US soldiers in Afghanistan.
Not only the strategy, but the very concept of the assumption that a foreign army can pin down insurgency is flawed.Never in the history has a foreign power been able to tackle insurgency in an alien land with or without the support of the government in place in that country.
Basically no Nation likes to be to be dominated, even through the guise of helping the nation.
Having entered into an unwinnable operation, best for US is to withdraw and handle insurgency on its shore by adequate measures.Present policy will meet with the same fate as in Iraq,Vietnam and elsewhere,including Pakistan.
Story;
The most damaging comment by General Stanley McChrystal about the Obama Administration’s Afghanistan war effort was not in the Rolling Stone story that got him canned. Instead it was his explanation, two weeks ago during a NATO briefing in Brussels, for the delay in the planned Kandahar offensive, deemed the pivotal campaign of the war. “When you go to protect people,” McChrystal said, “the people have to want you to protect them.” Protecting the people rather than hunting down insurgents is the essence of the counterinsurgency strategy pursued by McChrystal, with Obama’s blessing. But he seemed, in Brussels, to inadvertently reveal what could be a fatal weakness in the plan: the civilian population of southern Afghanistan, where the Taliban insurgency is based, does not support escalating the U.S. war effort.
