THE US IS LOSING IN AFGHANISTAN AFTER 16 YEARS:

[Bruce Patrick Brychek]

06.13.2017:Dear JFK Murder Solved Forum Members and Readers:* IN 16 YEARS OF US OPERATIONS IN AND AROUND AFGHANISTAN THE US HAS LOST OVER 2,200 TROOPS.* THE US IS FAILING IN ITS 16 YEAR LONG FIGHT IN AFGHANISTAN.* AT BEST AFGHANISTAN vs. THE US IS A STALEMATE AFTER 16 YEARS.* SINCE 2001 THE US HAS SPENT MORE THAN $ 110 BILLION ON AFGHANISTAN RECONSTRUCTION.THAT IS MORE THAN THE MARSHALL PLAN THAT RECONSTRUCTED EUROPE AFTER WORLD WAR II.* US ARMY GENERAL JOHN NICHOLSON, COMMANDER OF US FORCES IN AFGHANISTAN AND THE TWELFTHPERSON TO HOLD THAT POSITION, CURRENTLY CALLS AFGHANISTAN A STALEMATE.* SINCE 2002 THE US CONGRESS HAS ALLOCATED $ 60 BILLION TO TRAIN AND EQUIP AFGHANISTANTROOPS.* THE TALIBAN IS NOW CONTROLLING MORE OF AFGHANISTAN THAN ANY TIME SINCE 2001.* THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IS NOW CONSIDERING SENDING AT LEAST 5,000 MORE US TROOPSTO AFGHANISTAN.* THERE IS NO PROFIT IN PEACE.* AND SOME THINK THAT WE WILL BRING OUT THE REAL, TOTAL TRUTH OF JFK, MX, MLK, RFK, THEOKLAHOMA BOMBING, 09.11.2001, FALSE FLAGS, etc., RIGHT !* MEANWHILE, LET'S BRING CIVILIZATION, DEMOCRACY, LAW AND ORDER, AND PEACE TO AFGHANISTANAND OTHER 3RD WORLD COUNTRIES AT THE COST OF "We the People..." (06.13.2017, BB)WE ARE NOT WINNING IN AFGHANISTAN - BUT WE WILL CORRECT THIS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE:* The US's war in Afghanistan — a fight James Mattis says 'we are not winning ... right now'THE U.S.’s WAR IN AFGHANISTAN - A FIGHT DEFENSE SECRETARY JAMES MATTIS SAYS “WE ARE NOT WINNING…RIGHT NOW:” Christopher Woody Robert Gates NATO war in Afghanistan US military command.Then-US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, left, and US Army Gen. David McKiernan, top US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, with Afghan officials in the mountains of Wardak Province, May 8, 2009.REUTERS/Jason ReedAt the end of 2014, after more than 13 years of combat operations, 9,800 US troops were to remain in Afghanistan.That number would be reduced by half at the end of 2015 and reduced again at the end of 2016 to a small military contingent attached to the US embassy.But the Taliban's continued success on the battlefield and Afghan security forces' poor performance led to a continued US deployment in the country.At the end of 2016 the US had a force of nearly 10,000 in Afghanistan, though President Barack Obama intended to reduce that force to 5,500 in 2017, the Taliban threat caused a change of plans, and 8,400 troops are to remain in Afghanistan during 2017.Now the Trump administration is considering sending up to 5,000 more troops to to support Afghan military and police units fighting the Taliban, as well as deploying special-operations forces to counter ISIS and Al Qaeda elements along the Afghan-Pakistan border.Those deliberations come as the US is failing in its nearly 16-year-long fight — longer than any other US foreign war and most other military operations — in the war-torn country, according to Defense Secretary James Mattis."We are not winning in Afghanistan right now. And we will correct this as soon as possible," Mattis told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday.Mattis is not alone in that assessment.US Army Afghanistan John Nicholson:US Army Gen. John Nicholson, commander of US forces in Afghanistan, with US soldiers during a transfer of authority ceremony in Helmand province, April 29, 2017.REUTERS/James MackenzieEarlier this year, Army Gen. John Nicholson, the top US commander in Afghanistan and the 12th person to hold that job, called the situation there a stalemate.Nicholson has also cautioned Congress that more US forces may be needed to counter growing outside influence in Afghanistan — from Russia in particular.In 16 years of operations in and around Afghanistan, the US has lost some 2,200 troops.Since 2001, the US has spent about $110 billion on Afghanistan's reconstruction, more than the cost of the Marshall Plan that reconstructed Europe after World War II. Washington has allocated more than $60 billion since 2002 to train and equip Afghan troops.The US money spent in Afghanistan has yielded few lasting results, however. Security in the country remains precarious and the Taliban is believed to control more territory in Afghanistan than at any time since 2001.The US unleashed the "mother of all bombs" onto an ISIS target in AfghanistanThe "mother of all bombs" blast site is still off-limits.As always, I strongly recommend that you first read, research, and study material completely yourself about a Subject Matter, and then formulate your own Opinions and Theories.Any additional analyses, interviews, investigations, readings, research, studies, thoughts,or writings on any aspect of this Subject Matter ?Bear in mind that we are trying to attract and educate a Whole New Generation of JFKResearchers who may not be as well versed as you.Comments ?Respectfully,BB.

[Slav]

Isn't losing more profitable ? Doesn't there cash registers still ring if they lose and carry this on forever, if they won the cash register and profit stop. There is no profit in peace let there be world wide war and chaos to keep the registers ringing.Imagine almost 200 billion spent, imagine what that money would do if it was spent here.

[JDThomas]

It is a recurring theme of mine, but?1.Who is funding the Afgan Taliban, this irreguar force made-up of peasents who live in mud brick homes?2.Who is supplying them with weapons?3.Where are these weapons being made?If the US was serious about ending the war, then their ultra-sophisticated intel and computer systems wouldn't take long to stop 3 and by definition discover 2 and cut this off. I'm sure that they already know who 1 is. Breaking this chain should be reasonably strightforward with the resources that they have, but where is the profit in ending the war?