How we got to Zero: General Eikenberry's Hail Mary on Afgan Troops - Michael Collins (me)

[autorank]

Special thanks to the White House for making their decision while I was writing this story!

How we got to Zero: General Eikenberry's Hail Mary on Afgan Troop

Michael Collins

"The position of the ambassador, Karl W. Eikenberry, puts him in stark opposition to the current American and NATO commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, who has asked for 40,000 more troops. New York Times, Nov. 11

This isn't just any envoy. General Karl Eikenberry has served two tours of duty in Afghanistan, the second as head of the Combined Forces Command. After the second Afghan tour, Eikenberry was Chairman of the NATO Joint Military Committee. He's a West Point graduate with advanced degrees from Harvard and Stanford and is fluent in Mandarin Chinese.

General McChrystal has asked for 50,000 troops in early October. By October 28, the president was said to favor a "McChrystal light" number as low as 15,000. On Nov. 7, just four days before Eikenberry's statement, McClatchy Newspapers put Obama's preferred number at 30,000. At this moment, the president is reported have rejected all of the troop increases on the table, according to Associated Press at 12:02 am EDT, today, November 12.

How did we get from McChrystal's request for 50,000 troop requests in early October to Eikenberry's "written reservations about deploying additional troops" just days before President Obama's planned decision?

More

(Hint - it has a lot to do with election fraud!)

[elleng]

1. 'Of interest,

on troop levels, the Eikenberry statement agrees with the much criticized assessment of Vice President Joe Biden on made after a trip to Afghanistan.'

[autorank]

2. It would make sense that Biden talked to Eikenberry at that time

Eikenberry was with NAT0 then but he'd be one or three or four people Biden would talk too based on the general's experience. The credibility of troop increases (as opposed to more aid to the people) is in bad shape.

We have, to my knowledge, the first instance where a U.S. representative based a recommendation
on a fraudulent election outcome. That seems to have been the turning point. I was very impressed
that Eikenberry stood with the cheated candidates as they protested the fraud. When has that happened?

That involved a break with the laid back attitude toward foreign election fraud and also was done at considerable personal risk.

[ihavenobias]

3. Interesting stuff.

Thanks for posting.

[hfojvt]

4. "don't do it. Don't start the countdown to zero."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJJ8YtmKDLA

[autorank]

15. That's great.

Finally I'm on a hip thread.

[hfojvt]

17. I misread the title though and responded to the title

I thought zero was bad, as in we have nothing. We are down to nothing. We have lost everything.

I don't think that a non-hit from the 1990s (or late 1980s) is very hip though. But I thought it was sort of a cool anti-war song.

[gateley]

5. Outstanding piece -- helped me understand a LOT. Thanks! nt

[autorank]

14. Thank you!!!

Every once in a while, we get to see really outstanding people exercising their authority for the
people. I believe that this is one of those times. We'll see where it all ends up but if he wants
to be heard, Eikenberry will have an easier time next go round.

Check this out. You'd think this would get more coverage.
http://agonist.org/michael_collins/20091112/how_we_got_to_zero_general_eikenberrys_hail_mary#comment-199357

[pleah]

6. K&R

[bigtree]

7. one opinion I read today was that the ambassador's objections were orchestrated

. . . timed to soften the impact of what is surmised to be the president accepting less troops than his generals have counseled - as cover for his decision; to say that here's a substantial figure on the ground there who agrees with me.

edit: as you say, 'no accident"

you wrote:

"The White House's rapid downward trend in troop commitment from, 40,000 to zero for the moment indicates that an alarm bell is ringing. If they just face the truth, they'll announce that we've "hit bottom" and, as a result, we can't afford any more of this because we're flat broke. If they just listen to the people through public polling, they'll come up with something palliative that will allow the president to stay above 50% approval, at least until the next banking crisis. That something was to rely on the advice of General Eikenberry, at least for now.

This is almost the same process President Obama put the military through just after his inauguration when General Petraeus tried his push for more troops in Iraq . . ."


- recommended

[autorank]

12. I gave that some thought. It's a very good question.

Yes, Obama raked Petraeus over the coals in January. It was brilliant and it was new. This is the same technique.

That doesn't say anything less about Eikenerry. From what I can see, he did what he did based
on his mission, as he defines it honorably, and his intellectual honesty. He's got a Ranger Tab plus he's fluent in Mandarin, and those two degrees (writes well too). The guy is probably done suffering fools for this life time. It takes real personal courage and commitment to show up with opposition when the boss is a crook with a drug dealing brother in a place where people get shot all the time.

My theory is, Eikenberry was doing what he saw as his duty and he had the best thinking by far. It was also probably a little heady for him. He's a big target. He put it out there he's still walking around.

The Obama people were fiddling around with these figures and then some reality slipped in. Maybe Biden went in and Kirked out, something.

Bingo... There's Eikenberry. We'll tie the decision to him. That he was there with his "written assessments" was enough. We may never hear of him again or he may become more of a public figure.

Here's a pic of him, which if I'd had about 10 min longer, I would have found;) (along with that fish I've been talking about for years).



"In a move that could be the biggest joke of the century for at least in Afghanistan, the US-installed Afghan President Hamid Karzai in a News conference turned angry over recent visits of the US ambassador in Kabul with the Presidential candidates Dr. Abdulllah Abdullah, who talked of a political system change in Afghanistan earlier this weekend, Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai and Mirwais Yasini, calling it a direct interference in the upcoming Presidential elections to be held on August 20 this year.

"The US ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry had met with the Afghan Presidential Candidates and Karzai’s top opponents in the upcomingPresidential Elections Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai and Mirwais Yasini. In the meeting they had reportedly discussed the security concerns and the overall outcome of the upcomingPresidential elections and the preparations involved. However, this active US diplomacy came under harsh criticism of the Afghan government headed by President Karzai. Immediately after these meetings, in reaction to these meetings the presidential spokesman termed it “an obvious interference” in the elections."

http://ikramuddin.instablogs.com/entry/stay-away-from-afghan-elections-karzai-tells-foreigners/

[DemReadingDU]

8. Zero. That would be awesome.

I was happy to hear that Obama had rejected proposals to increase troops to Afghanistan. Let's hope Obama eventually decides the zero number an any future proposal.

[Me.]

9. Ring Knocker?

Probably not if he's going up against the crystal ball

[autorank]

13. I think he put a sheet over that ball, or a black shroud;)

[Orwellian_Ghost]

10. K&R

Any word on mercenaries? I've heard rumblings that many of the African, e.g. Ugandans, mercenaries paid by the US are going to head over to Afghanistan. Not sure.

[autorank]

11. No I have not. If they do, they'll regret it.

Did you read anything about Hezbollah fighters or equivalents being imported to Tehran to beat down
demonstrators?

[GuvWurld]

16. Very interesting

This piece makes it a little tough to see the puppet strings usually so clearly visible.

[mmonk]

18. I remember Dr. Abdullah during the Northern Alliance fight with the Taliban.

Thanks for the informative piece and nice job. I may make a note of it in my blog as I plan to write something on Afghanistan soon.

[autorank]

19. Thanks!!!

Abdullah is a familiar face. He's stayed in his country and continues to fight.

PM me or post or both the blog piece. I'd be interested in seeing it.

MSM people aren't jumping on Eikenberry right away. To me that says he's extremely convenient right
now but not anointed.