McChrystal: Taliban ranks weakening

After 8 years of war the mission is not clear and inconsistent.

Washington (CNN) -- Rank-and-file Taliban fighters in Afghanistan are tired and weakening, with some making offers to drop out of the conflict, the top U.S. commander there said.

In a rare in-depth interview with CNN's Christiane Amanpour on Wednesday, Gen. Stanley McChrystal said Taliban leaders who operate from safe havens remain confident and optimistic. But recent operations by U.S. and allied troops have pushed back the Taliban "in a number of areas" and caused "a tremendous amount of angst" in the Islamic militia's ranks, he said.

Click to expand...

McChrystal: Taliban ranks weakening - CNN.com

RDS said:

After 8 years of war the mission is not clear and inconsistent.

McChrystal: Taliban ranks weakening - CNN.com

Click to expand...

Seems pretty clear to me. Kill the enemy, deny them the use of afghanistan as a base of operations from which to launch attacks against the us. Just in case you've forgotten just why we're there. What isn't clear to me is just how obama is supposed to win a war while leading the democratic party.

RDS said:

After 8 years of war the mission is not clear and inconsistent.

McChrystal: Taliban ranks weakening - CNN.com

Click to expand...

I don't think the Taliban is weakening.

Pakistan has once again signaled that it is willing to negotiate with the Taliban.

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said the government will talk to the Taliban before it considers launching an operation in the Arakzai tribal agency, while Interior Minister Rehman Malik said he would discuss Taliban offers with political parties that are sympathetic to or support the Taliban.

Gilani indicated that negotiations are on the table and that the government would consider discussing proposals made by Imran Khan, the leader of the Tehrik-i-Insaaf, and the pro-Taliban Jamaat-e-Islami.

Click to expand...

There's no way that Pakistan would negotiate with a weaker enemy.

Dutch said:

Seems pretty clear to me. Kill the enemy, deny them the use of afghanistan as a base of operations from which to launch attacks against the us. Just in case you've forgotten just why we're there. What isn't clear to me is just how obama is supposed to win a war while leading the democratic party.

Click to expand...

al-Qa'ida is no more threatening than any other terrorist organization.
The longer we use 9/11 as the reasoning for our foreign policy, the longer we will suffer from it.

Even if we dropped a hydrogen bomb on FATA, we still could be attacked.

It is not American policy to invade nations that we believe are hiding terrorists; counter-terrorism does not pertain military invasion, which is something that George Bush and Obama do not understand.

Learn from the Russians. Can you trust Pakistan? Pakistan will continue harbouring the Talibans cuz they need the Talibans to carry out terrorist activities on their enemy India.

Obama's Afghan Surge: A Long War With an Uncertain Outcome

This is like a tennis game. It was deuce before the troop surge. Now with the troop surge its advantage to Talibans.

The week spent on Capitol Hill by Administration officials explaining President Obama's Afghan surge has produced much predictable politicking. Republicans tried in vain to coax Gen. Stanley McChrystal into admitting their claim that Obama had denied him the resources he needs to win; and Democrats tried in vain to prod Kabul Ambassador Karl Eikenberry to reiterate his argument against a troop surge. Everyone stayed on message, but in explaining how the strategy might work, Generals McChrystal and David Petraeus made clear that U.S. military involvement in Afghanistan is not likely to end any time soon, or to produce a "victory" in the sense that Americans have used the term since World War II.

Read more: Obama's Afghanistan Surge: A Long War With an Uncertain Outcome - TIME

Click to expand...

It is unlikely that there will be much territorial or influential gain or loss in this new scenario. We will undoubtably have the superior strength, and the superior weaponry, but we cannot rule out the Taliban and Lashkar al-Zil's influence (their mythos), and their home-court advantage.

I expect to see an immediate increase in confrontations in northern Afghanistan, especially around the Baghdis province. The Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, and the northern elements supported by Iranian Qod will try to push the American troops to stretch their ranks (most of the newly deployed soldiers will end up in the South and E.South) and bend them.

The winter is going to be hellaciously cold, but the Taliban does not seem to be in hibernation yet. Pakistan is certainly worthless in this conflict. They've ally themselves with elements of the Taliban and end up losing ground and men because their allies sneak attack them.

Pakistan will never learn. If we were serious about our national security it would have never been Afghanistan and Iraq. It would have been Pakistan and Afghanistan.