Panetta: New direction for terror war

| November 21, 2012

I guess the dimbulbs at the Pentagon have discovered that which we’ve discussed here over the last few years – that the US can’t just depend on withdrawal as our sole strategy in the war against terror. Probably because the public is noticing that we’re failing in Afghanistan and not because of the efforts of our troops there, but because, like Vietnam, the civilian leaders lack the political will to prosecute the war the way they should. But, they’re three years late. Anyway, the Associated Press reports on Leon Panetta’s latest theatrical proclamation on a change of strategy;

Panetta said the evolving campaign will feature the use of small U.S. strike forces; more partnering with foreign commandos; and more training and other forms of assistance that enable partner nations to combat terrorism on their own.


“All this sends a very simple and very powerful message to al-Qaida, to the Taliban, and to the violent extremist groups who want to regain a safe haven in Afghanistan: We are not going anywhere; our commitment to Afghanistan is long term, and you cannot wait us out,” Panetta said in a speech to the Center for a New American Security, a think tank.

So, basically, this new strategy is just more of the old strategy, only bigger with fewer troops. I guess they’re coming to the conclusion that they understaffed the surge, and now that the surge troops have been drawn down, they find that they need more troops, but tough words will replace those troops.

Panetta claims that they’ll “pursue” al Qaeda into Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, but it was a scant few months ago that we heard that al-Qaeda was on the ropes. So the same people who crowed that al Qaeda was dead are now getting serious about the war? Too late. Al Qaeda weren’t the only ones waiting out the 2014 date for withdrawal.

Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Terror War

Comments (6)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. CI says:

    I don’t see much choice, given that COIN wasn’t working, regardless of the force strength.

    The ‘dead-enders’ theme by Administrations is getting a bit old though.

  2. NHSparky says:

    The new Obama WOT mission statement:

    “When in danger, when it doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.”

    Hey, gotta be better than what they’ve done so far.

  3. Lawrence Todd says:

    No one ever seems to mention what our withdrawl did in south east asia with millions daying in death camps in cambodia laos and vietnam — the blood of those innocents are on the hands of jane fonda and john kerry

  4. Tman says:

    Who the heck wants to fight panetta and company’s war against al qaeda with ridiculous rules of engagement and hand holding that leaves our troops vulnerable?

  5. Flagwaver says:

    No, no, no… didn’t you listen to the President? If we have fewer troops, then they will be more elite! So, fewer troops in country means they will all magically become Navy SEALs. That is what we will use to defeat the terroris… I mean the insurgents.

    Now, if only we could trust our “allies” enough to protect them all while they are in their magical 550-cord cocoons.

  6. Eric says:

    @2 its not War on Terror, its “Overseas Contingency Operations” because we aren’t allowed to say Terror or Terrorists…oops, I just said it three times. You got me, well played sir.

    Besides, the election is over now, so they can say whatever they want.

    COIN “would” work if they left it to Special Operators and didn’t let so many conventional planners/leaders decide how to run it. Oh and it definitely does help that the SecDef and POTUS give them clear guidelines and support when they want it, to actually win.