iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

McChrystal: No Major Al-Qaeda Signs In Afghanistan

MIKE CORDER   09/11/09 11:48 AM ET   AP

Afghanistan

THE HAGUE, Netherlands — The top commander of U.S. and international forces in Afghanistan said Friday he sees no signs of a major al-Qaida presence in the country, but says the terror group still maintains close links to insurgents.

Gen. Stanley McChrystal spoke on the eighth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States by al-Qaida that prompted the 2001 U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan.

The invasion quickly toppled the Taliban regime that had sheltered al-Qaida leaders who plotted the 9/11 attacks, but has since bogged down amid a deadly insurgency.

"I do not see indications of a large al-Qaida presence in Afghanistan now," McChrystal told reporters at the Dutch Defense Ministry, where he met military officials.

But he warned that Osama bin Laden's network still maintains contact with insurgents and seeks to use areas of Afghanistan they control as bases.

"I do believe that al-Qaida intends to retain those relationships because they believe it is symbiotic ... where the Taliban has success, that provides a sanctuary from which al-Qaida can operate transnationally," he added.

The specter of al-Qaida terrorists being harbored by insurgents in lawless areas of Afghanistan serves as a reminder to America and its allies of why the increasingly unpopular war started.

Last month, McChrystal sent a "strategic assessment" of the war to U.S. and NATO leaders. He has not revealed its contents publicly, but said at the time that success in Afghanistan "is achievable and demands a revised implementation strategy, commitment and resolve, and increased unity of effort."

Earlier this year, President Barack Obama ordered 21,000 more troops to Afghanistan, which will bring the total number of U.S. forces there to 68,000 by the end of the year.

McChrystal is expected to ask for more troops soon, but would not elaborate on numbers Friday.

"My position here is a little bit like a mechanic. We've got a situation with a vehicle and I've been asked to look at it and tell the owner what the situation is and what it will cost to make the vehicle run correctly and I will provide that," he said.

"Now I understand that the vehicle owner then has to make a decision on what the car is worth, how much longer he intends to drive it," he added. "Whether he wants it to look good or just run."

McChrystal can expect the U.S. Congress to take a long look at any cost estimate he sends them.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the highest-ranking Democrat in Congress, said this week she did not think "there's a great deal of support for sending more troops to Afghanistan in the country or in the Congress."

But while skepticism about the war in Afghanistan grows, McChrystal said allied troops there likely prevented other terror attacks since 9/11.

"We have not been struck again in the United States, and I think the strikes that would have hit across the world – not just in Europe or the United States but I think also in much of the Muslim world – I think have been prevented," he told The Associated Press. "I can't prove that because you can't prove a negative, but I certainly strongly believe that is the case."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WORLD

THE HAGUE, Netherlands — The top commander of U.S. and international forces in Afghanistan said Friday he sees no signs of a major al-Qaida presence in the country, but says the terror group sti...
THE HAGUE, Netherlands — The top commander of U.S. and international forces in Afghanistan said Friday he sees no signs of a major al-Qaida presence in the country, but says the terror group sti...
Filed by Ami Cholia  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 28
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LeftOfCenter44
01:55 PM on 09/30/2009
Sign my petition to stop our tax dollars from paying “private Military/security firms” to run rampant in the Middle East.

http://www.change.org/actions/view/demand_congress_stop_funding_private_armies_in_the_middle_east
photo
CigarGod
What is your process?
04:30 PM on 09/13/2009
"I do not see indications of a large al-Qaida presence in Afghanistan now,"

But, he does see indications of a small presence in every corner of Afghanistan...which in a reasonable person's mind, should add up to a large presence.
photo
joebaggadonuts
Civilization: Evolutionary pathway of choice.
05:29 AM on 09/13/2009
OK then General. Let's stop driving this car, eh? After this report, seems to me we should have turned it in while the cash for clunkers program was still in force. Keeping it running will cost how many more lives and how much more treasure you say? Ahhhhh. So, if we want to simply buy a new vehicle, we should expect to pay less, right? Maybe we should go with a late model Diplomacy instead of another War vehicle, given the savings and all we should expect. Thanks for the report, man.
06:03 AM on 09/12/2009
I do wish the US authorities would get their act together and stick to it. One minute the world is being told by US leaders that the US must remain in Afghanistan and keep the so-called war on terror going to prevent more attacks from al-Qaida; the next that the same al-quaida is a spent force and on the verge of defeat.

Which is it? Not for my benefit but all those who you constantly dupe with your propaganda.

Professor Dr. Stanley Collymore.
11:17 AM on 09/12/2009
All the better to keep everyone busy playing 'whack-a-mole' against their constantly shifting fearmongering and jingoist propaganda.

That way, there is much less discussion of war profits, pipelines, and the Pentagon's official plans for global 'full-spectrum dominance' over all 'potential advesaries'
11:19 AM on 09/12/2009
typo correction:
"adversaries"
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:25 AM on 09/12/2009
The idea that a terrorist needs a base comparable to a formal military is nonsensical.

The military is incapable of defeating terrorists. Using the military to fight terrorism is the second dumbest idea of the 21st century, the dumbest idea being the invasion of Afghanistan.

It's time to remove the military from the equation since they are wrong tool for the job.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:22 AM on 09/13/2009
Absolutely on the money.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
evekendall
01:51 PM on 09/13/2009
Amen!
03:29 AM on 09/12/2009
old news

arabs and pashtu don't mix
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DixieMelody
Iso Blue in Red Idaho
01:30 AM on 09/12/2009
It was on NBC news tonight that the Taliban has reclaimed 80% of the country.

EIGHTY PERCENT! ! !
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:31 AM on 09/12/2009
The Taliban is Afghanistan's government.

They did not gain control over Afghanistan without popular support.

Despite all the US propaganda, the Taliban still has popular support.

Over 70% of Afghans are illiterate and have no modern conveniences.

The US is wasting lives & money attempting to convert Aghanistan into the US.

Afghanistan has no industrial or commercial base that can finance any such effort. Afghanistan is what it is and will likely always be until dirt & rocks become valuable commodities on the world market because that's about all they have other than opium.
11:35 PM on 09/11/2009
Ok then, Mission Accomplished! Why are we still there?
09:51 PM on 09/11/2009
McChrystal said allied troops there likely prevented other terror attacks since 9/11.

"We have not been struck again in the United States, and I think the strikes that would have hit across the world – not just in Europe or the United States but I think also in much of the Muslim world – I think have been prevented," he told The Associated Press. "I can't prove that because you can't prove a negative, but I certainly strongly believe that is the case."

"Likely", "I think", "strongly believe".

Keep up the faith General. Spread the good word. Who needs facts.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RSKaz
Impact not ego.
08:17 PM on 09/11/2009
Did he check Texas?
07:05 PM on 09/11/2009
No AlQaeda ?
so the "enemy" is simply all the so-called insurgents, militants, radicals, terrorists, Taleban, nationalists, fundamentalists, and anyone else who opposes US military occupation, bases, puppet government, or foreign takeover of resources. Mostly everybody.

Except, of course, our Afghan 'allies', the only ones left, the bribed politicians around Karzai, and a few drug dealers.

So, the great general McChrystal, a self-professed counter-insurgency 'expert', is thus sure to find the 'insurgents' he loves to fight, especially when they have been created by invasion for him.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
BradSmith
05:16 PM on 09/11/2009
Dispite the facts that we have nothing to gain and much to lose by staying we are still there.

They come up with one excuse after another for why we can't leave. Do you ever get the feeling that we don't want to leave? I wonder if it has anything to do with keeping a presence in the area and being able to threaten Iran with troops surrounding their nation?

I believe that the long term goal is the destruction of Iran. However, it is not going to be easy, they are not Iraq who was bombed for ten years and sactioned the entire time. They are not Afghanistan that was mostly destroyed by Russia. They are no threat to us or their neighbors but they can still defend themselves and would be very hard to occupy without the bases in Iraq and Afghanistan. Did we really need to build some of the worlds largest airstrips within miles of the Iran border for our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Why would we build these airstrips in areas where we would still have a supply line open to attack?

The upcoming war with Iran is still on the table, it's just in limbo. We are waiting for the right cards to fall at the right time.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:13 PM on 09/11/2009
Al Qaeda stronghold is now across the border in Pakistan. However, many Tal-iban in Afghanistan are closely allied with al Qaeda.
It seems to me that if our goal is to debilitate al Qaeda, we should focus on them directly, in Pakistan. In Afghanistan, our goal should be to help create conditions that minimize the chance of al Qaeda again finding a sanctuary there after we leave.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
omobob
left coast, usa
04:43 PM on 09/11/2009
al-Qaida is in the Horn of Africa. The Taliban is in the Swat Valley. al-Qaida lost two Islamic Republics to the West. Not to popular, I’d say.
09:03 PM on 09/11/2009
Yeah, and "search and destroy" all the potential enemies of the US throughout the globe.
I am sure the amoral arms merchants and their sychophant Pentagon glory hunters would love that.
How about Mexico next? Now there's a real opportunity for the 'Homeland' safety firsters like you. Invade and establish military bases and a super-embassy. Just until they don't pose any "threat', and our freedom-loving troops and mercenaries can teach them the real meaning of "democracy" and wipe out "corruption". Oh, by the way, Mexico has some oil.
Face it Hume, you have become an apologist for militarism, and an advocate of empire-building under the false flag of fighting "terrorism".

Obama and his advisors, same as Bush, are waging war for geopolitical power, pipelines, and war profits. Promoting democracy, stability, and keeping you safe are merely ploys for gullible chauvinists and frightened narcissists.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Winning09
02:56 PM on 09/11/2009
Cool.

We've almost won. :)
02:51 PM on 09/11/2009
No Al Quaida.
No reason for being there.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JoeBlough
The Horror. . .The Horror. . .
02:54 PM on 09/11/2009
War profits
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Winning09
02:55 PM on 09/11/2009
Time warp.