"Official: US to replace top general in Afghanistan"

By PAULINE JELINEK and ANNE GEARAN, Associated Press Writers

11 MAY 2009

WASHINGTON – The Pentagon will replace its top general in Afghanistan as President Barack Obama tries to turn around a stalemated war, defense officials said.

The exit of Gen. David McKiernan comes as more than 21,000 additional U.S. forces begin to arrive in Afghanistan, dispatched by Obama to confront the Taliban more forcefully this spring and summer.

McKiernan, on the job about a year, has asked repeatedly for additional forces.

He has argued that his forces, while technically far superior, cannot hold ground against the Taliban in the volatile East and South.

Obama's revamped strategy for Afghanistan does markedly increase the number of U.S. forces in the country but focuses on nonmilitary solutions as a better long-term approach.

Military officials who spoke on condition of anonymity said McKiernan will be replaced by Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity ahead of the announcement.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates was likely to announce the new leadership in Afghanistan later Monday, an official said.

Obama has approved a new strategy for Afghanistan and Gates wants new leadership to carry it out, the defense official said.

McKiernan was named to his post by former President George W. Bush.

Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen scheduled a Monday afternoon news conference at which Gates will discuss his trip last week to Afghanistan and new plans for the seven-year-old Afghan campaign, which during the Bush administration took a back seat to the war in Iraq.

McChrystal has had a top administrative job at the Joint Chiefs of Staff for less than a year.

He is a former commander of the Joint Special Operations Command.

Lt. Gen. David M. Rodriguez, who serves as top military aide to Gates, will be deputy to McChrystal in Afghanistan, the defense official said.

Obama had approved 17,000 additional combat forces for Afghanistan this year, plus 4,000 trainers and other non-combat troops.

By year's end, the United States will have more than 68,000 troops in the sprawling country — about double the total at the end of Bush's presidency but still far fewer than the approximately 130,000 still in Iraq.

McKiernan and other U.S. commanders have said resources they need in Afghanistan are tied up in Iraq.

More to come in a minute or so, Livyjr?

"The Pat Tillman Investigation"

By Larry Johnson

Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net

Site: http://NoQuarterUSA.net

The investigation is done and the report on the death and awards for Army Ranger Pat Tillman is in.

As far as scandals go this one is pretty lame.

While it is awful that the Tillman family did not learn early on that their son and husband was a victim of friendly fire, it was not because of malicious intent.

Pat Tillman is not the only casualty here.

Lt. General Stanley McChrystal, the current commander of the Joint Special Operations Command, really gets hammered.

Of the folks mentioned in the report, I think he will suffer the most career damage because he is active duty, running a significant command, and this probably kills his chance for future promotion.

(And before someone gets on a high horse, I’m not equating his career damage with Tillman’s death.)

Too bad.

McChrystal, who was a two star General when these events unfolded, was promoted last year to his third star.

McChrystal has done some remarkable work during the past three years and has made tremendous personal sacrifices.

But he will prove the rule that no good deal goes unpunished.

http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2007/03/2...-investigation/

About: Larry C. Johnson is a former analyst at the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, who moved subsequently in 1989 to the U.S. Department of State, where he served four years as the deputy director for transportation security, antiterrorism assistance training, and special operations in the State Department's Office of Counterterrorism.

He left government service in October 1993 and set up a consulting business.

He currently is the co-owner and CEO of BERG Associates, LLC (Business Exposure Reduction Group) and is an expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, and crisis and risk management, and money laundering investigations.

Johnson is the founder and main author of No Quarter, a weblog that addresses issues of terrorism and intelligence and politics.

NoQuarterUSA was nominated as Best Political Blog of 2008.

He has worked as a private consultant on issues of international terrorism and security for the U.S. Government and private companies.

Johnson has appeared as a consultant and commentator in many major newspapers and news programs.

That's up to Obama, isn't it?

That dude is handing out miracles by the minute, it seems ...

I'm waiting to hear the he personally captured Osama bin Laden, myself ....

That will be quite a headline, alright - OBAMA CAPTURES OSAMA ....

And so ...

The dude sounds like Lincoln's General "SCAREDY PANTS" McClellon, who though numerically superior, was afraid to take on the Secesh down around Washington and in Virginia during the Civil War ......

"I'M SCARED, I NEED MORE TROOPS" .....

And so ...

I think that Obama has surprised a lot of liberals out there who did not think that he had a bloodlust to equal that of George W. Bush or maybe surpass it ....

And so ...

I think that a lot of bloodshed is coming myself, Arneoker ...

Although it might not be in the next couple of minutes ....

Obama is going to show the Afghanistnamis that he is nobody to **** with, like he is a modern day Alexander the Great ....

And so ...

It seems that they wanted a solution more based on politics rather than through a military solution.

I understand also that McKiernen rightly mentions that critical resources are tied up in Iraq. However it seems that due to the change in policy, this may be the reason they asked for a general who is based more on "Administration" rather that just asking for a larger force. That though the request is valid, the stories did not mention if McKiernen had any other ideas to do rather than just seeking a larger force. So it seems his replacement are in keeping with the new ideology of the current administration of seeking more diplomatic solutions rather than military ones.

My comments should be in no way be construed as an indictment of McKiernen's methods, merely stating that the stories on the paper do not make any mention of him coming up with other approaches other than seeking more resources. I don't know who would be better on that job but if this is a mistake, it is Obama's and Gates' to make.

The power triad here would be Obama, Gates and Petraeus. It is hard to know who is educating who?

I wouldn't know.
It may be the right decision, but either right or wrong it would be costly.

No, I meant from you. In terms of what would justify your subtitle.

Anyway, with your comments about McChrystal seem to indicate that you thought he was a good choice, as choices in this war go. But then you have your thing about Obama...

INDEED IT IS, rla ....

IT SOUNDS LIKE McCHRYSTAL IS BEING POLITICALLY REHABILITATED ....

And so ...

"General McChrystal is Right, Al Qaeda is a Non-Factor"

By Larry Johnson

October 17, 2007

Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net

Site: http://NoQuarterUSA.net

Monday’s Washington Post story announcing that a key general believes Al Qaeda is crippled should be taken seriously.

According to the Post:

Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, head of the Joint Special Operations Command’s operations in Iraq, is the chief promoter of a victory declaration and believes that AQI has been all but eliminated, the military intelligence official said.

But Adm. William J. Fallon, the chief of U.S. Central Command, which oversees Iraq and the rest of the Middle East, is urging restraint, the official said.

The military intelligence official, like others interviewed for this report, spoke on the condition of anonymity about Iraq assessments and strategy.

Senior U.S. commanders on the ground, including Gen. David H. Petraeus, the head of U.S. forces in Iraq, have long complained that Central Command, along with the CIA, is too negative in its analyses.

On this issue, however, Petraeus agrees with Fallon, the military intelligence official said.

While General McChrystal is being unfairly pilloried as the author of “Mission Accomplished”, he is not receiving credit for extraordinary sacrifice and leadership during the last three years.

The public will never know much about his command’s activities because they are highly classified.

General McChrystal is not an armchair general.

He has spent an extraordinary amount of time during the last three years deployed with his troops.

He does not ask the units under his command to do anything he is not willing to do.

If the McChrystal quote is accurate (and I believe it is) then the American people are being given important information critical to understanding what is happening in Iraq.

It is General McChrystal and his troops, not General Petraeus or Admiral Fallon, who are on the pointy end of the spear in the battle against what is left of Al Qaeda.

What has been apparent for quite some time, most of the violence in Iraq is not (I REPEAT NOT) being caused by Al Qaeda in Iraq or foreign fighters.

As I have reported in these pages previously, I was in Iraq in May of 2006.

I saw firsthand what units under General McChrystal’s command were doing – they were killing and capturing on a daily basis suspected Al Qaeda in Iraq operatives.

Despite the success of their operations, the violence in Iraq continued to escalate (a trend that continued thru May of this year).

Why?

Very simple.

Most of the violence was not being initiated nor carried out by Al Qaeda elements.

The violence then (and now) stems from sectarian strife–i.e., sunnis versus shias.

But the Bush Administration does not want to accept nor hear this kind of report.

To admit that most of the violence in Iraq has nothing to do with Al Qaeda, and even less to do with foreign fighters, completely obliterates the Bush Administration’s rationale for keeping troops in Iraq.

Once again we are witnessing a General being silenced for telling an uncomfortable truth to the American people.

This is a new “General Shinseki” moment in my view.

McChrystal’s assessment must be put on the public record as soon as possible.

The Senate and House Armed Services committees need to call General McChrystal to testify.

He is not some political pollyanna seeking to curry favor with political masters.

He’s a solid, professional soldier who has made enormous personal sacrifices during the last three years.

Once we understand that Al Qaeda is not the primary cause of violence in Iraq we can turn our attention to devising viable strategies to defuse the enmity fueling the civil war raging between Sunnis and Shias.

Unfortunately, it appears that the Congress and the American people are, once again, prepared to ignore an important warning from a frontline general.

McChrystal’s views on this are important and should be heard.

http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2007/10/1...s-a-non-factor/

You're kidding, right ....

Or misjudging me in a major-league way ...

McChrystal is the dude who covered over Pat Tillman's friendly fire death in what was a major league ****-up under his command in Afghanistnam ...

I'm amazed that Obama picked him, to be truthful ....

And there is some kind of a message that is being sent here ....

BUT TO WHOM?

As for me, I'm not for wanton bloodshed, Arneoker ....

Been there, seen that, don't want no part of it today or tomarrow ...

But Obama, America and HILLARY do ....

And they are inexorable ...

And so ...

Well, Arneoker ....

I would say that the facts of the matter justify my selection of a sub-title here ....

I thought that it was apt to the subject matter under discussion in here ....

And so ...

Well you seemed to be signaling that you liked McChrystal with the generally favorable articles you were posting, but okay...

Well you can say what you like, everybody else does. And you discuss that subject matter if you like as well. You have already compared McKiernan to McClellan with their requests for more troops.

He sure picked a strange one for seeking a more diplomatic solution in Afghanistnam, xyzse ....

McChrystal doesn't do diplomacy ....

He kills people ...

And so ......

My "thing" about Obama is that he sure fooled a lot of people, Arneoker ....

And so ...

Those articles were written by a George W. Bush republican, Arneoker ....

I put them in here as some background on McChrystal so that people could get a feel for who Obama is selecting to run things in Afghanistnam ....

That's all ....

I did not say that I agreed with that author ....

And in my various posts up to this point, I think that you will find that I was quite contemptuous of the way that Patrick Tillman died, in what was called a "friendly fire" incident ....

If I recall correctly, McChrystal was passed over for this command when it was given instead to McKeirnan ....

So it is interesting that Obama is rehabilitating him at this stage of the game ....

But then, Obama is desperate, isn't he?

And so ...

What could Obama do to show that he is not desperate, Livyjr? It seems to me that you could spin anything he does to show desperation. Even something like how often he makes news. If he continues his high-profile approach that shows he is desperate. If he were to go to a lower profile that would show he was desperate.

As far as this subject goes, any replacement could show that he was desperate as any replacement could be trashed. But of course keeping McKiernan in there would be desperate as well.

McChrystal has previously demonstrated that he will fudge the facts and tell tall stories, Arneoker .....

It sounds like that could be a reason Obama wants him on board in his administration ....

And so ...

Not really, Arneoker ....

Not much now, Arneoker ....

It's a bit late for that, don't you think ....

And so ...

And we would know that because...

I heard a politician from India yesterday on TV say that most Governments have a Military, except that in the case of Pakistan, the Military has a government. I'm beginning to wonder if that is the case with the USA?

No, I don't think that. And you seem to be illustrating my point that you are going to trash Obama no matter which way he goes. Or are you saying that he should be desperate? Was your point in attaching that adjective to him to illustrate his remarkable good sense?

"US replaces general in Afghanistan as war worsens - US replaces top general in Afghanistan as war worsens; Gates says new leadership needed there"

By PAULINE JELINEK and ANNE GEARAN, Associated Press

Last updated: 4:16 p.m., Monday, May 11, 2009

WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon replaced its top general in Afghanistan Monday as President Barack Obama tries to turn around a stalemated war.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he asked for the resignation of Gen. David McKiernan.

Gates said new leadership is needed as the Obama administration launches its strategy in the seven-year-old campaign.

The change is aimed at "getting fresh thinking, fresh eyes on the problem," Gates told a Pentagon news conference.

The move comes as more than 21,000 additional U.S. forces begin to arrive in Afghanistan, dispatched by Obama to confront the Taliban more forcefully this spring and summer.

Replacing McKiernan will be Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who has had a top administrative job at the Joint Chiefs of Staff for less than a year.

He is a former commander of the Joint Special Operations Command.

McKiernan held the command in Afghanistan for about 11 months.

Gates recommended to Obama that McChrystal be nominated for the top job and that Lt. Gen. David M. Rodriguez be McChrystal's deputy.

He urged the Senate to confirm the two quickly.

Obama had approved 17,000 additional combat forces for Afghanistan this year, plus 4,000 trainers and other non-combat troops.

By year's end, the United States will have more than 68,000 troops in the sprawling country -- about double the total at the end of Bush's presidency but still far fewer than the approximately 130,000 still in Iraq.

McKiernan and other U.S. commanders have said resources they need in Afghanistan are tied up in Iraq.

Asked if McKiernan's resignation ends his military career, Gates said, "Probably."

Gates visited Afghanistan last week to see firsthand what preparations and plans are under way to set the president's counterinsurgency strategy in motion.

"As I have said many times before, very few of these problems can be solved by military means alone," Gates said Monday.

"And yet, from the military perspective, we can and must do better."

He noted that the Afghan campaign has long been shortchanged of the people and money needed in favor of the Bush administration's focus since 2003 on the Iraq war.

"But I believe, resources or no, that our mission there requires new thinking and new approaches from our military leaders," he said.

"Today we have a new policy set by our new president."

"We have a new strategy, a new mission, and a new ambassador."

"I believe that new military leadership also is needed."

In June 2006 McChrystal was congratulated by then-President Bush for his role in the operation that killed Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq.

As head of the special operations command, his forces included the Army's clandestine counterterrorism unit, Delta Force.

McChrystal also came under fire for his role in the furor surrounding the friendly fire shooting of Army Ranger Pat Tillman -- a former NFL star -- in Afghanistan.

An investigation at the time found that he was "accountable for the inaccurate and misleading assertions" contained in papers recommending that Tillman get a Silver Star award.

McChrystal acknowledged he had suspected several days prior to approving the Silver Star citation that Tillman may have died by fratricide, rather than enemy fire.

He sent a memo to military leaders warning them of that, even as they were approving Tillman's Silver Star.

He told investigators that he believed Tillman deserved the award.

The Army overruled a Pentagon recommendation that he be held accountable for his actions.

You get yourself boxed into a corner, Arneoker, then you get desperate ....

Apparently, Obama is finding himself boxed into a corner .....

And so ...

How do you do that math, Arneoker?

How is it good sense to get your teats into the wringer up to your armpits?

And so ...

So he is being rational and sensible and taking the best course under the circumstances?

Because there are other generals who would not need the political rehabilitation that McChrystal does ....

And so ...

So when Lincoln replaced McClellan was he desperate, and if he was being desperate the sensible approach to take at the time?

Such as...

(I presume we would restrict ourselves to generals who would be qualified to handle that command.)

I seriously doubt that Obama even has a clue, Arneoker ....

He went and ran his mouth, and now, it is time to put up or shut up ...

He is just like George W. Bush to me - "BRING IT ON!"

Obama is going to show all the candid world that like George W. Bush before him, he too has an IRON FIST ....

And in the end, time is going to tell ....

The veteran's grapevine has begun to rumble about this replacement ....

Not favorably, so far ....

And the veteran's grapevine includes West Point graduates, just so you know ....

And so ...

Are you being dense and obtuse here on purpose, Arneoker?

McChrystal made and filed false reports ....

In the military, that is grounds for discipline, which McChrystal escaped for unknown reasons ...

And everybody in America who was in the military knows that ....

Veterans are looking at this as a mockery of the CODE OF HONOR among officers ....

But Obama is not bound by that, is he .....

Politicians can lie whenever they want with impunity ....

And so ...

I would say that Lincoln was fit to be tied, and that he was tearing out his hair and spitting nails ....

If he had a gun, he might have gone out himself to blow McClellan away, as an object lesson to who was going to replace him ....

So yes, Arneoker, Lincoln was quite desperate when he replaced McClellan ....

He was losing the war to the Secesh, you see ....

They has superior generals and fighters, even though greatly outnumbered ....

If "Stonewall" Jackson hadn't of been killed by his own men in The Wilderness, who knows how it would have gone ....

Lincoln caught a big break in that tragedy ....

And so ...

Well stated, rla ...

I think that Obama's power is going to his head, Arneoker ....

Like George W. Bush's did ....

Power and inexperience are a dangerous combination ....

I wonder how many Americans will find that out first-hand in Afghanistnam as they die for his cause ....

And so ...

I think that McChrystal is the modern-day equivalent of "Dug-Out Doug" McArthur in Korea ....

An American Caesar ....

And so ....

More and more, Arneoker, and we have just seen it with these bogus bank "stress tests", what we are seeing from the Obama administration is that the truth and facts do not really matter all that much ....

And here is another case in point, where Obama has selected a general who did lie ....

And who then got caught at it ....

And so ...

What is not trashable cannot be trashed, Arneoker, you know what I am saying ...

Or as Forrest Gump put it, "stupid is as stupid does" ....

And so ...

You know, Arneoker, this started out as a completely neutral thread ...

A news item was posted ....

And in a few posts, you have single-handedly converted it over into a bash of poor Obama ....

And so ...

AND AS OBAMA GEARS UP TO PROVIDE THE CANDID WORLD WITH A SUMMER OF BLOOD FROM AFGHANISTNAM, WE HAVE ...

"Suicide bombers launch attack in east Afghanistan"

12 MAY 2009

KABUL (AP) — An Afghan defense official praised the outgoing U.S. commander in Afghanistan who was fired by the Obama administration and listed priorities Tuesday for the incoming one to turn around the war against the Taliban.

Gen. David McKiernan was fired Monday as the United States seeks new ways to reverse the tide of the Taliban insurgency.

He was replaced after less than a year on the job by Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, also an Army officer but with experience as a leader of special forces.

McKiernan has a more conventional military background.

Gen. Mohammad Zahir Azimi, the defense ministry spokesman, praised McKiernan's role in improving relations between international and Afghan forces while also "doing his best to conduct the military operations in a better way."

Azimi was quick to list three priorities that McChrystal should focus on when taking over the command.

"Prevent civilian casualties, strengthen the quality and quantity of Afghan forces, and focus more on coordinating the military operations with Afghan forces," Azimi said.

Monday's surprise announcement by Defense Secretary Robert Gates came a week after scores of Afghan civilians were killed during a battle between militants and U.S. forces, an event that further soured relations between Afghans and international troops.

Afghan officials say up to 147 people may have died in the battle in Farah, though the U.S. says that number is exaggerated.

The U.S. on Saturday blamed Taliban militants for causing the deaths by using villagers as human shields in hopes they would be killed.

A preliminary U.S. report did not say how many people died in the battle.

The issue of civilian deaths during U.S. military operations in Afghanistan has become a major point of friction between President Hamid Karzai's government and his Western backers.

Despite attempts to limit such incidents over the past year, including putting all forces under the same command, the killing of noncombatants has continued.

A few days before his firing, McKiernan also received praise for changes he put in place to prevent civilian casualties in military operations from Kai Eide, the United Nations' top official in Afghanistan.

"There is a marked change, and I have applauded Gen. McKiernan's efforts in that respect many times," Eide told The Associated Press.

"The problem then is to see to it that his instructions and his attitude penetrates down to the forces on the ground."

"That is a big challenge now."

"And of course it is particularly a big challenge when you have a significant increase in the military forces coming up."

McKiernan's exit comes as more than 21,000 additional U.S. forces begin to arrive in Afghanistan, dispatched by Obama to confront the Taliban more forcefully this spring and summer.

Despite more than seven years of effort by the U.S. and allies, Afghanistan remains a battleground with an unstable government, flourishing opium trade and suicide attacks by supporters of al-Qaida.

McKiernan issued a short statement saying his time in Afghanistan made him proud to be an American soldier.

"All of us, in any future capacity, must remain committed to the great people of Afghanistan," he said.

Gates said McChrystal, now a senior administrator with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, would be nominated for the top job in Afghanistan and that Lt. Gen. David M. Rodriguez would become McChrystal's deputy.

The defense secretary urged the Senate to confirm the two quickly.

Gates visited Afghanistan last week to see firsthand what preparations were under way for Obama's counterinsurgency strategy.

"As I have said many times before, very few of these problems can be solved by military means alone," Gates said Monday.

"And yet, from the military perspective, we can and must do better."

He indicated the Afghan campaign had long lacked the people and money needed in favor of the Bush administration's focus since 2003 on the Iraq war.

"But I believe, resources or no, that our mission there requires new thinking and new approaches from our military leaders," Gates said.

This article gives a bit more about the reasons for the change in command.

WaPo article

The bad news here is an apparent revival of counter-insurgency doctrine.


The good news is a renewed commitment toward reconstruction---if it is more than the usual spin.

It's a good thing most of us aren't forced to make such choices, or can conceal what cluelessness we have relatively easily! We can run our mouths forever, whatever way we want, and never ever have to worry! (And usually we don't worry.)

He made and filed false reports? That is a pretty serious charge Livyjr. Can you support that? Or let me ask that in a better way. Would you support that, while taking a tiny little bit of time off from putting forth your judgment on all and sundry?

You seem to be making a case that being desperate can be a very rational way to go. Now I would think that being desperate is not always the way to go, so your calling Obama "desperate" turns out to be a most ambiguous statement, although we can get an inkling of what you meant by putting it in the context of other things you have said.

Yes, your subtitle especially is a paragon of neutrality. You have been quite neutral in terms of the question of just what kind of bloodthirsty incompetent Obama is.

GENERAL McKIERNAN GOT TOSSED UNDER THE BUS, IT LOOKS LIKE TO ME ....

INTERNAL POLITICS ...

Australia.TO International Edition - Local and World News

"US-AFGHANISTAN: McKiernan Gets Control of Disputed Raids"

Written by Gareth Porter

WASHINGTON, Mar 20 (IPS) - U.S. Special Operations forces in Afghanistan, whose commando raids and airstrikes against suspected Taliban targets have caused large numbers of civilian casualties that have angered Afghans, have quietly been put under the ”tactical control” of the commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, Gen. David McKiernan, for the first time.

An order issued Tuesday at the direction of CENTCOM chief Gen. David Petraeus gives McKiernan authority over all operations by Special Operations units stationed in the country, as Col. Gregory Julian, McKiernan's spokesperson, confirmed in an e-mail to IPS.

The order, which has not been made public, modifies previous command arrangements which had excluded U.S. Special Operations forces from McKiernan's command authority.

Although the order follows a period of rising Afghan protests against Special Operations raids, there is no indication that Petraeus intends for the change in command arrangements to bring about any fundamental change in such raids.

Nevertheless, it appears that those raids have become a political hot potato, which Petraeus prefers to be in McKiernan's hands rather than his own, particularly as Afghanistan heads into a politically charged period leading up to a presidential election in August.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai is certain to make his criticism of such raids and their cost in civilian deaths an issue during the campaign.

In December, Karzai complained publicly about two such Special Operations raids in Khost and Zabul provinces, one of which the U.S. military admitted had been a ”tragic case of mistaken identity” that had resulted in the killing of civilians.

A United Nations report released in February blamed such raids as part of the reason for a major increase in civilian deaths in Afghanistan in 2008.

The rise in criticism apparently led the Special Operations command in Afghanistan to reduce the number of those attacks briefly last month.

Vice-Adm. William H. McRaven, the head of the Combined and Joint Special Operations Task Force-Afghanistan (CJSOTF-A), had ordered a dramatic reduction in the raids for two weeks beginning in mid-February, according to a report in the New York Times Mar. 10.

But the targeted raids have now returned to their normal level, which may be as many as dozens per week, according to the Times.

U.S. officials claimed to the Times that the military had adopted new procedures aimed at reducing civilian casualties, but failed to provide any specifics about what those procedures were.

The new order is the latest indication that neither McKiernan nor Petraeus, who is his boss, have been eager to take responsibility for the Special Operations raids and their human and political consequences.

The day before the order was issued Col. Julian told IPS in an e-mail that Special Operations units were already operating as though such an order were in effect.

They had begun operating on that basis ever since the USFOR-A (U.S. Forces-Afghanistan) headquarters was established Oct. 2, 2008, said Julian.

However, McKiernan had shown no evidence of being ready to exercise command authority over the Special Operations forces' commando raids and air strikes against suspected Taliban targets after the establishment of that command.

In mid-October, two weeks after the new command was officially created, John Burns of the New York Times reported that a new directive from McKiernan to field commanders applying the more restrictive NATO policy on air strikes did not apply to the Special Operations forces in Afghanistan, because they were not under McKiernan's command.

And last week, Col. Julian confirmed that a lull in the Special Operations raids had occurred in February, but denied that McKiernan had issued the order, again implying that they were not under his authority.

Both incidents suggest that McKiernan was content to have the CJSOTF-A, which comes directly under the command of CENTCOM, continue to carry out plans for the controversial targeted raids without his reviewing them in advance.

But Petraeus apparently prefers to have McKiernan bear the direct responsibility for operations that are likely to generate even greater Afghan and international outrage over the continued killing of civilians.

In the absence of Tuesday's order, Petraeus's command authority over the Joint Special Operations headquarters in Afghanistan would have put him squarely in the line of fire were the raids to become a major political issue.

The order, however, puts Gen. McKiernan between Petraeus and the issue.

The U.S. command in Afghanistan has not always been so tolerant of killing of innocent civilians by Special Operations forces commando raids and airstrikes as it is now.

The commander of all U.S. forces in Afghanistan from 2003 to 2005, Gen. David Barno, imposed day-to-day control over Special Forces raids and ended targeted airstrikes altogether.

Col. David W. Lamm, who served as chief of staff for Barno in Afghanistan, recalled in an interview with IPS that Barno had exercised ”veto authority” over strikes against Taliban targets by Special Operations forces.

”We had a SOCOM [Special Operations Command] liaison officer in our HQ who briefed Barno every day,” said Lamm, now chief of staff of the Near East South Asia Centre for Strategic Studies at the National Defence University.

As reported by IPS last October, Barno ordered an end to targeted airstrikes in early 2004.

Now director of the same centre, Barno explained that he had decided to stop the use of pre-targeted air strikes because the civilian casualties they caused were ”strategically decoupling us from our objective,” said Barno.

”It caused blowback that undermined our cause.”

Such targeted airstrikes were resumed after Barno was replaced by Gen. Karl Eikenberry in 2005.

Eikenberry was nominated by President Barack Obama last week to become the next ambassador to Afghanistan.

Lamm said he believes the tactical control over Special Forces operations was lost when the command in Afghanistan technically became part of a NATO operation in 2006.

The result of that loss of control, said Lamm, was that Special Operations teams would ”go and do something, and the Afghans or U.S. forces then have to go in and deal with the second and third order effects of their operations.”

Barno believed that killing local Taliban leaders might not have significantly reduced the Taliban's capabilities.

The Taliban organisation was ”like a starfish, not like a spider,” Barno argued.

”Even if you killed the leadership - except for the very top guys - they would be quickly replaced.”

Barno's conclusion about the questionable value of targeted attacks on the Taliban was confirmed in a recent classified study of intelligence operations in Iraq and Afghanistan by the Rand Corporation, prepared for the U.S. Joint Forces Command, which was based on interviews with more than 90 U.S. and allied military officers and intelligence experts.

The study, revealed by Wikileaks last month, quoted one intelligence specialist as saying, ”We also spent a lot of time, money, blood, and treasure on going after MVTs [medium-value targets] and HVTs [high-value targets]... and I don't think it had a great deal of effect on the Taliban because they are not hierarchical."

"If we killed one guy, they just replaced him in about 10 minutes.”

*Gareth Porter is an investigative historian and journalist specialising in U.S. national security policy. The paperback edition of his latest book, ”Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam”, was published in 2006.

http://www.australia.to/index.php?option=c...mp;catid=70:war

It takes a lot of hard work and a lot of thought, Arneoker, to come up with a proper sub-title in here ....

Thanks for your recognition of that process above here ....

And so ...