Yes, but they're OUR warlords

Chris Sands, one of the better journalists working in Afghanistan, is the foreign correspondent for The National (United Arab Emirates). He writes from northern Afghanistan:

North slipping into different kind of hell
October 20, 2008

JOWZJAN, Afghanistan ...

While the Taliban insurgency across southern, eastern and parts of western Afghanistan grabs the world’s attention, the north of the country is slipping into a different kind of hell.

Here militia commanders with links to the government and its international allies are reasserting their control over a terrified population. Abductions, rapes, beheadings and assassinations are just some of their weapons of choice...

The picture [locals] paint of life in Sar-e-Pul province could hardly be worse. There is “lots of killing”, they said, and those involved are either in the government or connected to it.

According to them and countless others across the north, all the 2001 invasion did was effectively legitimise the power of warlords – giving them official positions and occasionally new uniforms.

“During the Taliban there was nothing like this,” Amruddin said. “We would leave our doors open and no one was raped.

“The British, the Americans, the Russians, they also wouldn’t do such a thing. But these people have raped a small girl.” ...

Five of the men responsible have been jailed, but they may not be behind bars long. Corruption is common throughout Afghanistan and freedom can easily be bought.

One judge in the province of Jowzjan admitted as much. Mohammad Harrun said foreign troops were making no effort to disarm or keep watch over local warlords...

Portraits of Abdul Rashid Dostum dominate Sheberghan, the capital of Jowzjan. Mr Dostum was a key ally of the United States in 2001, despite a long record of human rights abuses. His followers are now believed to be responsible for much of the violence in this region.

It is here that a commander in the Afghan National Army abducted Sweeta Khairi this year. Only 11 years old, she was taken to a military base and raped... (link)

NATO kills and injures civilians, says official

From Pajhwok Afghan News:

One killed, two injured by ISAF firing in Ghazni
Sher Ahmad Haidar

GHAZNI CITY, Oct 18 (PAN) - One civilian was killed and two wounded as NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) soldiers opened fire on a motorcyclist in the southern Ghazni province, an official said.

A security official who did not want to be named on Saturday told Pajhwok Afghan News the NATO-led ISAF soldiers opened fire on a civilian motorcyclist in the provincial capital at approximately 4:00pm. (link)

British MP on the ground

British Conservative MP David Davis has a jarring report from Afghanistan:

Independent (UK)
David Davis: We are losing Taliban battle

Monday, 20 October 2008

... Although the Taliban have nowhere near majority support, their standing is growing rapidly among some ordinary Afghans...

The regime we are defending is corrupt from top to bottom. While the President's brother faces accusations of being a drug baron, some three-quarters of the Afghan National Police actively steal from the people...

The government appears to have been run for the financial benefit of 20 families. From the allocation of mineral rights to the awarding of contracts, ministers frequently intervene to favour families and friends. Even more disturbing, the beneficiaries of this corruption are old-time warlords and faction leaders responsible for past atrocities. Today, they operate with impunity, even over acts of violence and attempted murder. Many public officials, from police chiefs to governors to ministers, have acquired multi-million dollar fortunes in office...

That is the regime we are defending and are perceived to be supporting.

The Taliban play on this. They offer a system of courts which is fast, decisive, and effective. An Afghan living in a non-Taliban part of a southern province, who has a dispute – over property, immigration rights, or a criminal matter – is quite likely to go to the Taliban area and ask them to arbitrate. They will summon both parties, hear their petitions, spend a few days collecting evidence – and then issue, and enforce, a judgement...

In Helmand, we control five town centres, but rural areas and roads are dominated by the Taliban. Kandahar is little better. The problem is spreading. (link)

NATO strike kills up to 30, say locals

From the International Herald Tribune:

NATO airstrike killed over 25 civilians, Afghans say

KABUL, Oct 17 - A NATO airstrike on a village near the embattled provincial capital of Lashkar Gah killed 25 to 30 civilians, according to Afghan officials in the area...

Residents claiming to have witnessed the airstrike said at least 18 bodies, all women and children - including one only 6 months old - were pulled from the rubble and taken to the provincial governor's compound in protest.

At nightfall Thursday in Kabul, the NATO command issued a statement confirming only that an airstrike had taken place in the Nadali District, northwest of Lashkar Gah, capital of Helmand Province in the southwest...

Local officials and residents of Nadali said Thursday that a bomb had hit three houses in a village in the Loy Bagh District where seven families were seeking refuge from fighting elsewhere. Mahboob Khan, the district chief, said in a telephone interview that 18 bodies had been retrieved, and that as many as 12 other bodies remained in the rubble. Khan said the bombing had caused widespread anger among the villagers...

The BBC reported that one of its journalists had seen 18 bodies, all women and children ranging in age from 6 months to 15 years.

Accounts gathered over the telephone by a reporter for The New York Times in Kandahar, about 135 kilometers, or 85 miles, east of Lashkar Gah, were similar. (link)

The Times relays claims by the office of Helmand's governor that the victims may not have died from military action, but from a collapsing house.

Tajik insurgents

Those with a passing familiarity with Afghanistan will know that Tajiks are the second-ranked (in both size and status) ethnic group there. It is also well known that the Taliban are almost entirely composed of ethnic Pashtuns, the dominant group in the country. It is thus somewhat surprising to learn that at least one newly-formed ethnic Tajik insurgent group sees itself as allies of the Taliban.

From Al Jazeera:

Afghan mayor turns Taliban leader
Akbari says he will not negotiate with the government until foreign troops leave

OCTOBER 17 - The former mayor of Afghanistan's Herat province is now the most powerful local Taliban commander.

Ghullam Yahya Akbari told Al Jazeera that he will not negotiate with the Afghan government as long as foreign troops are on Afghan soil.

Given exclusive access to one of his 20 mountain bases hidden deep inside rugged terrain that Akbari says were also used to fight the Russians, Al Jazeera's Qais Azimy found a group of at least 60 well-armed Taliban fighters.

Akbari's steely resolve to fight foreign forces comes amid reports of many soldiers defecting to the Taliban. Many are unhappy with the "un-Islamic" ways of the foreign troops...

The former mayor is not interested in peace talks and said he would even turn his guns against Mullah Omar, the Taliban leader, if he negotiated with the Afghan government.

"I do not believe that Mullah Omar would do that but if they sit with the Afghan government and negotiate then for us they will be like all the other members of the government and we'll continue our jihad," Akbari said...

Twenty Afghan members of parliament have meanwhile gone on strike in protest at the worsening security situation in Herat, and over what they say is the government's inability to fix it. (link)

See the Al Jazeera interview here.

Akbari is identified as a Tajik in an earlier Al Jazeera interview with him:

Smith on the Taliban

The Globe and Mail's Graeme Smith joins the growing chorus of journalists who note that Taliban insurgents have won the active support of many Afghans:

Reversal of fortune leaves Kabul under Taliban's thumb
Graeme Smith, Oct 14

... Interviews suggest that the Taliban have gained control along three of the four major highways into the city, and some believe it's a matter of time before they regulate all traffic around the capital.

That marks a shocking reversal of the insurgents' fortunes...

[T]he insurgents are grabbing the same political high ground the Taliban exploited during their previous sweep to power in the 1990s, by positioning themselves as the best enforcers of security in rural Afghanistan.

The roadblocks have also started to pinch the foreign troops. Military bases find themselves running short of fuel and other supplies...

Truck drivers often leave a rear door open at the back of their tractor-trailers, securing their cargo with a spider web of ropes, so that Taliban can easily look inside and check the shipment for anything forbidden by the insurgency. The Taliban even scrutinize the drivers' customs paperwork to certify that the goods are destined for non-military consumers.

The problem of Taliban influence on the southern highways grew especially acute this summer, said Brigadier-General Richard Blanchette, NATO's chief spokesman in Afghanistan.

“There was this saying, that the insurgency begins where the highway finishes,” Gen. Blanchette said, referring to a popular aphorism among the foreign troops. “Well, for a while it was almost the opposite.”

The Taliban make a point of allowing ordinary Afghans to drive the roads without harming them, but Gen. Blanchette said their actions are starting to affect the average traveller...

Each of the four major gateways into Kabul are guarded by Afghan police, soldiers, and intelligence officers, Col. Abed said, but the insurgents easily bribe their way through. People with loyalties to the insurgents have also infiltrated the ranks of Afghanistan's security establishment, he added: “They're not working honestly.” ...

But at a bus stop on the dusty edge of the Shomali plains, drivers and ticket-sellers say even this road is getting worse.

“Only one road remains now, this road, but in a year you won't be able to travel even this one,” said Nafis Khan, 36, a ticket vendor.

“The Taliban are not the problem,” he added. “When people saw the bad behaviour of the foreigners and government, the Taliban stood up to protect them. Day by day, their power increases.” (link)

Related:

• Two interviews (here and here) with Nir Rosen, who embedded with the Taliban.

• Logar senator says Afghan people support the Taliban.

• Reporters from The Times, the Washington Post and others report that Afghans are increasingly throwing their support behind the Taliban.

Empty promises or just lies?

As we will see below, a recent announcement by NATO commanders that rules for air strikes have been changed to reduce the risk of civilian casualties appearas to be mere propaganda.

Here's the claim, courtesy of Reuters:

NATO Troops To Retreat If Afghan Civilians At Risk

KABUL, Oct 14 (Reuters) - NATO has ordered its troops in Afghanistan to pull back from firefights with the Taliban rather than call in air strikes that might kill civilians, Afghan and NATO officials said...

NATO defense ministers endorsed the restriction at a summit in Budapest last week after three U.S. air strikes killed more than 100 Afghan civilians in the three months...

If there is a risk to civilians, troops have now been ordered to withdraw if they can, rather than order bombings that would earn a short-term victory but boost Taliban opponents in the longer term.

That should lead to a drop in the number of air strikes, which are up sharply from last year, said a spokesman for NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).

ISAF chief U.S. General David McKiernan has also told his officers that as far as possible all operations should be conducted alongside Afghan forces, an ISAF spokesman said...

"There will be no uninvited entry into an Afghan house or a mosque without having the lead from the Afghan Army unless there is a clear danger that comes from that house," said ISAF spokesman Brigadier General Richard Blanchette. (link)

The Washington Post has some pertinent details:

NATO Modifies Airstrike Policy In Afghanistan
Commanders Told to Consider Alternatives

By Candace Rondeaux
Washington Post Foreign Service

KABUL, Oct. 15 -- In a bow to public outrage over a recent spate of U.S.-led airstrikes in Afghanistan that resulted in more than 100 civilian deaths, NATO officials have ordered commanders to try to lessen their reliance on air power...

Brig. Gen. Richard Blanchette, NATO's chief spokesman in Afghanistan, said commanders are now under orders to consider a "tactical withdrawal" when faced with the choice of calling in air support during clashes in areas where civilians are believed to be present...

U.S. Gen. David D. McKiernan, top commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, issued the new order early last month. (link)

The order, expected to lessen air strikes, was given by Gen David McKiernan sometime before September 8. Have air strikes lessened since the new order was issued? The data say no.

The US Air Force issues airpower summaries nearly every day on their website. These summaries relate the number of close air support (CAS) missions in Afghanistan as well as Iraq. Back in 2006, the average number of CAS missions in Afghanistan was about 40 per day. By 2008, the average had risen to about 70. So, let's look at what happened both before after the new order took effect.

Here are the reported numbers of CAS missions from August 1 to 10 (no Aug 8 airpower summary was issued):
67, 69, 69, 45, 70, 74, 72, 78, 60. Avg= 59.4

For reasons unknown to me, the daily airpower summaries stopped from August 10 to September 7. Now, here are the first nine reported totals after reporting recommenced on September 7. (Keep in mind, the new order was given in early September, as per above.):
44, 70, 77, 74, 81, 51, 74, 68, 72. Avg= 67.9

And now the nine most recent reports, up to October 16:
69, 70, 47, 70, 71, 68, 66, 70, 72. Avg= 67

So, before the new rules took effect, there were actually fewer CAS missions than there were after the rules took effect.

Related:

• (August 2007) Invited by CIDA to audit their projects in Afghanistna, the Senlis Council finds a near-total lack of progress. "[W]e could not find evidence of CIDA's work, or CIDA-funded work that matched the information given to us by CIDA", said the NGO's director.
• (January 2008) Despite frequent claims by NATO and US military officials that the Taliban includes many foreigners, the US-run prison in Bagram which holds the most dangerous prisoners reports only 30 foreigners out of 630.
• (August 2008) Canada's ambassador to Afghanistan claims that NATO forces have reduced the number of civilians killed by their troops. Red Cross figures reveal this to be a lie.
• (August 2008) While NATO and Canadian officials claimed that Operation Medusa of September 2006 put Taliban fighters "on their back foot," declassified documents reveal that the insurgents amassed a force of 600 fighters only 10 months after that battle.
• (September 2008) After American officials repeatedly denied having killed civilians in Herat province, video emerges showing numerous dead civilians. Later, US officials would belatedly acknowledge the slaughter.

More Nir

Nir Rosen again, this time talking with Amy Goodman of Democracy Now. He deftly outlines the quagmire that Afghanistan has become and gives a lucid explanation of how civil war might erupt in the future. Hear the audio here. Excerpts:

Democracy Now
Oct 15

Investigative journalist Nir Rosen has just returned from Afghanistan, where he embedded with the Taliban and traveled far from capital city of Kabul, “Afghanistan’s version of the Green Zone.” He doesn’t think the US-led NATO occupation is winning in Afghanistan. His latest article for Rolling Stone magazine is “How We Lost the War We Won: A Journey into Taliban-Controlled Afghanistan.” ...

AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean, “how we lost the war we won”?

NIR ROSEN: Well, it wasn’t my title. But this was obviously a battle that was very quickly over initially in November 2001. I mean, the Taliban were quickly dispatched. But they weren’t exactly hunted and destroyed, nor was their senior leadership. They fled to Pakistan and eventually reestablished themselves. It’s just shocking that this could have actually been a fairly easy country to deal with. The destruction, the misery, the despair was so utter that you didn’t have the same initial hostility to foreign forces that you might have seen in Iraq. With a little bit more of attention with—if they hadn’t focused on the war in Iraq, if they had focused more reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan, if they had not allowed the warlords to take over from an early period, then perhaps Afghanistan could have been a relative success...

And an increase in troops in Afghanistan will only be more counterproductive. You’re going to kill more civilians. You’re going to have more engagements with the so-called enemy. You’re going to call in more air support. More civilians will be killed as a result of that.

And it’s unfortunate that—Obama, of course, one of his major platforms is to withdraw from Iraq. That’s the bad war; he needs the good war. So Afghanistan now is the good war. He needs to prove, as a Democrat, that he too can kill brown people. I think that’s what it comes down to, that we’re not weak; we can kill foreigners, too. All you’ll do, if you increase the troops in Afghanistan, is alienate more of the population...

AMY GOODMAN: So what do you think needs to happen in Afghanistan?

NIR ROSEN: I think that international troops should withdraw, or certainly change their approach in terms of pursuing the Taliban. I think negotiations with the Taliban are the only hope of any kind of peaceful solution.

And what I saw when I was with Taliban commanders is that they are far more pragmatic than they were in the ’90s. Their attitudes towards women’s education—haven’t exactly become feminists, but they accept that women should be able to work and go to school. They accept that they should be able—that they should negotiate with the Afghan army and security forces when the foreigners leave. Many of them weren’t calling for Mullah Omar to come back. They disapproved of suicide bombings, a lot of the guys I was with. These guys were watching TV, even Indian soap operas, which the Taliban would have been very upset about in the past.

AMY GOODMAN: Nir, you’re saying something most people aren’t, that there’s less violence in Iraq, not because of the surge, but because of ethnic cleansing. Do you see the same thing happening in Afghanistan?

NIR ROSEN: Well, it’s a very different situation. Iraq was a civil war. And Afghanistan can be pushed toward civil war. The Taliban is becoming more and more, in some ways, a representative of Pashtun nationalism. And if they proceed with the elections, which they’re trying to have in Afghanistan, I think you may see the country going in that direction of civil war, because you just cannot have election registration or actual elections taking place in Pashtun areas. People who go to register will be killed. People who go to vote will be killed, meaning Pashtuns won’t be able to vote, just as Sunnis couldn’t vote in Iraq. And that caused a civil war eventually, Sunni alienation in Iraq. If the Pashtun, as a much larger group in Afghanistan, aren’t able to feel enfranchised, they too—I think you’ll see some kind of clash between Tajiks and Pashtuns. (link)

Related:

• Nir Rosen on NPR.

Why do people prefer the Taliban?

American journalist Nir Rosen, whose reporting on the war in Iraq is second only to that of Patrick Cockburn, is one of the finest journalists in the world. Recently, he visited Afghanistan where he was able to "embed" with Taliban fighters in Ghazni province.

His experiences, as outlined below, surely amount to the richest source of recent information about the insurgents. Highly recommended:

PBS: October 14, 2008
Journalist Recounts His Experiences With Taliban in Afghanistan

[...] Q: And who are these Taliban commanders? Can you describe who your guides were?

NIR ROSEN: One of them was an experienced Mujahid, he fought the Soviets in the ‘80s and then had grown disenchanted with the Mujahideen who had began to fight each other following Soviet withdrawal. And eventually joined the Taliban out of frustration with the war lords who were terrorizing the Afghans and now continues to fight on behalf of the Taliban against the Americans.

And the other guy was a little more senior and he was also a liaison with the Taliban Minister of Defense. The Taliban actually has ministers and governors for each province. They have on paper at least a well established structure. Although I was to learn that in reality of course it falls victim to Afghanistan which is much more vociferous and bitter rivalries divide different groups just as they did the various Mujahideen parties in the ‘80s.

Both these commanders drove me down to Ghazni to the Andar District...

And we went on various patrols with the Taliban during the day. They go around with RPGs, rocket grenade launchers, machine guns, really not a care in the world as if there's no Americans in the country at all. They feel very confident. They adjudicate disputes between farmers, they hold trials and execute alleged spies, conduct operations against so-called collaborators with the occupation, whether they're police or army or government workers...

Q: And it didn't last long because you got into some trouble at one point right with, you were detained by a Taliban leader. Who was he and what did he want?

A: It turned out that my commander that was sort of protecting me, taking me around had clashed with this rival commander called Dr. Khalil. My commander had killed 11 Pakistanis and two Arabs under the command of the other guy...

[The rival commander] basically ordered me detained and put on trial for being a spy. It was never clear if he actually believed I was a spy or just wanted to hold onto me for the ransom.

But it took about 24 hours for my various contacts to be able to reach just about every Taliban commander they could think of and finally the Taliban Minister of Defense and only he was able to secure my release. The Taliban governor for the province actually tried and failed. So it was one look into the various rivalries that divide the movement. And what I also got to see was just some of the daily life, what these guys do when they come home. The commander I was with sat down and watched Indian soap opera.

Q: And also Iranian, you said Iranian pop music.

A: Yeah. Iranian pop music both of which the Taliban would have severely punished in the ‘90s certainly. This guy was a commander so he obviously knew that but he didn't seem to care at all. And there was very little separating him from your average Pashtun from the region. I think he could have almost just as likely joined the police or the army. In fact very little often separates tribes or villages who join the police or those who join the Taliban could be just an insult over a contract. It could result from the governor favoring one tribe over another, but I also found that these guys, many of them could, seemed like they could be brought into the system, into the process. They seemed willing to negotiate with the army and the police once the foreigners left, that was one of their requirements. When the foreigners leave they said they wouldn't have a reason to fight anymore.

Q: What can you say about in terms of how much the Taliban has evolved since they were driven from power in 2001? I mean at one point you mentioned their attitude towards women seems to have changed a bit. Several commanders have told you that they thought women could have jobs and go to school. Now is that a major shift on their part?

A: Acknowledging that women can work even be, even serve in the government and go to school is definitely a step forward. Because throughout Afghanistan the plight of women is just absolutely horrible and it's not like it's unique to the Taliban. They were also more, I would say the Taliban are becoming more of a Pashtun nationalist movement in the sense of Pashtun alienation. The Taliban are seizing upon that and in some way becoming less of purely Afghan or Islamist movement. And perhaps that's also a good thing in a sense that they're appealing to local grievances.

There is a danger, of course, that they're becoming more linked to, to global jihadist movements. They definitely resent foreigners which includes foreign fighters, it includes Pakistan, and the Arabs who join them, Pakistanis who join them. It was clear that the guys I was with disapproved of suicide bombings which are common tactic of the Taliban. And one of them actually complained that the Taliban are killing too many civilians. So these aren't exactly huge steps forward but they are a sign of an increased pragmatism.

So there are signs that perhaps could be taken advantage of. However, I doubt that the Americans have the elegance and the subtlety to be able to that. Moreover, I think the Taliban are so confident because they really are at this point becoming more and more victorious. They might see little reason to negotiate. Once you leave Kabul, you're entering Taliban territory. They're taking more and more land approaching Kabul in attacks in and around Kabul Province are more and more brazen. They've shut down the main roads leaving Kabul. And it really seems irreversible... (link)

The Christian Science Monitor's Anand Gopal has more along the same lines:

Some Afghans live under Taliban rule – and prefer it
By Anand Gopal

PORAK, Afghanistan, Oct 14 - After a gang of thieves had continually terrorized an Afghan neighborhood near here months ago, locals decided they'd had enough. "We complained several times to the government and even showed them where the thieves lived," says Ahmad, who goes by one name.

But the bandits continued to operate freely. So the villagers turned to the Taliban.

The militants' parallel government here in Logar Province – less than 40 miles from Kabul, the capital – tried and convicted the men, tarred their faces, paraded them around, and threatened to chop off their hands if they were caught stealing in the future. The thieves never bothered the locals again.

In several provinces close to Kabul, the government's presence is vanishing or already nonexistent, residents say. In its place, a more effective – and brutal – Taliban shadow government is spreading and winning local support.

"The police are just for show," one local says. "The Taliban are the real power here."

Widespread disillusionment with rampant crime, corrupt government, and lack of jobs has fueled the Taliban's rise to de facto power – though mainly in areas dominated by fellow ethnic Pashtuns...

Villagers say that almost every household in Logar Province has Taliban fighters. By day the area is quiet – most people stay indoors behind large mud walls or tend to their fields. A tiny roadside market sells dried fruits and soft drinks, and the shops often go unattended for hours.

As nightfall approaches, Taliban fighters slowly emerge from the houses and surrounding hillsides, some lugging rocket-propelled grenade launchers over their shoulders, ready to begin a night's work. The guerrillas set up checkpoints along Logar Province's central highway, stopping trucks and taxis to check IDs.

A few miles away sits a police checkpoint, but the police say they don't dare enter the Taliban-controlled areas. Yet many villagers say they don't need the police, since crime has almost vanished...

The Taliban now have a strong presence in all seven of Logar's districts, including outright control of four of them, locals say. "In these districts the Taliban patrol openly in the daytime and there is no government presence at all," says Qabir.

In neighboring Ghazni Province, the Taliban is in full control of 13 of the 18 districts, according to locals. Similarly, in Wardak, which neighbors Kabul, the insurgents have control of six of eight districts...

In areas under their control, the Taliban has set up their own government, complete with police chiefs, judges, and even education committees.

An Islamic scholar heads the judicial committee of each district under Taliban control and usually appoints two judges to try cases using a strict interpretation of sharia law, according to locals and Taliban members. "We prefer these courts to the government courts," says Fazel Wali of Ghazni city, an NGO worker. Taliban courts have a reputation of working much faster than government ones, which often take months to decide cases and are saddled with corruption, he says.

The Taliban's parallel government is also involved in local education. Employees with Coordination for Afghan Relief, an Afghan NGO that works in Ghazni city and trains teachers, say Taliban authorities recently gave them a letter detailing the "allowed curriculum" in local schools.

Abdul Hakim, a Taliban "Emir of Education and Culture" in Ghazni Province, says his group checks all schoolbooks to ensure that they adhere to their version of sharia law. "We want to ensure that our youth are trained in Islamic education," he explains. "First, they should learn sharia law and religious studies. Then comes science and other subjects.... But we don't burn or close down schools if they are in accord with Islam."

However, locals say that the number of schools in Taliban-controlled territory is dwindling fast... (link)

Related:

• Logar senator says Afghan people support the Taliban.

• Reporters from The Times, the Washington Post and others report that Afghans are increasingly throwing their support behind the Taliban.

Is American opinion turning against the war?

We have seen in recent months that Afghan public opinion has turned against the war. So too has Australian opinion, thus joining most of the western troop-deploying countries like the UK, Canada, Germany, Italy, etc. (Note that this fact puts paid to any suggestions that the war is somehow about promoting democracy.)

So far, however, American public opinion has been in favor of the war. But that might be changing:

Newsday (Long Island, NY)
Poll: Tired of warfare, Long Islanders want troops brought home

OCTOBER 14 - Long Islanders are tired of seeing America wage two wars and want troops to come home from Iraq and Afghanistan, a Newsday poll found.

Nearly two-thirds want a timetable for pulling troops out of Iraq. That overwhelming sentiment echoes the opinions of other Americans, and puts Long Islanders in line with Barack Obama's position on Iraq.

At the same time, about half of Long Islanders say the United States should decrease troops in Afghanistan or even pull out. That's a sharp disagreement with both Obama and his Republican challenger, John McCain.

The poll surveyed 761 likely Long Island voters from Oct. 1 to Oct. 7. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.6 percentage points.

The strong feeling about troops in Afghanistan surprised some local analysts, who expected Long Islanders would be supportive of the candidates' constant calls to send more troops to Afghanistan. Only 28 percent of those polled want an increase in troops and about 10 percent want them kept at current levels.

Richard Himelfarb, a history professor at Hofstra University, called the anti-Afghanistan poll numbers "remarkable."

"The Afghanistan finding is surprising in that the public mood is directly against the two candidates," said Himelfarb, a McCain supporter who advocates the war in Afghanistan as well as in Iraq.

But Patrick Kelly, a history professor at Adelphi University, said he's noticed public support eroding for the Afghanistan war in the last few weeks as the American economy has imploded...

By far, Long Islanders are most critical of the war in Iraq. Not only do nearly 65 percent of them want a timetable, but it is favored by all demographic groups, including Republicans. (link)