31st MEU's leaves Japan / returns to Oki

31ST MEU RETURNS TO OKINAWA AFTER OPERATION TOMODACHI

USS ESSEX, AT SEA - 2,200 Marines and Sailors of the 31st Marine Expeditionary unit, are returning home to Okinawa, Japan, after nearly three weeks of conducting relief operations with the Japan Maritime and Ground Self-Defense Forces in support of Operation Tomodachi in mainland Japan.

USS Essex (LHD 2), with the majority of Marines and Sailors of the 31st MEU aboard, is scheduled to arrive at Naval Facility White Beach, Okinawa at noon on April 12. Two other ships with elements of the 31st MEU aboard, USS Germantown (LSD 42) and USS Harpers Ferry (LSD 49), already arrived in Okinawa on April 7.

"The Marines have helped their friends in time of need, and stand ready to support further if called upon," said Col. Andrew MacMannis, commanding officer, 31st MEU. "We are proud to call Okinawa our home, and to help those in Japan was an honor and privilege. We are all proud to have been a part of the relief efforts."

The 31st MEU was split into three separate parts on March 11. The largest ship, USS Essex (LHD 2), with most of the Marines and Sailors of the 31st MEU aboard, had just completed an exercise in Cambodia and had arrived in Malaysia for a port visit. When 31st MEU leadership received news of the tsunami, they initiated an immediate recall of all personnel who were away from the ship on liberty. The ship quickly took on some supplies, and in less than 24 hours was underway to Japan where it would meet up with the other two ships.

Germantown and Harpers Ferry were both in Indonesia with elements of the 31st MEU embarked, and Marines and Sailors aboard Harpers Ferry were scheduled to participate in a large humanitarian assistance and disaster relief exercise starting March 12. Both ships were immediately alerted upon news of the disaster in Japan and headed north for the stricken country.

The Essex Amphibious Ready Group and the 31st MEU first arrived off the coast of Akita, Japan, March 17 and began flying coastal surveillance flights. Then, on March 22, the ARG repositioned off the east coast of Japan, near Hachinohe, and the 31st MEU immediately began delivering relief supplies ashore via helicopters. Supplies delivered included water, blankets, and other health and comfort items. HMM-262 (Rein) conducted a total of 15 survey missions and 204 supply delivery missions with nearly 300 hours of flight time.

On March 27, the MEU and Essex ARG's priority became support to the isolated island of Oshima. The units began by transporting relief supplies, which included moving commercial electric utility vehicles, a fuel truck, a water re-supply vehicle and civilian workers from the Tohoku Power Company by U.S. Navy landing craft to restore partial power to the cut-off island.

During the Oshima operation, two pallets of clothes, blankets, food and toys donated by Marines and Sailors were flown to the JMSDF helicopter destroyer JS Hyuga (DDH 181) by Marine helicopters, where they were distributed to displaced residents of the island who were temporarily embarked aboard the ship.

Working alongside the JGSDF, the 31st MEU delivered 15,000 pounds of supplies to the island and cleared tons of debris from harbors, roads and beaches. Marines also created temporary shower facilities allowing residents to bathe. For some it was the first time they had been able to take a shower since the tsunami struck.

In total, the 31st MEU and the Essex ARG moved more than 160,000 pounds of relief supplies to those affected by the disaster.

JMSDF Lt. Hiroaki Tanaka, who served as a liaison officer between Japanese and U.S. forces in the area, expressed appreciation on behalf of the people of Japan. "Thank you," said Tanaka. "We are extremely thankful for your help and cooperation. I will never forget everything you have done for us."

The 31st MEU is the only continually forward-deployed MEU, and remains the nation's force-in-readiness in the Asia-Pacific region. It provides a forward-deployed, flexible, sea-based force capable of responding to a wide range of contingencies as required.

"Building on Faith" By the Imam of the proposed NYC mosque

Building on Faith

By FEISAL ABDUL RAUF

AS my flight approached America last weekend, my mind circled back to the furor that has broken out over plans to build Cordoba House, a community center in Lower Manhattan.I have been away from home for two months, speaking abroad about cooperation among people from different religions. Every day, including the past two weeks spent representing my country on a State Department tour in the Middle East, I have been struck by how the controversy has riveted the attention of Americans, as well as nearly everyone I met in my travels.

We have all been awed by how inflamed and emotional the issue of the proposed community center has become. The level of attention reflects the degree to which people care about the very American values under debate: recognition of the rights of others, tolerance and freedom of worship.

Many people wondered why I did not speak out more, and sooner, about this project. I felt that it would not be right to comment from abroad. It would be better if I addressed these issues once I returned home to America, and after I could confer with leaders of other faiths who have been deliberating with us over this project. My life’s work has been focused on building bridges between religious groups and never has that been as important as it is now.

We are proceeding with the community center, Cordoba House. More important, we are doing so with the support of the downtown community, government at all levels and leaders from across the religious spectrum, who will be our partners. I am convinced that it is the right thing to do for many reasons.

Above all, the project will amplify the multifaith approach that the Cordoba Initiative has deployed in concrete ways for years. Our name, Cordoba, was inspired by the city in Spain where Muslims, Christians and Jews co-existed in the Middle Ages during a period of great cultural enrichment created by Muslims. Our initiative is intended to cultivate understanding among all religions and cultures.

Our broader mission — to strengthen relations between the Western and Muslim worlds and to help counter radical ideology — lies not in skirting the margins of issues that have polarized relations within the Muslim world and between non-Muslims and Muslims. It lies in confronting them as a joint multifaith, multinational effort.

From the political conflicts between Israelis and Palestinians to the building of a community center in Lower Manhattan, Muslims and members of all faiths must work together if we are ever going to succeed in fostering understanding and peace.

At Cordoba House, we envision shared space for community activities, like a swimming pool, classrooms and a play space for children. There will be separate prayer spaces for Muslims, Christians, Jews and men and women of other faiths. The center will also include a multifaith memorial dedicated to victims of the Sept. 11 attacks.

I am very sensitive to the feelings of the families of victims of 9/11, as are my fellow leaders of many faiths. We will accordingly seek the support of those families, and the support of our vibrant neighborhood, as we consider the ultimate plans for the community center. Our objective has always been to make this a center for unification and healing.

Cordoba House will be built on the two fundamental commandments common to Judaism, Christianity and Islam: to love the Lord our creator with all of our hearts, minds, souls and strength; and to love our neighbors as we love ourselves. We want to foster a culture of worship authentic to each religious tradition, and also a culture of forging personal bonds across religious traditions.

I do not underestimate the challenges that will be involved in bringing our work to completion. (Construction has not even begun yet.) I know there will be interest in our financing, and so we will clearly identify all of our financial backers.

Lost amid the commotion is the good that has come out of the recent discussion. I want to draw attention, specifically, to the open, law-based and tolerant actions that have taken place, and that are particularly striking for Muslims.

President Obama and Mayor Michael Bloomberg both spoke out in support of our project. As I traveled overseas, I saw firsthand how their words and actions made a tremendous impact on the Muslim street and on Muslim leaders. It was striking: a Christian president and a Jewish mayor of New York supporting the rights of Muslims. Their statements sent a powerful message about what America stands for, and will be remembered as a milestone in improving American-Muslim relations.

The wonderful outpouring of support for our right to build this community center from across the social, religious and political spectrum seriously undermines the ability of anti-American radicals to recruit young, impressionable Muslims by falsely claiming that America persecutes Muslims for their faith. These efforts by radicals at distortion endanger our national security and the personal security of Americans worldwide. This is why Americans must not back away from completion of this project. If we do, we cede the discourse and, essentially, our future to radicals on both sides. The paradigm of a clash between the West and the Muslim world will continue, as it has in recent decades at terrible cost. It is a paradigm we must shift.

From those who recognize our rights, from grassroots organizers to heads of state, I sense a global desire to build on this positive momentum and to be part of a global movement to heal relations and bring peace. This is an opportunity we must grasp.

I therefore call upon all Americans to rise to this challenge. Let us commemorate the anniversary of 9/11 by pausing to reflect and meditate and tone down the vitriol and rhetoric that serves only to strengthen the radicals and weaken our friends’ belief in our values.

The very word “islam” comes from a word cognate to shalom, which means peace in Hebrew. The Koran declares in its 36th chapter, regarded by the Prophet Muhammad as the heart of the Koran, in a verse deemed the heart of this chapter, “Peace is a word spoken from a merciful Lord.”

How better to commemorate 9/11 than to urge our fellow Muslims, fellow Christians and fellow Jews to follow the fundamental common impulse of our great faith traditions?
====================

Feisal Abdul Rauf is the chairman of the Cordoba Initiative and the imam of the Farah mosque in Lower Manhattan.

Pakistani complicity with Al Qada-Taliban uncovered

The TTP & Operation ‘Samosa’
By Ali K Chishti
Daily Times; Karachi

It has been reported from at least two Interior Ministry sources in Pakistan that the ministry is in a state of panic and, as one of the sources, who wanted to remain anonymous, confirmed to Daily Times, “We are currently in a state of panic. If the whole al Qaeda, Taliban, TTP, local jihadi organisations and floods were not enough, we are now under immense pressure to trace the links of the alleged bombers caught in Ontario, Canada.” (Seems they are reluctant to do so, as those links to the Pakistani government will be uncovered)

While the country’s media is busy commenting on the latest cricket betting scandal and floods, a whole new crisis, perhaps of the same intensity as the Faisal Shahzad one, is brewing within both the international community and Canada.

Daily Times, after intense investigations and a tip-off from a source, was able to talk to a leader of the TTP who’s been alleged by a certain Western diplomat of being the brains behind the would-be terrorist attacks in Canada. TTP spokesman Azam Tariq neither refused nor denied the statement, but instead opted to say, “We support anyone who would fight the infidels.”

The TTP also paid homage to Faisal Shahzad for his bold actions in the US and said he had rendered great sacrifices to uphold the sacred cause of Islam. America is not safe on its own land, Azam Tariq pointed out.

While intense investigations are underway both in Pakistan and Canada, intelligence officials in Pakistan are said to be focusing on a friend of Shahzad – Muhammad Rehan – who originally introduced Shahzad to the TTP. Hiva Alizadeh, 30, an Iranian of Kurdish descent, is believed to be the mastermind of the would-be terrorist plot.

Daily Times was the first publication to publish the role of a Pakistani intelligence agency in tipping off its Canadian counterparts, which helped the Canadians unearth the al Qaeda cell.
===========

Code Stink Rally

Code Stink
by Kanani Fong

I wore pink because it's always been my fucking color. The fact that this crew of rich harridans hijacking my color for their own political means has always grated my sensibilities. And so it was that I spent an interesting afternoon at the Jerry Brown gubernatorial fundraiser sponsored by wealthy Code Pink co-founder Jodie Evans. As expected, none of the people coming to the fundraiser understood this was a Code Pink event, and many denied it. However, Code Pink had a big pink anti-war sign with their name on the fence, hence --giving it the appearance of it being a Code Pink sanctioned event.

While many of Brown's elderly supporters weren't aware of Code Pink, Jerry Brown's staff had to have been aware of their anti-war tactics which include trying to kick the Marines out of Berkeley, telling Gold Star Mom Debbie Lee that her son deserved to die, and calling Marines war criminals. After all, their work in Berkeley happened in his backyard (he lives in Oakland). This was a "You scratched my back, I'll scratch yours" event. None of his staffers went out of their way to tear the Code Pink signs down, which makes me think his campaign's ideals are in step with Code Pink.

Code Pink is an annoying as hell organization --or rather, a triad of organizations, founded by Medea Benjamin. To Code Pink, there are no heroes. There are only apologies to be made and troops to cast as victims, pawns, and accuse most as guilty of war crimes. Their maxim of "Bring our troops home," "Books not Bombs," are sentiments we all have to an extent, however, they are dangerous ones to base military strategy on, ineffective of getting rid of bad guys with, and casts all wars as unnecessary inconveniences. Without military interventions, as well as diplomatic ones, the Serbs would have continued their assault on Kosovo, Liberia's war would have claimed more than the 200,000 it did, and the fragile DRC would fall back into deadly chaos. Truth be told, the Taliban would have continued with their unbearable repression of women, as well as their stadium killings. But maybe Code Pink is too busy running to Gaza, or stalking Blackwater founder Eric Prince's wife in North Carolina, or targeting children at Halloween waiting to visit the Obamas (which included many military kids) to notice.

What Code Pink does is cut off any discussion about war by leaning on sentiment and tugging on emotions. This leads to more confusion about war, and politics not only here, but worldwide. What we risk by letting groups like Code Pink rule by sentiment is becoming more isolated from world events. While they say bring the troops back home, shore up our own borders, in no time there would be protests along the same border the National Guard is posted, with many slathered with empty rhetoric accusing them of being war criminals. Given their anti-military stance, it is not unreasonable to think they would use their considerable political clout to lean on Democrats to reduce military budgets, but not necessarily increasing the funding for programs that benefit the long term needs of veterans.

Anyway, we gave Code Pink a taste of their own tactics. Danny and Melanie laid down on the sidewalk, mimicking their own tactics. We made a few people uncomfortable, Brown avoided us, Andrew Breitbart entertained all on his skates asking attendees to "Smile for the camera and say Hamas!" We were accused by a past head of the California Democratic Party of being a Meg Whitman plant --the same Meg Whitman described by me as having all the desirability of a cold brussel sprout. Former candidate for California State Senator Mickey Kaus discovered what was going on when he heard us yelling --he lives across the street. While he spent time with us he didn't join the protest. However, it's always good having a rational Democrat around when you need it. Roller skates, flags, cops, valets, character actors, and old time liberals --this was a classic Venice Beach event.

OIF-OEF Class Action PTSD Lawsuit Extension

JUDGE EXTENDS DEADLINE TO JOIN CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT BY THREE MONTHS FOR OEF/OIF VETS WITH PTSD WHO WERE SHORTCHANGED ON BENEFITSVeterans’ advocates win extension through November 10, 2010 for Sabo v. United States
NVLSP calls on friends and families of OEF/OIF vets to encourage class members to “opt-in”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 16, 2010

WASHINGTON— Veterans discharged from military service due to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) between December 17, 2002 and October 14, 2008 and shortchanged on their military benefits have three additional months to join a class action lawsuit, thanks to a critical deadline extension.

Last Thursday, Judge George W. Miller of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims signed an order giving eligible veterans – almost all of whom served in Iraq or Afghanistan -- until November 10, 2010 to join (or “opt-in to”) Sabo v. United States, a class action lawsuit brought in December 2008 by the National Veterans Legal Services Program (NVLSP) and pro-bono counsel Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP.

As a result of an agreement reached with the military services, veterans who join the lawsuit are guaranteed a disability rating upgrade and expedited records review, which can potentially lead to additional financial benefits and improved healthcare for veterans and their families.

Approximately, 42 percent, or 1,835 veterans, signed and sent in “Opt-in Forms” before the original July 24, 2010 deadline, making them class members in the lawsuit. At least 2,623 other veterans are eligible to join the lawsuit and become class members.

Class notices were mailed to 4,400 Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom veterans in January 2010. However, many notices were returned as undeliverable by the post office.

Using government sources and public records research, NVLSP staff attorneys called more than 600 eligible veterans as the July 24 deadline approached. They found that many veterans did not understand the legal notice they received in the mail, or never received it.

“More than a third of the eligible veterans are severely disabled, with VA disability ratings for PTSD of 70 to 100 percent,” said Bart Stichman, co-executive director of the NVLSP. “It’s not easy for them to understand the legal notice and what are the advantages of joining the lawsuit, even though they stand to potentially gain significant lifetime financial and healthcare benefits for themselves and their families.”

Stichman says NVLSP plans to continue calling eligible veterans over the next three months, but is also asking families and friends of eligible veterans to get involved and talk with the veterans.

“Anyone who knows an Iraq or Afghanistan veteran discharged between December 17, 2002and October 14, 2008 because of PTSD should ask if he or she has received a legal notice and opted into this lawsuit,” said Stichman. “These veterans and their families were treated unjustly and denied the benefits to which they were entitled. This is about getting them the lifetime military benefits that they have earned and deserve. More information is available at www.ptsdlawsuit.com.”

Eligible veterans who join the lawsuit are entitled to review of their PTSD disability rating by the military on a priority basis, a guaranteed correction of military records to show a higher military disability rating for PTSD for the six-month period following the date of release from military service, as well as a determination of whether the new rating should be permanently increased, decreased, or remain the same after the six-month period.

The correction of military records will not change the disability ratings that the veteran may have from the VA and no eligible veteran who opts into the lawsuit will risk losing any other military or VA benefits that he or she is already receiving. Nearly all class members who have already gone through the prioritized review with the military have received higher disability ratings and better benefits.

As a result of an increase in their military rating for PTSD, class members may receive back pay of disability benefits, reimbursement for healthcare expenses the military should have covered, as well as a higher amount of future benefits to which they and their families are entitled—potentially millions of dollars in benefits over time.

One hundred volunteer lawyers stand ready to offer free counseling to all class members. The lawyers for the veterans from NVLSP and Morgan, Lewis and Bockius LLP are donating their services for free. The lawyers involved say their payment is knowing an injustice is being righted for those who have served our country.

The disability ratings which are the subject of the lawsuit are critically important to ensuring veterans receive the benefits which they have earned and deserve. For years, the law has required the military to assign a disability rating of at least 50 percent to all veterans discharged for PTSD. A permanent disability rating of 30 percent or more entitles a veteran to monthly disability benefits for the rest of the veteran’s life, to free lifetime health care for the veteran and his or her spouse, and to free health care for their minor children.

All of the veterans who qualify as class members for this lawsuit were illegally discharged from the military with military disability ratings for PTSD of less than 50 percent. After they were discharged, many of them obtained a higher disability rating for PTSD from the VA, but the lawsuit is aimed at getting these veterans a higher military disability rating and with enhanced military disability benefits that accompany a higher military disability rating.

WHO CAN BE A CLASS MEMBER IN THIS CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT?All individuals who:
(a) served on active duty in the U.S. Army, Navy, Marine Corps, or Air Force,
(b) were found by a Physical Evaluation Board to be unfit for continued service due, at least in part, to the individual’s PTSD,
(c) were assigned a disability rating for PTSD of less than 50 percent, and, as a result,
(d) were released, separated, retired, or discharged from active duty after December 17, 2002, and prior to October 14, 2008 (regardless of whether such release, separation, retirement, or discharge resulted in the individual’s placement on the Temporary Disability Retirement List).

VETERANS WITH QUESTIONS ABOUT THE LAWSUIT

Veterans who have not received the legal notice, but who believe they may qualify as a class member, should go to www.ptsdlawsuit.com or call 877-345-8387 for more information.
======================
ABOUT NVLSP
The National Veterans Legal Services Program (NVLSP) is an independent, nonprofit veteran service organization that has served active duty military personnel and veterans since 1980. NVLSP strives to ensure that our nation honors its commitment to its 25 million veterans and active duty personnel by providing them the federal benefits they have earned through their service to our country. NVSLP offers training for attorneys and other advocates, connects veterans and active duty personnel with pro bono legal help, publishes the nation’s definitive guide on veterans’ benefits, and represents and litigates for veterans and their families before the VA, military discharge review agencies, and federal courts. For more information go to www.nvlsp.org.



ABOUT MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

Morgan Lewis provides comprehensive transactional, litigation, labor and employment, and intellectual property legal services to clients of all sizes—from global Fortune 100 companies to just-conceived startups—across all major industries. Its international team of attorneys, patent agents, employee benefits advisors, regulatory scientists, and other specialists—nearly 3,000 professionals total—serves clients from 23 offices in the United States, Europe, and Asia. For more information about Morgan Lewis or its practices, please visit: www.morganlewis.com.



###

A Marine Corps for the 21st Century

Is the Marine Corps just another army?

By Robert Haddick
This Week at War (smallwarsjournal.com)
May 14, 2010

On May 7, during a discussion with students at the U.S. Army's Command and General Staff College, Defense SecretaryRobert Gates revealed that he is interviewing candidates to replace Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway, who will retire this fall. Gates said he will expect the candidates to explain to him what in the future will make the Marine Corps unique and not just a second - and by implication, wastefully redundant - Army. "We will always have a Marine Corps," Gates said. "But the question is, how do you define the mission post-Iraq, post-Afghanistan? And that's the intellectual effort that I think the next commandant has to undertake."

The Marine Corps has long sought to differentiate itself from the Army by specializing in amphibious operations -- the ability to project military power from ship to shore. But during his talk to the students, Gates wondered whether large-scale amphibious landings would ever again be practical in the age of relatively cheap, numerous, and precise anti-ship missiles. If not, then what will make the Marine Corps unique?

Some analysts have already attempted to answer Gates's questions. Many of these analysts have concluded that security assistance, with numerous small detachments of Marines providing training and support to allied military forces, will be a major mission in the future. Lieutenant Colonel Edward Novack, then a staff officer at Headquarters Marine Corps, described a plan for Marine Corps regiments to each specialize in a particular region of the world, learn its culture, and then deploy security assistance training teams to build partnerships and indigenous military capacity. Analysts at Rand Corp. called for the both the Marine Corps and the Army to permanently designate up to a third of their combat units for security assistance work. Echoing Lt. Col. Novack's plan, Steven Metz and Frank Hoffman suggested assigning Latin America and the Pacific Rim to the Marine Corps and the rest of the world to the Army. Alternatively, Metz and Hoffman would have the Marine Corps be the Pentagon's primary assault force, with the Army specializing in stabilization, security, and counterinsurgency.

By contrast, Dakota Wood, an analyst at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, thinks the Marine Corps can still perform offensive combat operations from its traditional naval platform. Wood believes Marine units deployed on Navy ships and equipped with air power and landing craft will be useful for counterterrorism raiding and for direct action against nonstate adversaries. Against nation-state adversaries, Wood concludes that Marine Corps operations against adversary shipping lanes are feasible. However, Wood thinks that the Navy and the Marine Corps need to adopt a more decentralized structure to be effective against the most capable opponents.

Gates's candidates will no doubt explain why the Marines' sea-based tradition will remain relevant into the future. But as we saw in Iraq and Afghanistan, that argument for what makes the Marine Corps different from the Army will not stop the Marines from jumping into any kind of land war. Even when far from the ocean and appearing to be just another army, the Marine Corps has its own particular way of doing things. That, more than sea-basing, is what makes the Marine Corps unique and a value to the country

Mr. Obama And Mr. Karzai, Take Two

New York Times
May 13, 2010

After months of rancor, President Obama made nice to President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan on Wednesday, and Mr. Karzai made nice back. At a White House press conference, the two men painted a sunny, improbable picture of cooperation and mutual respect. There was no mention of the many failings of Mr. Karzai’s government or his resentment of American pressure.

Confronting the Afghan leader head-on was not working. We just hope that Mr. Obama and his aides have a real plan — beyond lowering the temperature — for getting Mr. Karzai to do what is needed and for building up a minimally effective Afghan government.

Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top commander in Afghanistan, has a clear military strategy. We are less certain about the administration’s political strategy.

The gap, and the danger, was on full display in Marja. February’s military offensive drove Taliban forces out of the area and secured the city center. American plans to quickly set up a competent “government in a box” faltered — either because there were too few qualified Afghans, or too few willing to take the risk, or Mr. Karzai’s government wasn’t really interested.

More than two months later, the Taliban are still active, and there is still no effective local government. Washington will need to do better with this summer’s far more important offensive in Kandahar. Mr. Karzai bears considerable responsibility for all that has gone wrong. He has refused to root out corruption. He prefers cronies to competent managers. He has wasted far too much time railing at his American protectors.

The problem is compounded by uncertainties about who is running the civilian side of Afghan policy. Richard Holbrooke was supposed to be the go-to guy. But his ties with Mr. Karzai soured, and now his clout — in Washington and Kabul — is unclear. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry’s publicized assessment that Mr. Karzai is not an “adequate strategic partner” has left lingering tensions with Mr. Karzai and General McChrystal.

The administration’s goals are rightly focused on building up Afghan government capacity — from Kabul to the local level. Until the government can been seen providing minimal security, jobs, water and electricity, Afghans are unlikely to take the risk of rejecting the Taliban. Progress has been frustratingly slow.

The State Department has deployed 1,000 civilian experts as of March (up from more than 300 last year) to advise Afghan ministries and oversee aid programs. Those numbers mask how hard it was to fill those jobs — and how hard it will be to replace them. Congress needs to fully finance the State Department’s request for $284 million to build a permanent corps of civilian experts to help in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Meanwhile, a new report by the Government Accountability Office said violence in Afghanistan is delaying implementation and increasing the costs of American aid programs and making them harder to monitor. This does not augur well for President Obama’s goal to start withdrawing American troops by mid-2011.

We hope all the hospitality does not leave President Karzai thinking he’s off the hook. We assume Mr. Obama was a bit blunter in private. We hope Mr. Obama is also having tough discussions with his own team.

Marines Stablize Marjah

Marines Stabilize Afghan Town Of Marjah

Morning Edition (NPR), 11:00 AM, April 27

RENEE MONTAGNE: And ahead of that Kandahar offensive that Jackie just spoke of, U.S. forces have been focused on southern Afghanistan. Earlier this year, the military drove the Taliban out of their stronghold in the town of Marjah. Twenty thousand U.S. Marines are now trying to make the town and the surrounding areas more stable.

Marine Major General Richard Mills arrived in Afghanistan earlier this month to take over command of all Marines in the country. We reached him in southern Afghanistan to get an update on the Marjah operation.

Major General RICHARD MILLS (United States Marine Corps): If you go to Marjah today, you will find a city that is free of the Taliban, that has schools that are open, a marketplace, a bazaar. I think the other thing that would strike you would be the relative security of the streets. It's certainly not a totally safe place now, but overall, security has improved. So far I think things have gone very well.

MONTAGNE: Well then, what do you say to reporting that some of the people in Marjah say when night falls, many of the streets go back to belonging to the Taliban?

MILLS: There is still a presence in the area. No question about it. And I think when you look at the importance of Marjah to the Taliban; it is the center of, really, their psychological homeland, if you will. They drew a lot of support from the narcotics trade that was there. So I think that some of what you see is a residual effects to the Taliban refusing to give it up. But, I think if you look at the results on the ground, you'd see a different story.

People are more safe and they're really voting with the children, the fact that they're children are free to come to schools, the schools that had been outlawed and closed by the Taliban. The Taliban have been reduced, there, really, to a war of terror. They have really disappeared from the city other than when they come in at night to plant their IEDs and to try to strike fear into the hearts and try to turn the people away. And to date, that everything has not worked.

MONTAGNE: Now, I know you've only been there and taken command in just the last few weeks, but what has been your experience when you've talk to local leaders and both tribal leaders and also elected leaders there in the province?

MILLS: Well, I think from the elected leadership perspective, I think that they are positive about what's happening within the province. They've seen great change. Marjah, of course, the one that everybody hears about, but there are towns like Nilesat, the town that was abandoned by over 30,000 Afghans when the Taliban took over. No one lived there. It was riddled with IEDs and mines. It was a fortified position by the Taliban. We took it back from them. People flocking back. And that's not unusual. I could give you three or our other examples of towns here, within the province, where life has come back. Bazaars are open. You hear music in the streets.

Is the fight over? No, not really. But it's headed in that direction. And I think that as the people feel more secure, they are beginning to change sides.

MONTAGNE: When you speak about changing sides, that was, of course, key to the regions in Iraq that were the heart of the insurgency. And you're a veteran of Anbar province. The key though, there, was a movement known generally as the Awakening movement, that really brought together tribal leaders who turned on insurgents. There's nothing that formal going on in southern Afghanistan, either Kandahar or Helmand. Does that make this just that much more of a challenge for you?

MILLS: Not really. I think that you can try to draw too many lessons from our experiences in Iraq, where you had a very, very homogeneous population, a strong sense of tribal belonging and the sheiks who could decide what the tribes would do. You don't have that same set up here in Afghanistan. Here you have the elders who are a little more - they stand back. They're willing to work with us but it's not the same dynamic as we found in Iraq. There's a different dynamic here that requires a different approach.

MONTAGNE: General, thank you very much.

MILLS: Well, thank you, Renee. Thank you very much.

MONTAGNE: Major General Richard Mills, speaking to us from Leatherneck in Helmand province. He is the new commander of all U.S. Marines in Afghanistan and we'll be checking in with him over the next year.

Pepsi awards $ 50,000 to "Wish for our Heros!"

Wish For Our Heroes Awarded $50,000 in Pepsi Refresh Project

Beverage Leader Supports Public’s Favorite Ideas to Refresh the World

(APRIL 26, 2010) – Phoenix-Wish For Our Heroes, a non-profit organization that grants wishes for active military, announced today that it is one of 10 causes to receive $50,000 in the Pepsi Refresh Project. Wish For Our Heroes finished 3rd among nearly 1,100 organizations competing in the $50,000 category.

The Pepsi Refresh Project (www.refresheverything.com) is an online grant program that, in 2010, will award $20 million to projects intended to improve, or “refresh” communities through an online, democratic voting process. In March, Wish For Our Heroes competed to raise funds for granting wishes to active military. Americans voted for their favorite ideas at www.refresheverything.com, and after a competitive month, Wish For Our Heroes achieved their goal of securing $50,000.

“This is the first grant Wish For Our Heroes has received, as contributions to date have been from individuals or small businesses,” explained Jeff Wells, President and Founder of Wish For Our Heroes. “This grant surpasses the total value of wishes we have granted since our inception in November, and this amount of money will help many deserving families of our active-duty military.”

In total, the Pepsi Refresh Project awarded two $250,000, ten $50,000, ten $25,000 and ten $5,000 grants.

“We couldn’t be more appreciative of the efforts Pepsi and its partners have made to better communities. Not only will this grant assist us in helping our U.S. military, it has raised awareness for our foundation, and the many other organizations working hard to make a difference in the world,” explained Wells.

Wish For Our Heroes strives to relieve hardship circumstances not covered by existing military charities. Since November, the foundation has granted 25 wishes with a total value of $45,000.

==============
For more information, visit www.wish4ourheroes.org , or our Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Phoenix-Wish-For-Our-Heroes/153138900347?ref=ts


About Phoenix-Wish For Our Heroes

Incorporated in 2009, The Phoenix-Wish For Our Heroes Foundation is a 501(c)(3) foundation dedicated to “Helping Heroes Battle Hardships”, by granting wishes to active-duty military and their families. Our mission is to be the largest source of aid to active-military families, granting one wish for every member of our Armed Forces. www.wish4ourheroes.org .

Quantico Conference: Afghanistan-the Way Ahead

Building Up Afghan Capacity Seen as Key Challenge
By REUTERS
April 22, 2010

QUANTICO, Virginia (Reuters) - When U.S. forces went in to clear the Taliban stronghold of Marjah in February, the hope was that local Afghan government could step in fast, but that has proved tough and underscores a countrywide challenge.
At a conference at the Marine Corps University in Quantico, Virginia, U.S. and Afghan officials listed dozens of obstacles in building up "Afghan capacity" and boosting credibility of a government seen by many as inefficient and corrupt.
The Afghan government's past inability to deliver services and provide basic security in areas where the Taliban has been pushed out is seen as an important threat to the Obama administration's counterinsurgency strategy. ''

In many districts, more than half of government jobs were still vacant as officials faced constant security threats and more educated candidates chose safer, more lucrative private sector work, said Jilani Popal, head of the Afghan agency seeking to boost government effectiveness.

"There is an urgent need for an improvement of the human resource situation in the provinces," Popal, director of the Independent Directorate of Local Government in Afghanistan, told Marines and officials at Wednesday's symposium.

In an extreme example, he said, only five out of 75 positions were filled in one district late last year, six provinces still did not have buildings for governors and others had no power.

In addition, Taliban have targeted local officials -- as they did on Tuesday when a deputy mayor in Kandahar was killed after gunmen burst into a mosque while he was praying.

"We have a lot of difficult days ahead of us, especially in terms of the issues of governance," said Brigadier General John Nicholson, head of the Pakistan-Afghanistan Coordination Cell at the Pentagon.

Another problem weighing on confidence in local government was the performance of the police force which U.S. and other allies are trying to boost in order to secure areas where the Taliban are being cleared out.
Nicholson said of an estimated 102,000 police in the country's force, only about 30 percent were trained.

"We have a fielded force out there carrying guns that are completely untrained -- the majority of them," he said. "We are just getting out of the starting gates. We are years behind."

AFGHAN ARMY

Retired Colonel Jeff Haynes, who was deployed to Afghanistan in 2008 and is now doing research and analysis there, said the Afghan Army also needed to step up and be given a stronger leadership role.

He said there was often cronyism and it was hard to punish or reward people in that environment, adding that corrupt officers should be removed.

"These guys are smart, they are clever people, they can do more and they are playing us. We need to stand up to that," Haynes said.
The State Department's top civilian representative in southern Afghanistan, Frank Ruggiero, said the United States was working hard to create a "connection" between the people of Afghanistan and their government.

In the former Taliban stronghold of Marjah, the U.S. government prepared what it dubbed a "government in a box" to extend the reach of central government to the southern town.

However, that has been tough going, and Ruggiero said freedom of movement was difficult to establish in Marjah. The route into the area was still "relatively insecure" and government capacity was slowly being built up.

Asked what lessons had been learned from Marjah before an expected major push in neighbouring Kandahar province this summer, he said there was a need to better prioritize which officials were needed fast and to ensure they were trained in time.
"If you are going to clear the area, you need to work out what the services are you need to provide soon thereafter clearing, so that those people are trained, hired and ready to go," Ruggiero said.

The blame for poor governance could also be shared among allies and donors who had not focussed enough on this during the eight-year war, several speakers at the conference said.

Grant Kippen, who chaired the electoral complaints commission for the flawed election in Afghanistan last year, said there had been a giant lack of voter education from the officials taking part to those who voted.
"I think a huge effort needs to go into educating public servants at all levels," he said.

Marines "Female Engagement Team" making a difference!

Female Engagement Team Plays Unique Role For Marines In Afghanistan
American Morning (CNN), 31 Mar 2010

KIRAN CHETRY: Well, there is nothing unusual about women serving in the military now, thousands of them stationed in Afghanistan right now and most of them assigned to bases far from enemy contact. Except for two young Marines who are on a mission deep inside Helmand Province, in a location littered with roadside bombs.

Pentagon correspondent Chris Lawrence introduces us to America's Female Engagement Team in this "A.M. Original".

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) CHRIS LAWRENCE, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Just about everyone told these two Marines, sure you deploy to Afghanistan, but you'll never leave the base.

MARINE LANCE CPL. GIADA WITT: They're like, yes, there's zero percent chance that you'll be leaving the wire ever.

LAWRENCE: But here they are, in a remote, heavily IED part of Helmand Province, on foot in Afghan villages.

WITT: Salaam Alaikum.

LAWRENCE: Lance Corporal Giada Witt and Corporal Christina Arana are part of FET or Female Engagement Team.

The Marines realized they were only reaching half the Afghan people, but Witt and Arana can go where male Marines can't -- into the homes of Afghan women.

MARINE CPL. CHRISTINA ARANA: Since this culture believes that the women can't meet with the men, they have to keep themselves covered.

LAWRENCE: Even our crew has to stop at the gate to avoid offending the man who owns this home.

LAWRENCE: I know they seem to be marginalized, but do you think that Afghan women have a good deal of influence within their family?

WITT: Absolutely. And they're definitely a key player in getting information.

LAWRENCE: In a counterinsurgency fight, if a woman tells the team they need a new wall and the Marines get it built, it improves their acceptance in the village. And the women may know from their husbands who the bad guys are.

Women only make up 6 percent of the U.S. Marine Corps and they're not allowed to join infantry or recon.

ARANA: Or it can always (INAUDIBLE). You have to meet with the people. You have to understand them. (END VIDEOTAPE)

LAWRENCE: Yes, and to do that, they receive some training before they're deployed here. Some of it is a cultural awareness, specifically about the area of Afghanistan that they're going to.

The other is a more extended refresher course on combat training. In fact, one of them said, one of the drills they had to do was just do a tremendous amount of push-ups, hop up, go in a full sprint, stop and then fire accurately. It's supposed to get them used to firing under pressure, which is something they may have to do here in Helmand.

CHETRY: Wow.

LAWRENCE: Kiran.

CHETRY: Intense training, but an intense mission. Is this a permanent program, by the way, a full-time job for them?

LAWRENCE: No, it's not. These teams are kind of thrown together by female Marines who also have other jobs, and that's one of the things that critics say. You know, they're getting pulled back into their own units.

They say, if this is yielding good information, if it's yielding good relations, then it should be more of a permanent full-time thing where they are allowed to spend months and months at a time, you know, cultivating those relationships.

CHETRY: All right. Chris Lawrence giving us a firsthand look.

Yes Virginia, There is a Santa Claus!

The following editorial, among the most famous ever written, appeared in the New York Sun in 1897:

Dear Editor-

I am 8 years old. Some of my little friends say there is no Santa Claus. Papa says, "If you see it in The Sun, it's so." Please tell me the truth, is there a Santa Claus?

Virginia O'Hanlon

Virginia, your little friends are wrong. They have been affected by the skepticism of a skeptical age. They do not believe except they see. They think that nothing can be which is not comprehensible by their little minds. All minds, Virginia, whether they be men's or children's, are little. In this great universe of ours, man is a mere insect, an ant, in his intellect as compared with the boundless world about him, as measured by the intelligence capable of grasping the whole of truth and knowledge.

Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus. He exists as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist, and you know that they abound and give to your life its highest beauty and joy. Alas! how dreary would be the world if there were no Santa Claus! It would be as dreary as if there were no Virginias. There would be no childlike faith then, no poetry, no romance to make tolerable this existence. We should have no enjoyment, except in sense and sight. The eternal light with which childhood fills the world would be extinguished.

Not believe in Santa Claus! You might as well not believe in fairies. You might get your papa to hire men to watch in all the chimneys on Christmas eve to catch Santa Claus, but even if you did not see Santa Claus coming down, what would that prove? Nobody sees Santa Claus, but that is no sign that there is no Santa Claus. The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see. Did you ever see fairies dancing on the lawn? Of course not, but that's no proof that they are not there.

Nobody can conceive or imagine all the wonders there are unseen and unseeable in the world.

You tear apart the baby's rattle and see what makes the noise inside, but there is a veil covering the unseen world which not the strongest man, nor even the united strength of all the strongest men that ever lived could tear apart. Only faith, poetry, love, romance, can push aside that curtain and view and picture the supernal beauty and glory beyond. Is it all real?

Ah, Virginia, in all this world there is nothing else real and abiding.

No Santa Claus! Thank God! he lives and lives forever. A thousand years from now, Virginia, nay 10 times 10,000 years from now, he will continue to make glad the heart of childhood.

======

Let the Afgan Army Fight !!

By Andrew Lubin

Training the Afghans how to shoot and move is the easy part. A typical Afghan soldier can probably beat an American tri-athlete up a steep hill; add in the flak, Kevlar and other equipment our troops carry, and they look back at us in amusement.

What’s not so amusing is the drug use, absurdly low pay, desertion, casual corruption, and problems caused in Kabul, much of which affects their ability to fight.

The pay issue was finally addressed last week when Lt. Gen. William B. Caldwell IV, who now oversees training of Afghans, increased the pay for both the Army and the Police. The pay for a basic soldier is now $ 165/month, and a sergeant is $ 210/ month. While this is still far below the $ 250 or so the Taliban pays its fighters, Afghan patriotism is such that enlistments boomed within the next days. One can imagine the results if we simply paid them close to the same as the Taliban.

The issue facing Gen McChrystal and Gen Caldwell is not just one of increasing the size of the Afghan Army, but rather having an efficient Afghan Army. If the war is to be ‘Afghanized’ then the ANA needs to be an effective army and not just a job-training program where the troop strength numbers look good on paper, instead of in the field. The question is not only how to properly train the young Afghans who enlist so enthusiastically, but also how to better utilize the entire Afghan army.

There are simple solutions here, except both are studiously being ignored in ISAF Headquarters who are actively trying to over-complicate the ANA in their zeal to turn them into mini-American soldiers:

1 – Instead of forming more kandaks (an Afghan Army battalion), increase the size of the existing ones. The ANA is short of good officers and senior enlisted; forming more kandaks will dilute these numbers even further. Inexperienced or incompetent officers and senior enlisted is bad for discipline, bad for morale, and saps the Afghan’s ability to fight.

Increasing the kandaks from the current 670 to say 900 will enable the good officers and senior enlisted to retain control of their troops while incorporating the new and inexperienced troops into their kandaks.

2 – Push the ANA into the fight without any further delay. It’s going to take years to get them spun up to Tier One units; so get their headquarters units co-located with their American mentors. Get the Afghans involved in the planning, in the logistics, and in their own training. Push them into the fighting ASAP; their ‘good enough’ is in fact – good enough. Plus they’re respected by the Afghan people; the more you can get them in front of the locals the more you’ve Afghanized the war.

There is already a program in place, instituted by the 3rd Marine Division, who has been mentoring the ANA’s 201’st Corp for the past four years. It’s called “Muscular Mentoring”, and it’s very effective. Each Marine is paired up with his 201st Corp equal, with the Marine Colonel mentoring the 201st Corp CG. From going into the field together, to planning missions, to sharing chai and quiet chats about leadership the Marines and Afghans work together daily.

The program works; in Kapisa Province’s Tagab River Valley, the ANA built their own FOB, and maintains security in the southern part of the valley. Giving them their own battlespace builds both their expertise and effectiveness, as well as promotes their reputation amongst the locals.

This is a vivid contrast to the situation some 20 miles away in Mether Lam, where an American National Guard unit has no interaction with an 80-man ANA troop with whom they share a base. With an increase in IED attacks on the main road, it is disturbing that the Guardsmen, have not approached the ANA for joint missions, instead continue to patrol from the back of their MRAPS with minimal ANA input on missions, tactics, or strategy.

Last year I interviewed a group of young Afghan enlisted men. “Why’d you join-up?” I asked. “My mother and father fought the Russians,” one soldier told me. “and my great-great grandfather fought the British, as did his grandfather. I hate the Pakistanis, and want to kill them all.” These young men don’t need to sit through yet another Army powerpoint; if we could harness this sort of fighting spirit to some reasonable leadership, we don’t have to worry about withdrawing in July 2011; we can withdraw tomorrow.

Afghanistan - Marine Style !!!

In Afghanistan, Marines Live A Tough Camp LifeBy Chuck Liddy, McClatchy Newspapers

((compare this to the big Army FOB's in the east-S/F!!)

FOB HASSANABAD, Afghanistan — The young Marines at this outpost could be on a camping trip to Hell.

The living conditions in Helmand Province, one of the worst regions for trouble in Afghanistan, are such that most of friends and family in the United States wouldn't consider putting up with them for one day, much less the months these men will be assigned here.

It's not even officially winter, yet temperatures routinely fall below freezing at night, and there's no heat in the tents. At night when standing guard in one of the security towers, the Marines put on layer after layer of clothes, including thermal suits. It does little to ward off the chill of the desert air.

There is no hot water. The only running water in the camp comes from a 3 inch diameter hose that jets out cold water in fire hydrant fashion. Clothes are washed in buckets, when time permits and the weather cooperates, then strung between tents and dried in the sun.

There are "sun" bags that can warm water to a tolerable temperature but they're used outside in a small wooden enclosure where the wind wreaks havoc on the bathing experience. Some of the men go for a couple of weeks without a real bath, using cloth sanitary wipes. Many just use the cold water from the hose and get clean as fast as possible without succumbing to uncontrollable shivering.

Meals come in a box. After a few days they all taste the same: Chicken with salsa, meat loaf, pork loin patty, cheese tortellini. The men gruble, as military nmen have for centuries.

Toilet facilities are wooden stalls with canvas doors and plastic commode seats where WAG (Waste Allocation and Gell) bags are used.

Mice are everywhere, pouring in from the surrounding cornfields. The men have adopted several kittens, even outfitting them with flea collars. The arrangement benefits t the cats and the Marines; the cats crave the attention and they have a healthy appetite for the mice.

But the Marines of Golf Company don't mind the austere conditions. Most shrug their shoulders and say they don't like spending much time in the base camp anyway, they'd rather be out on patrol chasing the bad guys.

There's no shortage of bad guys in Helmand, scene of some of the most intense fighting in Afghanistan. It boasts the highest casualty rate in the country.

But the Marines say they don't mind. After all they are Marines.

ROTC for Civilian Service

ROTC for civilian service

By E.J. Dionne Jr.
Washington Post, Nov 16, 2009

Imagine a time when government work was exciting, widely admired and much sought-after.

It seems an outlandish thought at a moment when you cannot turn on your television without hearing government spoken of as almost an alien creature. It is cast as far removed from the lives of average Americans and more likely to destroy the achievements of private citizens than to accomplish anything worthwhile.

True, we don't apply our anti-government sentiments to at least one group of Americans who draw government paychecks: our men and women in uniform. All the polls show they are, deservedly, held in high esteem. But civilians who do the daily work of government are more likely to be referred to as "bureaucrats," "timeservers," and various unprintable names than as public servants.

This has not always been the American way. There were important eras in our history when citizens in large numbers were drawn to government service with a sense of mission and exhilaration. The New Deal was certainly such a time, as were the days of the New Frontier and (though it is unjustly derided now) the Great Society.

They came in part -- take note, President Obama -- because they were inspired by leaders who made it a point to call them into government. Caroline Kennedy has said that when she was growing up, "hardly a day went by when someone didn't come up to us and say: 'Your father changed my life. I went into public service because he asked me.' "

But inspiration is not enough. The military, after all, does not rely solely on patriotic feelings to build its force, and neither should the civilian parts of government. One of the most powerful incentives the military has is the Reserve Officers' Training Corps, which offers assistance to those seeking higher education. It's time for a civilian ROTC.

That's the idea of a bipartisan group of senators and House members, who are proposing to create a Roosevelt Scholars program, named after Teddy Roosevelt. Reps. David Price (D-N.C.) and Mike Castle (R-Del.) have introduced a bill in the House, and a similar measure is expected in the Senate this week from Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and George Voinovich (R-Ohio).

Although there is sentiment to include undergraduates in the program, the House bill is aimed at graduate students because the federal government has a special demand for highly qualified employees who are otherwise attracted (and heavily recruited) by the private sector. In exchange for generous scholarships in fields such as engineering, information technology, foreign languages and public health, the scholars would commit to three to five years of service in an agency of the federal government.

"With the aging of the boomers and those who responded to Kennedy's call to service, we need to replenish the government workforce," says Max Stier, president and chief executive of the Partnership for Public Service.

Stier, a one-man evangelizing squad on behalf of government service, notes that the government must fill 273,000 "mission-critical" positions in the next three years. This will require vast improvements in the way government recruits and a new willingness on its part to invest in its workforce.

The military, Stier says, gets roughly 40 percent of its officer corps through the ROTC. It makes sense to undertake a comparable investment in the civil service.

In the small and underappreciated world of those who care passionately about improving government's performance and prestige, there are competing visions of how to achieve this. One group of activists and legislators has been pushing to create a public service academy, modeled after the military academies, to prepare a new generation of leaders in government.

It's a good idea and would send another powerful signal that government work is and should be valued. But with the extraordinary constraints on the federal budget, the prospects of the large investment that would be required to build a new institution are not exactly rosy. A civilian ROTC would be a good first step. The Roosevelt program would have the benefit of drawing on the entire higher education system's capacity to produce specialists.

The Roosevelt program could also be an antidote to two debilitating trends in our politics. It would push back against the tendency of politicians to deride government (an odd habit, since politicians are themselves engaged in government service). And it might open the way for a bipartisan achievement at a time when such endeavors are in very short supply.

ejdionne@washpost.com

Afghans Also Divided on Western Troops

Afghans Divided Over Foreign Forces


By Matthew Green in Bamiyan and Fazel Reshad in Kabul
Financial Times
September 28, 2009

A bullet-shaped niche hewn from the mountainside is all that remains of the colossal stone Buddha that watched over the Bamiyan valley for 1,500 years before the Taliban demolished it with dynamite.

Fragments of the fallen giant and its smaller twin joined the debris left by armies past: from the carcasses of Soviet tanks to the hilltop ruins of the City of Screams, site of a 13th century massacre by Genghis Khan.

The Hazara community that lives along the valley has fared far better since US troops arrived in Afghanistan in 2001, seven months after the Taliban destroyed their statues, than they have under past invaders.

Even as the insurgency blazes in the south and smoulders in the north, their central Bamiyan province remains a rare Afghan haven, patrolled by New Zealanders who pride themselves on friendly relations with locals.

Traders in the bazaar in Bamiyan town, once a thriving stop on the Silk Route from Europe to Asia, have a simple solution to the dilemma faced by Barack Obama, the US president, over whether to deploy more troops.

“I would advise him to send more soldiers to kick out the Taliban,” said Azizullah, a shopkeeper who, like many Afghans, goes by one name. “We want freedom and we want progress.”

If such views represented a consensus, then it would be easier for Mr Obama to heed the recommendations of Stanley McChrystal, the top US general in Afghanistan, who says more troops and a new strategy are needed to stop the west losing the war.

But in the southern and eastern provinces, where the insurgency is fiercest, people are far more likely to see foreign soldiers as oppressors. “For 1,000 years we have never had such a Ramadan, where blood was flowing everywhere because of explosions,” said Haji Dawood Khan, a shopkeeper from Helmand province, referring to the Muslim holy month that ended earlier this month. “I don?t want any foreigners building roads or big buildings for me when I am cleaning blood from my home.”

Recognising the resentment that foreign forces have caused, Gen McChrystal argues that protecting civilians must be the focus for a new approach based on persuading Afghans to side with the western-backed government instead of the Taliban.

Evidence of systematic rigging in last month?s presidential elections has, however, deepened doubts over whether President Hamid Karzai is capable of transforming an administration often seen as absent, predatory or corrupt into an entity worthy of loyalty.

The bitter legacy left by NATO forces who have found themselves enmeshed in local feuds has widened mistrust. “The more foreign troops there are, the more people will hate them,” said Mohammad Karigar, a businessman from Kandahar province, another flashpoint of the insurgency.

Haji Kamrdin, a tribal leader from Khost province in the east, was equally dismissive of the big development programmes needed to underpin classic counterinsurgency doctrine. “It is impossible for Britain and its allies to build an Afghan state,” he said. “Such a thing can come only from an Afghan national movement, not as a gift from foreigners.”

There are dissenting voices, even in the south, who see sense in Gen McChrystal?s strategy. Haji Ghafoor, a tribal elder from Wardak province, said: “You need the flexibility that more troops give you to maintain momentum.”

However, the only unambiguous point of agreement between Afghans and the general is on the need to accelerate training of the army and police to allow foreign forces to leave. “They must take the money that they would spend on sending more troops and use the money for the Afghan police and army,” said Shah Mahmood, a clerk from Kandahar.

In a country that has experienced centuries of invasion, the narrative surrounding foreign forces tends to blur into a story of oppression, regardless of whether the outsiders are Russians, Pakistani intelligence agents supporting the Taliban in the 1990s, or Nato troops.

Of 17 Afghans interviewed in recent days, three said they believed Washington was bankrolling the insurgency to justify a long-term presence in Afghanistan. “If the US wants to remove the Taliban, they could do it easily,” said Mohammed Akram, an elder who lives at the foot of the mountains where the Buddhas once stood. “The US is supporting both sides.”

Additional reporting by Ahmad Wali Sarhadi.

Pentagon Refuses to Forward McC's Urgent Troop Request

McChrystal Troops Request Shelved Pending Review

By REUTERS
Filed at 11:14 a.m. ET

KABUL/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan has submitted a request for more troops, a spokesman said Saturday, but the Pentagon will hold it while President Barack Obama decides what strategy to pursue.

General Stanley McChrystal hand delivered his long-awaited request to U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen and NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Europe, Admiral James Stavridis, said spokesman Lieutenant-Colonel Tadd Sholtis.

"At the end of that meeting General McChrystal did provide a copy of the force requirements to Admiral Mullen on the U.S. side and Admiral Stavridis on the NATO side," Sholtis said after McChrystal returned from the meeting at an air base in Germany.

In a bleak assessment prepared last month and leaked to the media in recent days, McChrystal wrote that his mission would likely fail if he is not given reinforcements for his force, now more than 100,000 strong, including about 63,000 Americans.

The additional troops would be needed as part of a complete overhaul of tactics, with new emphasis on securing civilians in population centers to loosen the grip of a strengthening Taliban-led insurgency.

The White House says it wants to review the entire strategy for the region before considering McChrystal's request.

"Right now the focus is on the strategic assessment itself. It (the troop request) will be shelved until such time that the White House is ready," a defense official said in Washington.

"It is not going to be addressed, or reviewed, or analyzed until the White House is ready to begin discussing! it."

The official, who asked not to be identified while discussing the confidential review, said several White House meetings on strategy were scheduled for next week.

Officials have not said exactly how many extra troops McChrystal believes he needs, although defense and congressional officials have suggested the request could be for about 30,000.

The war has intensified in recent months. A U.N. report released Saturday said 1,500 civilians had died so far this year, with August the deadliest month of the year and August 20 -- election day -- seeing the largest number of attacks since 2001.

August and July have also been the deadliest months of the war for Western troops, who launched major advances.

Obama, who has already ordered 21,000 extra troops to Afghanistan this year, has described himself as a "skeptical audience" of the case for sending more, and says he wants to be sure the strategy is correct first. Republican critics have reacted sharply to the delay, accusing him of dithering.

POLL SHOWS OPPOSITION TO EXTRA TROOPS
A Gallup poll published Friday showed a fall in support for the war, with 50 percent of Americans opposed to sending more troops, while 41 percent supported it. Obama said he understood the public's concerns.

"This is not easy and I would expect that the public would ask some very tough questions," he told a news conference at a summit of world leaders in Pittsburgh Friday. "That's exactly what I'm doing, is asking some tough questions."

Increasing evidence of fraud in last month's Afghan presidential election has made the case for sending more troops to protect the Afghan government more difficult to defend.

"What's most important is that there is a sense of legitimacy in Afghanistan among the Afghan people for their government," Obama said of the disputed election. "If there is not, that makes our task much more difficult."

In a quarterly U.N. report released Saturday, Secretary General Ban Ki Moon said: "Serious electoral fraud occurred, made possible primarily -- but not exclusively -- by the lack of access to parts of the country owing to the ongoing conflict."

"When the entire electoral process is completed, it will be of critical importance for the result to be accepted by all so that the election of Afghanistan's future preside nt can be certified and a new government can be formed," he added.

Preliminary results showed President Hamid Karzai winning in a single round with 54.6 percent of the vote, but if enough of his ballots are nullified because of fraud that he ends up with less than 50 percent, a second round must be held.

A U.N.-backed watchdog, the Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC), has ordered a recount of some 3,000 polling stations, about 12 percent of the total, where it suspects fraud.

Afghanistan's election authorities and the ECC agreed this week to conduct the recount by studying ballots from a random sample of 10 percent of those suspicious polling stations, to speed up the process.

They hope to complete the recount and certify a result in the next two weeks so a second round, if needed, can be held before winter weather sets in.

Afghan Policy: The 5 Votes That Matter

What Next In Afghanistan? The Five People Obama Is Asking.

President Obama has said he is reviewing US strategy in Afghanistan. Here are five of the most important people he is listening to – and what they might be telling him.

By Mark Sappenfield
Christian Science Monitor (csmonitor.com)
September 24, 2009

When he announced his administration’s new strategy for Afghanistan this spring, President Obama added an important asterisk.

“Going forward, we will not blindly stay the course,” he said March 27. “We will review whether we are using the right tools and tactics to make progress towards accomplishing our goals.”

Now, he is making good on that promise.

Mr. Obama has already held one meeting of his top foreign policy and military advisers to discuss the Afghan war, according to news reports. Several more are expected, beginning next week.

What comes out of this high-level review could determine whether tens of thousands more American troops head to Afghanistan or whether America essentially pulls back and focuses on targeted counterterrorism operations against Al Qaeda.

Here is what is known about where the members of the National Security Council might stand.

President Obama
Back in March, Obama said his goal was “to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat Al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future.”

He has consistently repeated that goal. But his strategic calculus about how to do that appears to be changing.

Media reports suggest that Obama has been shaken by the allegations of widespread fraud in Afghanistan’s Aug. 20 presidential elections. The results have sowed doubt about whether President Hamid Karzai is a reliable partner.

Also a factor is the dire battlefield assessment by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who is expected to request as many as 40,000 more troops. At a time when Obama is strained to his political limit by the healthcare debate, the prospect of having to sell an Afghan troop surge is decidedly unpalatable.

The shift in Obama’s outlook was evident Sunday, when Obama told “Meet the Press”: “I’m not interested in just being in Afghanistan for the sake of being in Afghanistan or saving face.”

The comment contrasted strikingly to the tone of an Aug. 17 speech – three days before the Afghan election – when he said that the war in Afghanistan “is fundamental to the defense of our people.”

Vice President Joe Biden
So far, Vice President Biden has been the most outspoken critic of expanding the Afghan war.

In different venues, he has proposed different courses of action.

In an interview with CNN, he advocated a wait-and-see approach. He noted that Obama approved 21,000 more troops for Afghanistan in March, and not all of them have even arrived.

“They’re now only getting in place; they’re not all fully in place and deployed,” he said, calling discussion of adding troops “premature.”

More controversial, however, is his advocacy of a plan to scale back US forces and move toward a narrower counterterrorism strategy. In short, the US military would use missiles fired from drones and special forces operations to attack Al Qaeda in Pakistan and prevent their return to Afghanistan.

Such a strategy would return to the central goal – targeting Al Qaeda – without having to rebuild a corrupt and impoverished nation.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton
Like Obama, Secretary Clinton has said she is open to any options going forward, so long as they keep Al Qaeda at bay.

“If Afghanistan were taken over by the Taliban, I can’t tell you how fast Al Qaeda would be back in Afghanistan,” she said in an interview with PBS’s “NewsHour” Monday.

But Clinton was not necessarily swayed by McChrystal’s assertion that the US must add more troops to accomplish this.

“I can only tell you there are other assessments from, you know, very expert military analysts who have worked in counterinsurgencies that are the exact opposite [of McChrystal’s],” she said. “So what our goal is, is to take all of this incoming data and sort it out.”

National Security Adviser James Jones
While General Jones has not given a recent indication of where he stands on Afghan strategy, past statements provide some potential insight.

On a trip to Afghanistan in June, Jones told commanders not to expect any more troops this year. Clearly, much has changed since then. McChrystal had just been confirmed as the new US commander in Afghanistan, for instance.

Yet Jones seemed to think the time for troop requests ended when Obama announced his new strategy in March.

“Everybody had their day in court, so to speak, before the president made his decision,” he told McClatchy news service in an article published July 1. “We signed off on the strategy, and now we’re in the implementation phase.”

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike MullenMullen’s position in the debate is virtually certain.

He has endorsed McChrystal’s report and told Congress Sept. 15 that “a properly resourced counterinsurgency probably means more forces.”

Mullen’s viewpoints likely reflect those of the Pentagon brass, which means the full weight of military support is behind McChrystal and his assertion that the situation in Afghanistan “demands a comprehensive counterinsurgency strategy.”

Defense Secretary Robert Gates

Gates appears to be the biggest wild card.

As secretary of Defense and a Republican whose opinion is widely respected both in the administration and in Congress, his opinion would be influential. Yet of all Obama’s main advisers, he has been perhaps the most obviously conflicted.

Gates is a strong supporter of McChrystal, having engineered the retirement of McChrystal’s predecessor in order to get his man into Afghanistan.

On Sept. 3, Gates said: “I’m very open to the recommendations and certainly the perspective of General McChrystal.” Yet in general, Gates has been wary of adding more troops, fearing that it would make the US look like occupiers.

If Marines Ran GTMO....

Marine Officer Who Set Up Guantanamo Prison Dismayed By What It Has Become

When Brig. Gen. Michael Lehnert established the facility, humane treatment of prisoners was a top priority. He discusses how that principle fell out of favor in the seven-plus years since he left.

By Tony Perry
Los Angeles Times
September 25, 2009

Reporting from Camp Pendleton--In late 2001, when the Pentagon decided to put detainees at the U.S. military base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the task of setting up a camp and establishing its rules went to Marine Brig. Gen. Michael Lehnert.

Lehnert planned to rely on what he learned while running a camp at Guantanamo in the mid-1990s for nearly 19,000 Cubans and Haitians trying to flee to the United States.

And he was determined to follow the spirit, if not the letter, of the Geneva Convention, providing decent food, banning extreme interrogation and allowing religious services. He brought in a Muslim chaplain and permitted visits by the Red Cross.

When detainees went on a hunger strike, he spoke to them, even allowing one to get a phone message from his wife in Afghanistan.

But in the bureaucratic jostling that followed, Lehnert's approach was supplanted by that of a hard-nosed Army general.

Initially assigned to the project for 60 days, Lehnert stayed for 90 and then returned to the U.S. In the intervening seven-plus years, he has held several key jobs, been promoted to major general and kept a public silence about the controversy that has enveloped Guantanamo.

On Thursday, as the 58-year-old officer prepared to retire after 36 years in the Marine Corps, he expressed his deep disappointment about what happened at Guantanamo after he left.

"I think we lost the moral high ground," Lehnert said. "For those who do not think much of the moral high ground, that is not that significant.

"But for those who think our standing in the international community is important, we need to stand for American values. You have to walk the walk, talk the talk."

In her recent book, "The Least Worst Place: Guantanamo's First 100 Days," Karen Greenberg, executive director of the Center on Law and Security at New York University's School of Law, suggests that history would have been much different if Lehnert's approach had prevailed.

"Certainly the reputation of the United States would not have been damaged as it has been by the unabashed pushing aside of law," she wrote.

As outlined by Greenberg, one of the biggest differences between Lehnert and his successors at Guantanamo was over the use of harsh interrogation techniques.

"I think you need to step back and say, 'As a country, is this something we want to do?" Lehnert said.

When tapped for the Guantanamo job, he said he had few direct orders on how to handle prisoners who were not members of a foreign military force but nevertheless suspected of crimes against the U.S.

"Once they were out of the fight, I felt we had a moral responsibility to care for them in a humane fashion," Lehnert said. "I think it's extremely important how we treat prisoners."

Lehnert recalled talking to young Marines who thought the detainees were being treated too well.

"They said, 'They wouldn't treat us this way,' " Lehnert said. "I said 'You're correct, and that is entirely irrelevant. If we treat them that way [as they might treat U.S. prisoners], then we become them."

Shortly after leaving Guantanamo, Lehnert said he concluded that the detention center should be shut down as soon as possible, a position that he holds more strongly now.

"I think we should close it down," he said. "I think the information we're getting is not worth the international beating we're taking."

During the assault on Baghdad in 2003, Lehnert led the logistics movement, making sure front-line troops had the gear needed to keep advancing.

For the last four years he's been the commanding general of Marine Corps Installations West, overseeing hundreds of millions of dollars of construction on seven West Coast bases and handling delicate issues about preservation of endangered species. His successor is set to arrive next week.

Lehnert and his wife plan to retire in their native Michigan, not that far from the prison at Standish, Mich., which is in the running to take some of the Guantanamo detainees once the detention facility is closed, which is planned to occur in the coming months.

"I think they're following me," Lehnert said with a smile.

New Marine Recruiting Program Begins Tomorrow !

QUANTICO, Va. (September 18, 2009) – The United States Marine Corps is launching a new multimedia campaign, America’s Few, to challenge America’s youth to prove they have what it takes to become a Marine.

The America’s Few campaign includes national TV, print and online advertising, in addition to digital mall signage, in-school TV, and social media websites. The TV advertisement airs on Saturday, September 19, during the University of Florida vs. University of Tennessee college football game on CBS at 3:30 p.m. ET. The TV advertisement will air again on September 20 during the NFL Today Show at 12:00 p.m. ET and again during the NFL Regional and National football games. The TV advertisement will also run September 21 on ESPN during Monday Night Football’s coverage of the Indianapolis Colts vs. Miami Dolphins game at 8:30 p.m. ET.

The Marine Corps aims to recruit the best in each generation, focusing on young Americans who hear the call to become a Marine and decide to make the life-changing decision to answer it. The America’s Few campaign features three Marines who answered that call and earned the title Marine after completing the most demanding recruit training our nation offers. The three Marines, LCpl Oscar Franquez, Jr. of Canyon Country, Calif., LCpl Benjamin Lee of Tulsa, Okla., and LCpl Martin McCallum of Freeport, N.Y., are all members of the USMC Silent Drill Platoon, based at Marine Barracks Washington, D.C.

“The calling to become a United States Marine has always been answered by the best and brightest of each generation,” said Major General Robert E. Milstead, Jr., Commanding General, Marine Corps Recruiting Command.

The America’s Few campaign comes at a juncture when the Marine Corps is focusing not only on enlistment numbers, but on the quality of new Marine recruits when more and more young men and women are considering military service as an option.
“There is only one reason to put yourself through the toughest 12 weeks of your life – and that is to become a United States Marine,” said LCpl Franquez. “Becoming a Marine has allowed me to defend my country and become part of a centuries old tradition of service and sacrifice.

For generations, the Marine Corps has taken young Americans who have answered the call and forged them into Marines through a time-tested crucible known as recruit training.

“Recruit training was the greatest challenge of my life,” said LCpl Lee. “Our title is earned, never given.

Marine Corps recruit training transforms the many into the few. It is an unwavering and relentless process that presents the ultimate challenge: an epic test of mind, body and character that molds our Nation’s greatest warriors.

“The training pushed me far beyond my perceived limits and inspired me to be my best. In the end, I demonstrated to myself and my family that I have what it takes to be a Marine,” said LCpl McCallum.

America’s Few is a prequel to America’s Marines, launched in January 2008, to strengthen America’s understanding of what the Marine Corps stands for. The America’s Marines campaign consisted of a nationwide tour, a new Web site and a TV advertisement that featured a symbolic line of Marines standing ready to defend our nation. It was filmed at iconic landmarks and picturesque small towns across the United States. America’s Few was filmed this summer at Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, S.C., and on location at Point Judith, R.I.