Sources: Obama Will Send 40-45K More to Afghanistan

White House denies a decision has made, but UK's move would make more sense

By Will McCahill, Newser Staff

Posted Oct 14, 2009 9:00 PM CDT

(Newser) – President Obama will announce a troop surge in Afghanistan next week, sources tell the BBC, with Afghanistan’s ambassador to the US saying Obama will commit as many as 45,000. The White House says there’s been no decision, with spokesman Robert Gibbs sniffing that the BBC wouldn’t be the first to get such news anyway.

Britain announced today it was sending 500 more troops, a move it wouldn’t likely have made without assurances that more US help was in the works. “All indications are that President Obama is honoring the request by Gen. McChrystal,” Ambassador Said Jawad said today; asked if that meant 40-45,000 troops, he replied, “This is part of the request, yes.”

[Images (2)]

[Quotes (1)]

President Barack Obama and his national security team listen to an onscreen presentation on Afghanistan today. (The White House)

Gen. Stanley McChrystal has asked for as many as 45,000 more US troops in Afghanistan, and the country's ambassador to the US says he'll get them. (AP Photo)

« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow

The president has not made a decision, and when he does, I think you can assume that the BBC will not be the first outlet for such a decision. - White House press secretary Robert Gibbs

« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow

To report an error on this story, notify our editors.

OTHER STORIES ON OUR RADAR

AP Photo

35 Brutally Honest Reasons Men Say No to Sex (The Stir)

Man in Mugshot Explains Why He Has Half a Head (HuffPost)

Another Sign Rihanna and Chris Brown Might Get Back Together? (Celebuzz)

These Exes Were Spotted Making Out … and That's a Bad Thing (Bleacher Report)

Did the Romney Family Dog Flee to Canada? (Slate)

Partner Links

A snapshot of the day's best news stories.

View Larger Grid

All Today Yesterday Pick a Date

COMMENTS

Read the comment policy

Showing 3 of 17 comments

bewilderbeast

Oct 15, 2009 11:57 AM CDT

And one day - maybe - it will dawn on Obama that even if he sent every one of you - 307 million Americans, you STILL cannot win a stupid senseless war on foreign soil. If it takes the Afghans 100yrs they will outwait you. You have everything to lose. An invaded country has NOTHING to lose. @JonmarkP understands what this war is about, and it AIN'T about winning.

Snowleopard

Oct 15, 2009 11:29 AM CDT

many of the fighters countering NATO are doing so for money, at about $15 per day. We should pay them $20 per day to fight the Taliban.

Snowleopard

Oct 15, 2009 11:27 AM CDT

Deebles: You're making the brits out to sound like a bunch of murderous thugs. Wasn't it them you coined the term "winning hearts and minds", whose strategy changed the tide in southern iraq? This war won't be won by whoever can kill the most indiscriminately. You kill some kid, his 3 brother's join the jihad against you.

What's Popular Now on Facebook

Rick Santorum: Birth Control Is 'Not OK'

E-Cigarette Explodes in Man's Mouth

BBC (Source Grid »)
Politico (Source Grid »)

World • Politics • US

Afghanistan • troop surge • BBC • Afghanistan war • Obama administration • Robert Gibbs • President Obama • Stanley McChrystal • Said Jawad

More Newser Stories

US Drones Return to Hit Rescuers, Funerals

Strikes occurring every 4 days under Obama: report

(NEWSER) - A few days back, President Obama said that US drone attacks in Pakistan had "not caused a huge number of civilian casualties." But a Bureau of Investigative Journalism report finds that somewhere between 282 and 535 civilians, including 60 children, have been "credibly reported" killed in the campaign. Secondary strikes target groups of rescuers shortly after attacks, while other drones have killed dozens at funerals. Obama has drastically escalated the drone program; some 260 strikes have occurred an average of once every four days under his administration. More»

Obama Considering Scaling Back Afghan Mission

US would shift to advisory role

(NEWSER) - The White House is looking to shift US troops in Afghanistan from a combat role to a primarily advisory one earlier than previously planned. While no decisions have been made yet, the possibility has been discussed at high-level meetings with defense officials, sources tell the Wall Street Journal , with some likening it to the US’ 2009 move to an “advise and assist” role in Iraq. This time, however, US troops would remain involved in combat, only under Afghan-led operations. More»

McChrystal: US View of Afghan War 'Frighteningly Simplistic'

Now we've only met half our goals, he says

(NEWSER) - After a decade of fighting in Afghanistan, the US and its NATO allies are only "a little better than" halfway to meeting their war goals, Gen. Stanley McChrystal warns. The former commander of coalition forces says the slow progress is largely due to the US not knowing what it was getting into, AP reports."We didn't know enough and we still don't know enough," he says. "Most of us—me included—had a very superficial understanding of the situation and history, and we had a frighteningly simplistic view of recent history." More»

Get Ready for Earful From Obama Aides

President needs trash-talking surrogates ahead of election 2012: Michael Scherer

(NEWSER) - Amid press conferences and big speeches, President Obama spent his first two years in office as “his own messenger.” But expect that to change in the run-up to the next election, writes Michael Scherer in Time . In those first two years, Obama lacked a solid team of spokespeople; aides like Larry Summers and Rahm Emanuel weren’t up to the job. Now, “as the Obama team enters the most trying 14 months of a remarkably trying five-year blitz, they are getting their ducks in a row.” More»

Obama Right to Stop Petraeus' 'Moby Dick' War

He finally rejects misguided 'bigger is better' Afghan strategy: Steve Clemons

(NEWSER) - President Obama's decision to bring home 30,000 troops by the end of next year isn't getting much praise, writes Steve Clemons at the Atlantic . Critics think it's either too much too fast or too little too slow. But Obama and Joe Biden "have it just right—and have achieved something very important in the political battle over America's Afghanistan adventure," asserts Clemons. They have finally "broken the back" of the misguided doctrine that "ever larger numbers of deployed troops equal ever large security" gains. More»

NEWS FROM OUR PARTNERS

What is Newser?

Face it: there's too much news. At Newser, we choose the most thought-provoking and entertaining stories from hundreds of US and international sources and reduce them to a headline, picture, and two paragraphs. And we do it 24/7—you can come back morning, noon, night (and in between) for something new that matters. Read less, know more.

Learn more »

Partnering with: Slate

View Newser on the mobile website

Sources: Obama Will Send 40-45K More to Afghanistan