NATO invites Russia to join missile shield; Medvedev interested (By Edward Cody, Washington Post)
It is there for you, readers; I'm not clicking on it.
