Comments on: Commander Questions NATO’s Relevance

By: Erich Kreppenhofer

Erich Kreppenhofer — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 19:17:13 +0000

In respect to Nato , The war in Afghanistan and other Islamic regions cannot be conducted with military standards in existance . Remember Africa , ( Algeria , Congo , Sudan ) The Nato forces fight a stationary war and go back to dortified encampments . Airstrikes are called in
to frequently . Insurgent mix with the civilians
and use them for the public sympathy . There is no effort made towards the religious leaders , the Immams who recruit and foster within the mosques . I have been there and have seen the religious fervor created in the name of Allah .
Nato must be ready to deal with the Taliban otherwise they will never obtain a peace . OR
GO HOME WITH THE TAIL BETWEEN THEIR LEGS.

By: PD Shaw

PD Shaw — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 22:07:03 +0000

In the context of the article, I think we are talking about unrestricted combat support. The Germans are providing numbers, but their special forces units are not deployed on missions and the remaineder keep to the North.

I probably shorted the Netherlands and Denmark for their contributions, particularly given their size. But both have historic and cultural connections to Britain.

By: Triumph

Triumph — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:15:10 +0000

Shaw-- Australia, I wouldn't regard as a "major contributor." Holland, Germany, Italy, France, and Poland all had more troops there than Australia.

Aussies are crocodile-hunting has-beens.

By: Triumph

Triumph — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:07:07 +0000

The world moves much, much faster now than it did even in 1999

Actually, that is not true. The world moves slower now than it did in 1999.

You need to re-read your Stephen Hawking. The earth and moon have been drifting apart for years which slows our rotation. We actually slow down about a millisecond each century.

So, sit back and have a scotch.

By: PD Shaw

PD Shaw — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:03:19 +0000

Is it a coincidence that the major contributors in Afghanistan are the U.S., the U.K., Canada and Australia? It suggests to me that there is one group that has a different threat assessment than another group. If that is so, and if that p.o.v. is consistent for America, then I would invite Australia to join.

By: drjjoyner (James Joyner)

drjjoyner (James Joyner) — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 04:59:59 +0000

Commander Questions NATO?s Relevance: Gen. B. John Craddock, head of the U. S. European Command a.. http://tinyurl.com/6s2puq