|
A lot of work going down the drain. Our engineers build them nice buildings and now they're used by the wrong people. I know the GBs there are professionals doing there job, but it must hurt your motivation to know even if you beat the clock and route them out of areas X, Y, and Z, that once you leave those areas they will likely get taken back over.
In a time-sensitive operation, where the enemy knows your timetable, does the bulk of the work go to training the local gov't for defensive self-sufficiency? Is that a better use of time then routing specific insurgents who will just become replaced instantly after death by other specific radicals?
It seems our best option is to leave soldiers past the deadline to make the insurgents lose that public moral victory. Knowing the history of the area, I just can't imagine the vacuum after US soldiers leave will bring in anything but terrorist groups. It seems the solution is some type of permanent force or continuous transports of new forces to "random" areas.
Even though the withdrawal is announced for next year, is there specific word on PMCs getting contracts from A-stan gov't to help keep order? Or DOD contracts? I'm not sure what the long-term goal is and just posing general notions to see what the prevailing thoughts are on how to shore up their defenses before we leave, assuming we necessarily have to leave.
|