Ramping up

tool name

tool name

Commentary: Ramping up in Afghanistan

The process would not be rushed, the White House said, and it wasn't. President Obama and his national security team met, discussed, deliberated for what seemed like forever as they wrestled with the strategic options centered on Afghanistan.

But if Obama sometimes seemed to be riding the brakes - for example, when he no doubt wanted to avoid appearing too ready to embrace Afghan President Hamid Karzai's fraud-tainted re-election - the careful review was entirely in order. Now, Americans await Obama's presentation of that review's outcome.

The president this week more than tipped his hand. Some of his fellow Democrats, especially, are leery of any widened U.S. role in Afghanistan, with the inevitable loss of life and compounded costs. But Obama publicly bought into the concept that there is a vital national interest in keeping Afghanistan from again becoming a staging ground for terrorists bent on attacking this country. He declared his intent to "finish the job" that was begun shortly after al-Qaida,

Are Obama advisers downplaying Afghan dangers?

WASHINGTON -- As the Obama administration reconsiders its Afghanistan policy, White House officials are minimizing warnings from the intelligence community, the military and the State Department about the risks of adopting a limited strategy focused on al Qaida, U.S. intelligence, diplomatic and military officials told McClatchy.

Recent U.S. intelligence assessments have found that the Taliban and other Pakistan-based groups that are fighting U.S.-led forces have much closer ties to al Qaida now than they did before 9/11, would allow the terrorist network to re-establish bases in Afghanistan and would help Osama bin Laden export his radical brand of Islam to Afghanistan's neighbors and beyond, the officials said.

McClatchy interviewed more than 15 senior and mid-level U.S. intelligence, military and diplomatic officials, all of whom said they concurred with the assessments. All of them requested anonymity because the assessments are classified and the officials weren't authorized to speak publicly.

Obama studies Afghan options

The Afghanistan war reached its once-unthinkable eighth anniversary Wednesday as President Barack Obama, seeking a revamped strategy for the increasingly unpopular conflict, focused more closely with his war council on neighboring Pakistan's role in the fight against al-Qaida.

The White House also revealed that Obama has had in hand, for nearly a week, the troop request prepared by the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal. It is said to include a range of options, from adding as few as 10,000 additional combat troops to -- McChrystal's strong preference -- as many as 40,000.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Obama asked for McChrystal's request last Thursday, before he flew to Copenhagen to lobby for Chicago's bid to host the 2016 Olympics. The numbers could become the focus of concentrated White House attention as soon as Friday, Gibbs said.

Military leery of Afghanistan escalation with no clear goals

WASHINGTON — As the Obama administration and Congress begin a heated debate about how many more American troops to send to Afghanistan, military observers, soldiers on the ground there and some top Pentagon officials are warning that dispatching even tens of thousands more soldiers and Marines might not ensure success.

Some even fear that deploying more U.S. troops, especially in the wake of a U.S. airstrike last week that killed and wounded scores of Afghan civilians, would convince more Afghans that the Americans are occupiers rather than allies and relieve the pressure on the Afghan government to improve its own security forces.

The heart of the problem, soldiers fighting in Afghanistan and some officials in Washington told McClatchy, is that neither Barack Obama's White House nor the Pentagon has clearly defined America's mission in Afghanistan. As a result, some soldiers in the field said, they aren't sure what their objectives are.

Al Qaida plays key role on both sides of Pakistan-Afghan border

KHOST, Afghanistan — When a wave of 11 suicide bombers attacked this Afghan provincial capital in mid-May — among them several men dressed head to toe in blue burqas — panicked residents fled into their homes to avoid the street battles between the killers and local security forces. Twenty locals died in the melee.

That so many bombers could slip into town from North Waziristan in neighboring Pakistan on a single operation testified to the rising level of violence in Afghanistan, and the U.S. military said that al Qaida is playing a critical role in financing suicide bombings and other attacks on U.S. and NATO forces.

However, the relatively low death toll in the Khost assault indicated that the attackers' preparation was deficient, at least by comparison with far more devastating suicide bombings in Iraq.