Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: U.S. Nato Envoy Calls For More Troops In Afghanistan

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2005

    U.S. Nato Envoy Calls For More Troops In Afghanistan

    U.S. NATO envoy calls for more troops in Afghanistan

    By Kate Kelland
    Wednesday, September 13, 2006; 7:04 AM

    LONDON (Reuters) - NATO allies must fulfill their commitment to the future stability of Afghanistan by dispatching more troops to fight insurgents, Washington's ambassador to the alliance said on Wednesday.

    Victoria Nuland praised the U.S., Britain, Canada and the Netherlands for their combat efforts in Afghanistan, but urged other members of the 26-nation alliance to reinforce political and logistical support with military commitments.

    "What we are looking to do is to put more forces in so that we can turn the tide faster," she told BBC radio. "The issue here ... is the fighting capability and the fighting willingness of all allies."

    NATO troops have been drawn into bloody combat with Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan -- particularly in the more volatile south -- in recent weeks and commanders on the ground have voiced concerns about troop capacity.

    The Taliban are now the most active they have been since being toppled by a U.S.-led coalition in 2001 in the wake of the September 11 attacks by the group's al Qaeda allies.

    More than 2,000 people -- rebels, civilians and Afghan and foreign troops -- have been killed in fighting this year.

    NATO's top commander of operations General James Jones has called for reinforcements for Afghanistan but has had no firm response so far.

    Prime Minister Tony Blair's spokesman played down any prospect of Britain sending more troops.

    "We have made our contribution and ... if you talk to NATO they recognize that," he told reporters.

    Britain already has around 4,000 soldiers serving in the country as part of NATO's peace force.

    "The U.S., the UK, Canada, the Dutch, have been in the tough, pointy end of this fight and more allies need to be willing to be ... in the fighting," Nuland said.

    She urged NATO members to respond quickly to the immediate need in Afghanistan, and also said the alliance's future would depend on greater European military capacity.

    "In addition to the political will to go where it is necessary, we also need ... over the longer term to continue to build European defenses and European armies so that more of our allies have more capable troops who can do these kinds of missions," she said. "In the world we are living in that is the NATO that we need."
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG

  2. #2
    shorebreak Guest
    To fill in the blanks and give you what the media won't, keep in mind that NATO Commander James Jones (Former US Marine Corp Commandant 1999-2003) is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). Along with members like Cheney, Rice, Powell, Rumsfeld, Albright, Clinton, and their financial controllers from Bear Stearns, Lazare, Chase, Goldman Sachs, and the rest of the international power brokers who profit under their imperialistic globalization agenda.

    With that in mind, it comes as no surprise that NATO is calling for more troops in the region. As CFR member Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote in 1997, control of Central Asia and the Middle East means control of the majority of the worlds remaining energy resources, meaning control of Eurasion and African politics.

    The Empire is on the march and most people have no clue as to how it's managed.

  3. #3
    Partridge Guest
    Nato fails on Afghan troops plea

    No formal offers have been made by Nato states in response to requests by commanders in Afghanistan for 2,500 extra troops, Nato says. Members are meeting in Belgium amid pressure from the International Security Assistance Force, which is fighting in southern Afghanistan.

    US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice earlier warned that Afghanistan was at risk of becoming a "failed state".

    Differing rules of engagement between Nato states are creating difficulties.

    "No formal offers were made at the table," spokesman James Appathurai told a news briefing.

    However, he said there were "positive indications" that some allies might consider providing additional forces, Reuters news agency reported.

    There are at least 18,500 foreign, mainly Nato soldiers in Afghanistan in addition to about the same number of US troops deployed.

    Half of them are in the south where Canadian and British forces are sharing the burden with US aircraft support and special forces on the ground.

    In the latest violence, Afghan police say they killed 16 Taleban fighters in a fierce gun battle overnight in Helmand province.

    Differing rules

    The Dutch, Australians and Estonians are also in southern Afghanistan but many other countries are reluctant to commit troops to what is currently the most dangerous part of the mission, the BBC's Alastair Leithead reports from Kabul.

    Total Isaf troops - 18,500
    Contributing nations - 37
    Isaf - International Security Assistance Force
    *A further 18,000 non-Isaf, US-led troops also in country

    UK Foreign Office Minister Kim Howells said he had spoken to the commander of Isaf in Afghanistan, Lt Gen David Richards, and it was clear they needed back-up.

    "We need Nato to be pulling its weight. They need to put more resources in there and we need help," he told a specially-convened session of the UK Foreign Affairs Select Committee.

    UK Prime Minister Tony Blair said it was of "fundamental importance" to security that the "the job in Afghanistan is done properly".

    "We should never forget that the reason why our troops are in Afghanistan, along with other Nato countries, is because out of Afghanistan came the terrorism of 9/11," he said.

    Germany has thousands of troops in northern Afghanistan but its rules prevent soldiers from moving south.

    While Nato countries agree reinforcements are necessary, the issue of who will provide them has yet to be decided.

    All nations are represented at the meeting in Mons, near Brussels, and Nato's Supreme Command was to solicit offers.

    Vacuum fears

    US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Afghanistan's strategic position meant it risked becoming a haven for militant groups.

    Referring to a US decision to leave the country after the withdrawal of the Soviet Union in 1989, Ms Rice said, "We all came to pay for that."

    Speaking in Canada, she explained that the US should learn its lessons from Afghanistan.

    "If you allow that kind of vacuum, if you allow a failed state in that strategic location, you're going to pay for it," she said.

    Last month, Nato commanders took over from US-led coalition forces but there has been a resurgence of Taleban attacks, above all in the south.

    Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf has warned that the Taleban are now more of a threat to the region's security than Osama Bin Laden's al-Qaeda network.

    "The centre of gravity of terrorism has shifted from al-Qaeda to [the] Taleban," he told European parliamentarians in Brussels.

    He said a reinvigorated Taleban was particularly dangerous as, unlike al-Qaeda, it had its roots in the Afghan people.

  4. #4
    harmonicrat Guest

    Petition for Dr. Jones

    I'm promoting a petition to BYU in support of Dr. Steven Jones. Please sign it and spread it. Thanks!

Similar Threads

  1. U.S. Envoy: Afghanistan Drug War A Failure
    By Gold9472 in forum The New News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-23-2009, 07:36 AM
  2. 'Over 40 Civilians killed' in Nato raids in Afghanistan
    By Partridge in forum The New News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-26-2006, 08:40 AM
  3. NATO Takes Over In Afghanistan
    By Gold9472 in forum The New News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-30-2006, 01:14 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-23-2006, 04:02 PM
  5. U.S. troops fire at Canadian envoy's car
    By beltman713 in forum The New News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-01-2006, 05:17 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts