Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Afghan War Strains U.S., Allies’ Bond

Tensions between America and her European “allies” reportedly are growing as Defense Secretary Robert Gates calls upon Europeans to do more in helping in war torn Afghanistan in the ongoing struggle to defeat Al Qaeda led terrorism.

Secretary Gates has expressed his frustration that repeated requests for “the allies to contribute more troops, and to allow commanders to use them with fewer restrictions,” continue falling flat.

An article from the Associated Press appearing on
Military.com discusses the increasing tensions as Secretary gates prods Europe to help out more in the fight against terrorists.

NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization), set up with European nations after World War Two to counter Soviet aggression, is currently in charge of the war, although it falls upon America to supply the majority of the Troops used currently in Afghanistan. US Army General Daniel McNeill, the top Commander in Afghanistan requested more Troops to fight terrorists who have begun increasing their activities. NATO member Nations continue to stonewall on sending more Troops, even though since September 11, 2001, terrorists have been targeting them instead of the US.

In efforts to undermine the Bush administrations prosecution of the ongoing war, Democrats began labeling it “the Forgotten War.” Senator Hillary Clinton, in a
December 2003 speech said,

“Let me turn now to Afghanistan, a place I believe we have not paid sufficient attention to in recent months. And by "we," I refer to all of us, citizens, the media, elected officials, the administration. And this point was crystallized for me when I was greeted by a soldier saying, ‘Well, senators, welcome to the forgotten front line of the war against terror.’”

In an August 2007 speech, Senator Barack Obama claims,
“I was a strong supporter of the war in Afghanistan.”
He then laments about how efforts need to be increased in Afghanistan, Iraq needs to be abandoned and such, but neither calls upon our NATO allies, the same allies they demanded be included in the first place, to increase their commitment.

Former NATO commander Gen. James Jones, in a study published the Atlantic Council, "Saving Afghanistan" said,
“If NATO cannot provide new forces to fight in the south, its credibility will be dealt a powerful blow, throwing into doubts its future cohesion and hence viability.”

Others quote General Jones with “NATO’s Not Winning in Afghanistan.”

The German Publication, Der Spiegel, in 2005 ran an article, “
How Widespread is Terrorism in Europe?,” in which they acknowledge,
“It has long been clear that Europeans, especially Britons, could be attacked at any time. The attacks in Istanbul in November 2003 (57 dead) and the train bombings in the Madrid suburbs on March 11, 2004 (191 dead) were only the beginning. "No country," says EU counterterrorism coordinator Gijs de Vries, "can nurture false hopes of being safe." German Interior Minister Otto Schily, who flew to London on Friday to meet with his British counterpart, warns that "radical Islamists have also explicitly named Germany as an enemy."

Just a couple years ago, Paris France erupted in rioting, largely claimed to be the work of Radical Muslims. An article from Council of Foreign Affairs told us in 2005,
"Radical Islam is spreading across Europe among descendants of Muslim immigrants. Disenfranchised and disillusioned by the failure of integration, some European Muslims have taken up jihad against the West.”

Radical Islam is the sect that produces the terrorists that act to force others into accepting and living under their radical and oppressive beliefs.

While it might seem advantageous to avoid Afghanistan and concentrate on the security of their homelands, wouldn’t their forces better be marshaled in keeping terrorism away from the homeland in the first place?

In spite of small coalitions being formed, Democrats have long faulted for President Bush for his “unilateral approach” in the War on Terror. Handing Afghanistan over to NATO, at the behest of many who claim Afghanistan is the “real War On Terror,” seems to be failing.

In America and in Europe many falsely believe radical Jihadists can be “reasoned with” to stop attacking the west. These people turn out in droves to protest Military action against those who will stop at nothing to kill our society. Perhaps they are the reason NATO nations are so reluctant to increase the effort to defeat terror.

Should the fight in Afghanistan fail and NATO fall apart, who will they turn to when radical Jihadists, freshly trained and equipped from rebuilt bases in Afghanistan and quite possibly Iraq, should America’s anti-war crowd succeed, begin terrorist attacks anew to subjugate the masses under another
Taliban Rule of Horror?

No comments: