A massive effort by US and NATO forces — including offensives in the insurgent heartland and targeted assassinations of rebel leaders — has failed to dent Taliban numerical strength over the past year, according to military and diplomatic officials.The article subtitle says, "Officials say estimates belie progress made".
A NATO official said this week that the alliance estimates the current number of insurgent fighters at up to 25,000, confirming figures provided earlier by several military officers and diplomats.
That number is the same as a year ago, before the arrival of an additional 40,000 US and allied troops, and before the alliance launched a massive campaign to restore government control in Helmand Province and around the city of Kandahar, in southern Afghanistan.
No. Perhaps the strategic geniuses who believe that the enemy's constant strength is a sign of our failure would like to explain to me why our increase in numbers over the last several years is not a sign of their failure despite repeated claims that the Taliban are "resurgent."
The fact is that each side in this war replaces losses. Given that the enemy loses more than we do, I think it is safe to assume that the enemy's quality has gone down even though quantity has not gone down. Heck, I'm relieved that the enemy hasn't ramped up their mobilization of resources to try to match us. That is usually what happens.
The bottom line is that enemy strength is not a metric of winning. When we start to win, enemy recruiting will decrease as the result of our winning.
So this is not a reason for those inclined to urge us to run away. Like most of their arguments for running, it is just an excuse to do what they naturally want to do--lose.
