The Afghan-surge guessing game
One leak puts Obama's upcoming Afghanistan troop surge at 10,000, another puts it at 40,000. Is someone lying?
CBS News, citing “informed sources,” reports that President Obama has decided to send roughly 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan, nearly matching the leaked request from Gen. Stanley McChyrstal. The Associated Press puts the number in the “tens of thousands.” National Security Adviser James Jones strongly denied the reports, saying Obama has not made a decision on troop levels yet. Who’s telling the truth here? (Watch a CBS News report about Obama's decision to send more troops to Afghanistan)
The Pentagon is playing games: You can probably thank the military brass for the confusion, says Joe Sudbay at AMERICAblog. Senior White House officials told CNN that “people at the Pentagon are trying to force a certain outcome” by leaking the 40,000 number. That’s not good. “The situation in Afghanistan is bad enough without ‘people at the Pentagon’ playing games with Obama.”
“On Afghanistan, ‘People at the Pentagon are trying to force a certain outcome’”
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
‘Surge Lite’ won’t work: White House leaks indicate that Obama will “opt for a mini-surge” of 10,000 to 20,000 troops, says Richard Cohen in The Washington Post. That won't work -- sending 40,000 troops won't, either. Given our diminishing supply of “both treasure and patience,” it might be better to “leave Afghanistan to the drones and Special Forces. It’s no way to win, but it’s a good way not to lose.”
“Why ‘Surge Light’ won’t work”
McChrystal’s numbers don’t add up: The generals “put Obama on the political hot seat” by going public with their request for more troops, says Leslie Gelb in The Daily Beast. Now it’s their turn—they need to explain how they'll accomplish the impossible task of getting 44,000 new pairs of boots on the ground in a year, per McChrystal’s timeline, and what good they'll do. If their explanations are “weak, it’s time for Washington to turn the war over to friendly Afghans.”
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
It’s all speculation until Obama talks: We’re all playing “the waiting and guessing game,” says Michael Scherer in Time. “There are credible people in town who think they know what President Obama is thinking. And Obama has not made any official decision.” Nor will he until he gets back from Asia in a week or so. The only safe bet is that “the chatter is sure to continue” while he’s gone.
-
What should you be stockpiling for 'World War Three'?
In the Spotlight Britons advised to prepare after the EU tells its citizens to have an emergency kit just in case
By Elizabeth Carr-Ellis, The Week UK Published
-
Carnivore diet: why people are eating only meat
The Explainer 'Meatfluencers' are taking social media by storm but experts warn meat-only diets have health consequences
By Elizabeth Carr-Ellis, The Week UK Published
-
Scientists want to fight malaria by poisoning mosquitoes with human blood
Under the radar Drugging the bugs
By Devika Rao, The Week US Published
-
The JFK files: the truth at last?
In The Spotlight More than 64,000 previously classified documents relating the 1963 assassination of John F. Kennedy have been released by the Trump administration
By The Week Staff Published
-
'Seriously, not literally': how should the world take Donald Trump?
Today's big question White House rhetoric and reality look likely to become increasingly blurred
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published
-
Will Trump's 'madman' strategy pay off?
Today's Big Question Incoming US president likes to seem unpredictable but, this time round, world leaders could be wise to his playbook
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published
-
Democrats vs. Republicans: who are the billionaires backing?
The Explainer Younger tech titans join 'boys' club throwing money and support' behind President Trump, while older plutocrats quietly rebuke new administration
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
US election: where things stand with one week to go
The Explainer Harris' lead in the polls has been narrowing in Trump's favour, but her campaign remains 'cautiously optimistic'
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Is Trump okay?
Today's Big Question Former president's mental fitness and alleged cognitive decline firmly back in the spotlight after 'bizarre' town hall event
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
The life and times of Kamala Harris
The Explainer The vice-president is narrowly leading the race to become the next US president. How did she get to where she is now?
By The Week UK Published
-
Will 'weirdly civil' VP debate move dial in US election?
Today's Big Question 'Diametrically opposed' candidates showed 'a lot of commonality' on some issues, but offered competing visions for America's future and democracy
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published