Afghani pain continues to teach

ARTICLE: U.S. Sets Metrics to Assess War Success, By Karen DeYoung, Washington Post, August 30, 2009

How Rumsfeldian! Metrics to track progress in Afghanistan.

Crazy and Vietnam-ish when Bush and Co. spoke such nonsense in Iraq, but cool and rational now with Obama and Co. diagnosing Af-Pak.

But it does point up the reality that our doctrinal deficit here is still huge, along with effective MOEs (measures of effectiveness).

So Afghanistan adds to the learning, all right.

Comments

[large]

Gotta say it again, Tom, amassing troops, building artillery firebases, "Winning the hearts and minds" are pointing to our past, which was then unsuccessful, and will, in all likelyhood be moreso this time . . What's next, enemy body counts?

We're regressing, not "progressing" . .

[Louis Heberlein]

One of the few good aspects of the chaos of our entry into WW II was that it allowed FDR to brush aside the government top bureaucracy and select the best and brightest from lower ranks, industry and academic worlds to deal with the real problems ... and opportunities for change.

[David Sutton]

Metrics huh, I know we need some measure of success, a restive population at home and abroad (we here in Australia are getting antsy about increasing body count) but I kind of agree with Large, it seems to be a return to old tricks.

Over at Exum’s blog they are having a series of lively debates about the concept of winning. It all seems to be directed toward the mission accomplished version of winning, the at what point do we got to go home. These mertrics seem to be slanted that way to me, and for someone who’s just as interested in the 2nd half stuff I worry that the US is setting itself up to get out of dodge asap.