Retired Army General Predicts 300 to 500 Casualties Per Month in Afghanistan
Thursday 07 January 2010
by: Mary Susan Littlepage, t r u t h o u t | Report

(Photo: Lance Cpl. John McCall / isafmedia)
The US could see as many as 300 to 500 soldiers killed and wounded per month in Afghanistan as 30,000 additional troops are sent to the country to launch a major offensive against insurgents, retired Army Gen. Barry McCaffrey said in a recent report.
McCaffrey, who is currently a professor of international affairs at the US Military Academy at West Point, said the surge will cost taxpayers about $300 billion due to a larger US presence. McCaffrey has visited Afghanistan numerous times since 2003 to assess the security situation on the ground.
Although McCaffrey said that President Barack Obama's Afghanistan Strategy Speech at West Point last month was "coherent, logical and sincere" and the "result of a very deliberative and thoughtful analytical review of the situation in Afghanistan and our several unpalatable options," he wrote, "We are unlikely to achieve our political and military goals in 18 months."
In the speech, Obama announced plans to add 30,000 troops to Afghanistan by July and to start withdrawing soldiers within 18 months of deployment.
But McCaffrey predicted a dire situation in Afghanistan, saying, "This will inevitably become a three- to ten-year strategy to build a viable Afghan state with their own security force that can allow us to withdraw. It may well cost us an additional $300 billion and we are likely to suffer thousands more US casualties."
McCaffrey's most recent assessment was based on a wide range of sources, including information he obtained from US Central Command Gen. David Petraeus; Gen. Stanley McChrystal, commanding general of International Security Assistance Force and US Forces in Afghanistan; Afghan officials such as Minister of Defense Abdul Rahim Wardak; and diplomatic officials such as Karl Eikenberry, US ambassador to Afghanistan.
Additionally, "personal research, data provided in-country during this [Afghanistan] trip and first-hand observations gained during my many field visits to Pakistan, Kuwait and Afghanistan during the period 2003 forward to the current situation" was used to prepare the report, McCaffrey said. "The conclusions are solely my own as an adjunct professor of international affairs at West Point and should be viewed as an independent civilian academic contribution to the national security debate."
High Number of Casualties
US, Allied and Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police casualties "have gone up dramatically," McCaffrey said. He said that as of last November, there were 922 US casualties and 4,565 wounded soldiers. The Pentagon confirmed these statistics.
Also, in fiscal year 2009, the war in Afghanistan cost $55.9 billion in regular appropriations with an extra supplement of $80.73 billion, McCaffrey wrote. "Clearly Afghanistan will run with a burn rate in excess of $9 billion per month by the summer of 2010," he said.
Achieving stability in Afghanistan will be difficult because the country and its 28 million people "are trying to build the basic elements of a civil and Islamic society while traumatized by 35 years of cruel violence and chaos."
However, McCaffrey wrote, "The Afghans are such impressive, devout, generous and energetic people," and, "They are intensely focused as students at any age and quick to learn and adapt."
The Taliban people believe they are winning the war, McCaffrey said, and the Afghan people do not know who will prevail - their government or the Taliban. "Most Afghans are also dismayed at the injustice and corruption of their government (in particular the Afghan National Police) compared to the more disciplined and Islamic Taliban," he wrote.
The Taliban are well equipped and heavily armed, and in recent months large groups of Taliban fighters have conducted complex attacks using surprise, fire support and enormous courage in trying to overrun isolated US units, McCaffrey said. "This is not Iraq," he said. "These Taliban have a political objective to knock NATO out of the war - backed up by ferocious combat capabilities."
Currently, 42 nations provide 35,000 non-US NATO troops, and the current US force level of 68,000 troops will increase by as many as 33,000 additional troops, which Obama called for in a speech last year. Allies may well provide an additional 7,000 or more reinforcements, McCaffrey said.
Also, he said that the Afghan National Army "is a growing success story," that 46 battalions "are rated as capable of independent operations," and that "Plans are to take the ANA from 90,000 to 240,000 by 2013."
Meanwhile, the Afghan National Police, now 92,000 officers, "are a work in progress," McCaffrey said. "They are six years behind the ANA in development. The police are badly equipped, corrupt (7,300 fired in last two years) and untrained (64 of 365 police districts have gone through training)." The US Department of Defense will now take charge of the program, but getting the ANP up to speed may take awhile, he said.
"It will take a decade to create an Afghan National Police Force with adequate integrity which can operate at village level in a competent manner," McCaffrey said. "It will also require 1,000 trained and protected judges - and a competent force of prosecutors and defense lawyers."
Many smart, talented people are trying to help Afghanistan, McCaffrey said. "All three of our superb senior US-NATO dual-hatted combat leaders - General Stan McChrystal, LTG Dave Rodriguez and LTG Bill Caldwell have called upon the best and the brightest of the military services and the inter-agency operators (FBI, DEA, AID, Border Patrol, etc.) to rally to this Afghanistan campaign," he said. "We now have the absolute best leaders in uniform, the CIA, law enforcement, and state/US AID headed into Afghanistan to run this operation."
Still, Afghanistan faces many problems, McCaffrey said. For instance, he said that the country is the fifth poorest nation, and that Afghans lack infrastructure, justice, resources and the most basic forms of local and national government. Also, he said that the country is the second most corrupt country after Somalia. "There is almost no civic or criminal justice," he wrote. "Court trials last only minutes in many cases and lack juries." Also, prisoners are often subject to torture.
McCaffrey said that general life expectancy in Afghanistan is less than 45 years. Tuberculosis and drug addiction are widespread, and the country is infested with millions of land mines, which have disabled more than 200,000 Afghans.
On the positive side, McCaffrey said, is that the country elected President Hamid Karzai, whom he described as "brilliant, well educated, non-violent, a politically astute dealmaker in a nation where murder, not compromise, is the normal political tool" and "a man who deeply cares for his people." Karzai also is "committed to earning his place in history as a transformer of his nation to a peaceful place in the civilized world."
In addition, McCaffrey said that people in Afghanistan are generally "extremely grateful" for US and international presence and that US/NATO forces have a 60 percent or higher favorability rating in polls. US poll numbers are lower in the UK, South Korea, Germany and Japan. However, the Afghans are worried that troops will leave them, resulting with their dealing with the chaos of endless civil war.
Meanwhile, social indicators have gotten better, McCaffrey said. Access to basic health care has rocketed from 8 percent in 2001 to 79 percent. Also, child mortality has been reduced by 25 percent, and Tuberculosis deaths are down by 50 percent.
On the other hand, the opium crop continues to hurt the country, McCaffrey said. "The $3.4 billion opium crop of 7,700 metric tons (in 2008) produces weapons and supplies for the Taliban and al Qaeda, corrupts the police and civil authorities, diverts land from food (two million drug workers) and has addicted a significant percentage of the population," he said. "Left unaddressed - the heroin menace will defeat our strategic goals in this campaign." There are at least 920,000 drug users in Afghanistan, and the country provides 93 percent of the global supply of heroin. "This criminal trade funnels $200-$400 million into the Taliban and the warlords," he said. "These huge criminal Afghan heroin operations, if not defeated, will corrupt legal governance, addict the population, distort the economy and funnel immense resources to the Taliban and terrorist groups."
McCaffrey recommended a solution: Work on alternative agricultural crops, have the Afghan political leadership confront the opium issue as un-Islamic and one that destroys their culture and destroy the crops.
In summary, McCaffrey said that to build a stable Afghan state, "We can achieve our strategic purpose with determined leadership and American treasure and blood." Also, he said that NATO forces are central to achieving success because they bring resources, political legitimacy and brainpower. "They will be a huge help with training and monitoring the growth and mentoring of the Afghan National Army And Afghan National Police," he said.
Because "we now have the most effective and courageous military forces in our nation's history committed to this campaign," McCaffrey said that he thinks the following goals can be achieved in the next five years:
* Create an Afghan security force that will operate in defense of their people and reduce our own active combat role.
* Create governance from the bottom up at district and province level that makes the lot of the Afghan people better (and worth supporting the government against the Taliban).
*Mitigate the corruption of the Afghan transition by having a parallel chain of financial custody and approval of resources - until the Afghan government is operating unlike an active criminal enterprise.
McCaffrey said, "Our focus must now not be on an exit strategy - but effective execution of the political, economic and military measures required to achieve our purpose."

This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.



Comments
This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.
McCaffery gets $8000 a month
Thu, 01/07/2010 - 14:14 — Carl (not verified)McCaffery gets $8000 a month in army retirement pay as a former General. Does anyone know if the Army pays him yet a again as a West Point Professor?
Feels like a time-warp to
Thu, 01/07/2010 - 14:34 — NYCartist (not verified)Feels like a time-warp to Vietnam war generals.
Impeach Obama, clean the
Thu, 01/07/2010 - 15:10 — Anonymous (not verified)Impeach Obama, clean the Federal Gov'mint of the top three arms merchants (terrorists)
Lockheed, Northrup and General Dynamics.
GOPer "Impeach Obama"; sir,
Thu, 01/07/2010 - 15:21 — Liberal Ray (not verified)GOPer "Impeach Obama"; sir, where were u with Bush 43 + Cheney who made this mess. "Anonymous" commenters are NOT brave Americans.
Am I the only one that has
Thu, 01/07/2010 - 16:04 — eval (not verified)Am I the only one that has noticed world events have been stranger than fiction for a long time now? An ET studying our media would be justified in judging us as absolutely insane; as individuals and as a civilization!
Might be true if McCaffrey
Thu, 01/07/2010 - 16:06 — Anonymous (not verified)Might be true if McCaffrey were in command. Too busy in the revolving govt/private door collecting cash for spreading bullshit.
Many countries have problems
Thu, 01/07/2010 - 16:14 — Murray Suid (not verified)Many countries have problems as serious as Afghanistan. Why are we investing our soldiers lives and our money there?
.
Moreover, if we deny Al-Qaeda access to Afghanistan, they will simply operate from other places.
This is a fool's mission. Does it make sense to build up another country while destroying our own?
You mmight want to consider
Thu, 01/07/2010 - 17:57 — Frank the Eagle (not verified)You mmight want to consider posting annonimously. The White House is watching you.
For Murray, we're there for
Thu, 01/07/2010 - 18:50 — Curt (not verified)For Murray, we're there for the same reason the Soviets were there before us, and our CIA created what is now known as al Qaeda to stop them. There are HUGE gas reserves in the former Soviet republics and the only viable way to get them to market is a pipeline through Afghanistan. That's the only reason we're there... and within 30 days of the invasion of that country we had installed a 'government' there and signed an agreement with that government to build the pipeline. Our government doesn't give a rat's rump about Afghanistan and its problems, they're being paid by the fossil fuel giants to get that pipeline built. If you study the events in those republics you'll find that many of the 'rebels' are fighting primarily against that gas extraction also. Unfortunately, as many empires over the ages have discovered, subduing what we call 'Afghanistan' (arbitrary political boundaries drawn by the British Empire during its attempt) is probably not possible.
A fool's errand, indeed. Do
Thu, 01/07/2010 - 19:29 — vb (not verified)A fool's errand, indeed.
Do U.S. government/military officials truly believe that by attacking others we are ensuring safety 'at home', or do they merely revel in the fact that the U.S. populace is, on the whole, so amazingly gullible and ignorant as to accept the load of crap they deliver as truth and necessity?
Past time to take this $300 billion given to the Pentagon to do with as they will and use it for the workers, not the soldiers.
Time to spend some of this cash on education and single-payer health care rather than in padding the inflated wallets of warrior generals, and the continued occupation and destruction of Iraq, Afghanistan, and the unlucky country they/we decide to bomb next.
General strike! Demand that we get out of Iraq and Afghanistan!
Natural gas
Thu, 01/07/2010 - 21:00 — Rodrian Roadeye (not verified)Natural gas pipeline...alright. So why Yemen and Columbia?
I'm not sure how I feel
Fri, 01/08/2010 - 12:00 — Anonymous (not verified)I'm not sure how I feel about such an article as this... Its pure speculation, just like most of mainstream Corporate Cable Media spends most of its time making its living these days... Its may also be 'speculation' pulled from a mountain of speculation which was chosen because it fits and serves a political agenda here. It reminds me of the Creepy BuSh-Cheney-CONservative use of cherry picked 'speculations'...
Gen. McCaffrey's information
Fri, 01/08/2010 - 12:17 — Al Veerhoff (not verified)Gen. McCaffrey's information is impressive, but I wonder where he got it.
Wasn't he part of the group of retired military "advisers" to the media taken to Guantanamo and supplied with recommended story lines in a Pentagon briefing?
I pray that Obama does not
Fri, 01/08/2010 - 19:32 — Ravenna (not verified)I pray that Obama does not end up as the second Lyndon Johnson, inheriting a war, escalating that war, then being forced to preside over another horrific failure.
Afghanistan is a bottomless pit.
The time the Pakistani
Fri, 01/08/2010 - 20:33 — FZB (not verified)The time the Pakistani intelligence services created jihadi Islam—backed it, funded it, trained it—was when the United States wanted that. Because at the time the Russians had occupied Afghanistan, the Americans wanted to drive them out and they needed allies. The allies they created were the jihadis. A lot of the books that were used as jihadi catechisms, primers, were published by the University of Nebraska. A lot of these people were taken to the deserts in Nevada and trained in Arizona, trained in how to use Stinger missiles, trained in how to blow up places. The army is now being told to kill its own people in the North West Frontier region.
Everybody see Avatar? Kind
Fri, 01/08/2010 - 20:53 — Eilish (not verified)Everybody see Avatar? Kind of reminds me of Afghanistan.
Hopeless situation. Trying
Fri, 01/08/2010 - 22:26 — frank (not verified)Hopeless situation. Trying to strengthen police and army dominated by minority tribes under command of war lords and (ex?) jihadis, to fight Taliban forces (mostly the Pashtuns and a plurality of the population) is bound to fail. How such contradictions have any outcome other than prolonged the agony of almost everyone concerned, even after the West withdraws to lick its wounds, and the Afghans suffer some combination of chaos and Taliban order? Unfortunately, Generals are trained to recognize such outcomes, but only as scenarios that can be overcome by expenditure of more blood and treasure. This also applies to double-dipping retired generals engaged in training the next generation of warriors.
The U.S. is being used as
Fri, 01/08/2010 - 23:08 — Dane McCarthy (not verified)The U.S. is being used as the muscle for the globalist/transnationals who want to reduce or preferrably destroy national sovereignty worldwide. Right now they are "mopping up" those countries not yet under their control. Yeman is just the next target-- it's fiercely independent warrior tribesmen are deemed a threat to the new globalized world. They must be tamed, broken, reduced to absolute poverty and despair as much of the rest of the third world has already been. This process has gone on for centuries and is now entering its final phase. When the globalists have used up all America has to give, they crush all those left able to resist, then begin to build their neo-feudal paradise, with them in control. After first drastically reducing the population, of course, by as much as ninety percent.
Some of the theories I am
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 02:52 — Anonymous (not verified)Some of the theories I am hearing are genuinely astounding. We are "in there" because Bush and Cheney went in without a plan for how to get out. They just did not plan that far ahead-if at all. Our current president has expressed a desire to get out, but unfortunately just saying "f' it" and leaving tomorrow is not remotely realistic. Which is a bigger mistake? Staying in there, or leaving? Either way, it is going to be a draining and painful experience. But lest we forget, the Soviet pullout from Afghanistan helped convince men like Bin Laden that they could in fact bring down the United States as well. In Iraq and Afghanistan, there next generation of Al-Qaeda may very well have already been created. But to just drop the situation as it was twenty years ago would only embolden them even more. I am just as sick of this war as everyone else, but there the reality of it simply cannot be ignored in favor of ideology.
McCaffrey's own(?) numbers
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 03:15 — A Knesal (not verified)McCaffrey's own(?) numbers spell out the folly of this war of choice and profit.
We simple cannot afford to pay for this misguided and criminal adventure for the next fifty years with our increasingly precious treasure.
How many jobs here at home would 150 billion create.
How many of our children could be educated out of that amount.
How much health care could we provide for that amount.
Missing the opportunity of paying down the debt by 150 billion instead of adding it to the debt -Plus the doubled and compounded INTEREST! is just stupid not too mention treasonable.
The cost of the war(s) is unsustainable.
As it is ... these atrocious, misbegotten tragedies will burden us financial, and in spirit for many years.
The question is ...Will we run out of money first(?) or will the Taliban's indefatigably tenacious will, be our undoing.
We can't beat them without turning the whole country into a gravel pit. And with that thought... the Afghani's are lucky, that President Obama isn't Putin.
A Knesal 'Liberal Warrior' "Little Beirut"
The whole thing is
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 11:11 — pink elephant (not verified)The whole thing is unfortunately about saving face rather than saving lives. And with a weak president, rightfully afraid of the media shit storm that the right would unleash were he to lack the resolve that the military call for we seem doomed to watching this play out.
A good point was made by another poster concerning other countries with problems..eg. Mexico. Why don't we help them. In no way does Afghanistan merit all the aid-if thats what we choose to call it that we are pouring down the sink hole.
Sad to say the given the contrary nature of American politics, you know Nixon opening China, or Clinton kicking single moms with sick kids off welfare, it is almost probable that only a republican administration could manage an exit, probably after massive bombings to enable us to claim victory. Or if the dems were brave enough they would do as Charlie Rengel suggested and reinstitute the draft. It all stinks...
There are 2 solutions to
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 12:27 — Boo (not verified)There are 2 solutions to bringing U.S. troops home from our futile wars:1)To reinstitute the draft & not allow deferments like Chickenhawk Cheney got during the Vietnam era; 2)Raise our taxes to cover the actual cost of these occupations.
Well said Boo. This is about
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 13:17 — pink elephant (not verified)Well said Boo. This is about all that will get thick headed Americans to act. Hit them where it hurts.
Its incredible that we are fighting this"war" without raising taxes. Has it ever been done before? And the same could be asked about conscription.
Finally, adore your thought on the chickenhawks. These guys love to pound their chest while others-and not just americans- die.
The first hint of General
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 17:45 — Anonymous (not verified)The first hint of General McCaffrey's distorted perception of Afghanistan in his article is when he refers to President Karzai as brilliant, non-violent, deeply caring for his people, etc.I am assuming the General forgot something many of us remember. Karzai was assigned his position by our government 'way back when' because he came straight from the oil industry. He was 'appointed' to ensure the gas pipeline was built. "Non-violent"? I think we are supposed to assume Karzai has no control over the rampant torture of individuals in the Afghanistan prison system. To add to the heap, his brother is one of the biggest drug runners in Afghanistan. And lastly, another small point. Karzai has surrounded himself with a highly corrupt cabinet. Even Obama and Clinton have guardedly declared him unfit to lead his country. One could go on and on, but I'll keep it short.
But He DID Raise Taxes by so
Sun, 01/10/2010 - 11:48 — Can you do simple math? (not verified)But He DID Raise Taxes by so enormously inflating the money supply - a time honored back-room tradition of presidents who cannot go to the American people to ask them to pay for their wildly expensive, corrupt, immoral pet projects. O is continuing where B left off. All of those who say 'Bush and Cheney caused all this' are not paying attention - O has ramped up every problem, while dismantling none of the dictatorial framework set up by the previous despots. The Left/Right paradigm is a fraud - what does 'progressive' mean anymore? Both 'sides' are in the service of the banks and the military industrial complex - they're sure as hell not working for us. As for the anticipated casualties in Afghanistan (alone) that works out to a 911 every six months - now what's this supposed to be protecting us from? This president really needs a 'national security crisis' badly right now in order to justify this continuing insanity. Let us not be taken in this time as we were by the last administration.
Army General initail
Wed, 02/24/2010 - 00:43 — Mary (not verified)Army General initail Mary said 2010 now 2012 nightmair wors earth quake from 4 Black planet planet earth will get wors real Demon wors i Mary have gifted be scinctist will have superpowers will save earth Mary chain now do you want be saved sead Men take Mary to Canada wedding i do scinctist work ok i promis you earth be save i could Destoy before close to earth when i have new powers i need misal large nets Mary will Destory it ok from MaryW get Mary at McDanald ok
shr crystal MCDonald
Wed, 02/24/2010 - 00:52 — Mary (not verified)shr crystal MCDonald 55428 Minnesota next to perkins restront Mary work at McDonald ok thank you from MaryW