British military leadership are scrambling to put together a plan that would allow them to dramatically speed up the withdrawal of their forces from occupied Afghanistan following a dressing down by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne.
During a recent Whitehall meeting on the drawdown, Chancellor Osborne reportedly criticized the strategy of having all troops out by the end of 2013, questioning the need to keep the troops there for another two years and suggesting they should leave immediately.
Those present said the chancellor was “deliberately provocative” but he appears to have stirred up enough of a discussion that defense chiefs are preparing for the possibility that when the decision is made on the timetable, they want a prepared option for a faster pullout.
It has been suggested several times recently, including by Defense Minister Philip Hammond, that Britain was considering speeding the withdrawal because they believe the Afghan forces are “ready.”
The plan currently on the table has no additional drawdowns in 2013 and the remaining 9,000 all leaving in 2014, and while Hammond was pushing splitting that between 2013 and 2014 there now seems to be some momentum for speeding not just the start of the “final drawdown,” but the end as well.
Nice to know that there is some shred of intelligence floating around somewhere in the World.
I am old enough to remember when our wars were short and deploymant strategy was always up against a drive to "get the boys home by Christmas". That kind of thinking is not popular anymore – leaving Afghanistan "prematurely" would have a bad effect upon the fiscal projections for a lot of MIC CFOs.
No doubt this proves vice presidential wanna be Ryan's statements of what a magnificent job the US has done in Afghanistan. Mission accomplished redux.
And from the moment they withdrew, start counting backward from 20 to the fall of the USan Empire. Yeehaw!
Great job for bringing Democracy and civilization to that ancient land, now which towns are best for tourists to visit?
The brits did not learn their lesson when they got their asses broke in the 1840s the Afgans had to demonstrate it to them again and to the yankees also now they are both broke and have to leave with their asses between their legs."Britiania rule the wave/god bless america AMEN.
But surely this'll mean 'it will all have been in vain.' You know, like when you're hungover and the receipt for that bottle of toe-nail polish sez it cost a grand, and you realize that you'll never be able to unload it for as much as five bucks. That kind of 'in vain.' Except it was other people's lives and money you spent. Or, hey, anybody ever buy a bridge 'in vain?' That's when you figure out that you really can't loiter on it and persuade people you're charging a toll, rather than panhandling… It really sucks trying to sell a used bridge, too. So I guess you can say that one's 'in vain.'
Out of all investments-in-vain, war is the one your not supposed to mention as such. That's why they go on forever –'cause then people who say so can still be painted as 'traitors.' Consider investments in feminine hygiene. Did you really think you could stand to watch the bottle inspection and sniffing long enough to profitably get rid of it? Did you consider what it would do to your very soul? All your male friends know (in vain), and all of them will say so. Not so for your war.
I believe that the mighty Brits are realizing that the war is lost and the Dream of establishing a great Britain with Colonies was nothing but a Dream.