Boot, Kagan, and Kagan - the neocon dogs of war attempt to justify more troops and more war in Afghanistan

why in god's name are these discredited, blood-thirsty hacks still getting prime op-ed space in the new york times...?

In addition to sending more soldiers, we must also increase our efforts to expand the Afghan security forces. It may be impossible to speed up the pace of building the Afghan National Army, but the current proposed end-strength of 134,000 troops is far too low. We should immediately commit to a goal of 250,000 troops for the army, and a substantial increase in the national police as well. Afghan troops also need lots of better equipment — everything from armored vehicles to night-vision goggles.

[...]

The key question for those who advocate pulling back is this: Where will we get the intelligence to direct the raids? If we have few troops on the ground, we will have to rely on intercepted communications. But seven years into the fight, the terrorists have learned a thing or two about keeping their communications secret. The only way to get the intelligence we need is from the residents, and they won’t provide it unless our troops stay in their villages to provide protection from Taliban retribution.

This struggle is not just about Afghanistan. It is also about tracking and effecting what is going on in Pakistan’s tribal areas. That is where the global Qaeda leadership is. It is the nexus of terrorist groups including the Lashkar-e-Taiba, which is implicated in the Mumbai, India, attacks last November; the Tehreek Nifaz-e-Shariat Mohammadi, which now has control of the Swat region in Pakistan; and Baitullah Mehsud’s Pakistani Taliban, which are said to have plotted the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, the former Pakistani prime minister.

From their positions across the border in Afghanistan, American forces can literally see these areas. They can also gather invaluable intelligence from, and spread our influence to, the tribes that straddle the frontier. But we get that vantage point only as long as we have something to offer the Afghans — security, improved quality of life, hope for a better government. If we abandon them, we will become blind to one of the most dangerous threats to our security, and also hand our most determined enemies an enormous propaganda victory — their biggest since 9/11.

Make no mistake: there is hard, costly fighting ahead in Afghanistan. But the fight is worth pursuing, and the odds of success are much better than they were in Iraq when we launched the forlorn hope known as the surge.

Max Boot is a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. Frederick Kagan is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. Kimberly Kagan is the president of the Institute for the Study of War.

good lord, please spare me... (special note to the nyt: please keep this crew the hell away from the op-ed page...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

I don't care how many credentials this man has, he says incredibly stupid things

i posted about a fred kagan op-ed in the nyt back in early may... his op-ed was entitled, "Plan B? Let’s Give Plan A Some Time First"... my comment at the time was this...

these guys just never give up, do they...? not only don't they ever give up, it seems that, no matter how terribly wrong they are or discredited they become, there's always a newspaper willing to give them space to air their delusions...

[...]

since when, i'd like to know, does a (former) professor of military history with a focus in eastern europe and the former soviet union get to claim expertise in insurgencies and civil wars in the middle east...? it's kind of like a long-haul, 18-wheeler driver, thinking he can move over to motorcycle racing...

so, today, i see, via think progress, that he's shooting off his mouth yet again...

Today, the American Enterprise Institute, a neoconservative think tank, held a discussion entitled “Assessing the Surge in Iraq,” featuring prominent Iraq war proponents like Fred Kagan, Gen. Jack Keane, and James Miller of the Center for a New American Security.

and, he-e-e-e-e-eeere's freddy...!

The worst that can be said of [the escalation] at this point is that the results have been mixed. I frankly think the results are less mixed…We can argue about statistics, but at the end of the day, that argument is not going to get us anywhere right now. … Whatever you can say about the current strategy, it has not failed.

ok, i'm not one to poke fun at anyone because of their looks, because, believe me, i have no room to talk... but, honestly, would you want anybody advising you on military strategy who looks like THIS...?



seriously... would you...?

A military historian who has taught at West Point, AEI resident scholar Frederick Kagan specializes in defense issues and the American military. In particular he studies defense transformation, the defense budget, and defense strategy and warfare. He has also written about Russian and European military history.

Professional Experience

-Associate professor of military history, 2001-2005; assistant professor of military history, 1995-2001; United States Military Academy (West Point)

Education

B.A., Soviet and East European studies; Ph.D., Russian and Soviet military history, Yale University

besides that, quite some time ago, i ceased being impressed with credentials, particularly after meeting a number of 24-carat, harvard, yale, and dartmouth-educated assholes... my response to kagan is rude, crude, and succinct... BFD... (and if you want to know what that means, ask around...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Fred Kagan and the neocons never have a "Plan B." Oops, enter John Boehner and "Plan B."

these guys just never give up, do they...? not only don't they ever give up, it seems that, no matter how terribly wrong they are or discredited they become, there's always a newspaper willing to give them space to air their delusions...

Plan B? Let’s Give Plan A Some Time First

By FREDERICK W. KAGAN

One of the most common criticisms of the current “surge” in Iraq is that its proponents have not developed a Plan B in case it fails. The skeptics liken this lack of a backup strategy to the Bush administration’s failure to plan for various contingencies after the initial invasion in 2003; they see a continuity of errors between previous strategies in Iraq and the new one.

In fact, the debate shows only how little the critics of the war understand about military operations. As one of the initial proponents of the surge, I argue that there is no Plan B because there cannot be one. The idea that there can be a single alternative strategy, developed now, just at the beginning of the surge, is antithetical to the dynamic nature of war. At this early stage, there are only possible general responses to various contingencies, which will become more focused as operations move forward.

The strategy now under way in Iraq — we are providing an increased number of American forces, working closely with Iraqi troops, to establish and maintain security in Baghdad as a precondition for political, economic and social progress — will change the situation in Iraq significantly, whether or not it succeeds in its aims.

and since when, i'd like to know, does a (former) professor of military history with a focus in eastern europe and the former soviet union get to claim expertise in insurgencies and civil wars in the middle east...? it's kind of like a long-haul, 18-wheeler driver, thinking he can move over to motorcycle racing... (ok, i confess... the dvd that was playing in the van on this afternoon's outing with the grandsons was "cars...")

Frederick W. Kagan is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), and a former professor of military history at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. He earned a B.A. in Soviet and East European studies and a Ph.D. in Russian and Soviet military history, both from Yale University. He worked as an Assistant professor of military history at West Point from 1995-2001 and as an Associate professor of military history from 2001-2005. The courses he taught at West Point included the history of military art, grand strategy, revolutionary warfare and diplomatic history. He is brother to foreign policy analyst Robert Kagan.

Frederick Kagan and his father Donald Kagan, who is a professor at Yale and a fellow at the Hudson Institute, together authored While America Sleeps: Self-Delusion, Military Weakness, and the Threat to Peace Today (2000). The book argued in favor of massive military spending and warned of future threats, including from a potential revival of Iraq's WMD program. Frederick along with his brother Robert Kagan, who is a member of the Aspen Strategy Group, and their father Donald are all signatories to the neoconservative Project for the New American Century manifesto titled Rebuilding America's Defenses (2000).

Kagan authored the so-called "real Iraq Study Group" report as the AEI's "hawkish" rival to the ISG report of James Baker and Lee H. Hamilton in December 2006. The AEI report, titled Choosing Victory: A Plan for Success in Iraq, was released on January 5, 2007, and Kagan was said to have won-over the ear of President George W. Bush, strongly influencing his subsequent "surge" plan for changing the course of the Iraq War. Along with retired Gen. Jack Keane, Kagan is credited as one of the "intellectual architects" of the surge plan.

and, oh, btw, fred, you might want to give a glance at today's wapo... it seems that you have a convincing job ahead of you on the repub side (at least with john boehner)...

"By the time we get to September or October, members are going to want to know how well this is working, and if it isn't, what's Plan B?"

give us all a break, fred, and go back to being a prof... it's obviously your better shot...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments