Argument over troops request goes political

Washington Times:

One day after an attack in Afghanistan killed eight American soldiers, supporters of Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal renewed his call for increased forces there, while President Obama's national security adviser downplayed both the importance of U.S. troop levels and the possibility of a Taliban return to power.

The types of attacks that happened late Saturday night likely would intensify without an increased troop presence in Afghanistan, Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, said on "Fox News Sunday."

"Well, the one thing I can tell you for sure, without reinforcing our troops, you're going to hear more of what happened today. General McChrystal said without reinforcements we cannot change the momentum that the Taliban has achieved, and the insurgency cannot be defeated in a year if something doesn't change," Mr. Graham said.

However, national security adviser James L. Jones suggested that Gen. McChrystal's call for more troops must be tempered by diplomatic considerations as the president weighs how to deal with the 8-year-old war.

...

That is a strange thing for Jones to say when you consider that our NATO allies are also calling for more troops. Is Jones suggesting that diplomacy with the enemy is a consideration? That would be even stranger since the enemy has no interest in talking with us. When you consider that we are finally getting effort from the Pakistanis against the enemy you have to ask just where he thinks diplomacy can produce a results that more troops would produce.

Clearly we need more troops and we need them quickly.