Matthew Irvine

Nota: Este archivo abarca los artículos publicados por el autor desde el 1 de mayo de 2009. Para fechas anteriores realice una búsqueda entrecomillando su nombre.

Kimberly and Frederick W. Kagan’s Nov. 23 commentary, arguing for a force of 30,000 or more Americans in Afghanistan after 2014 [“What we’ll need in Afghanistan”, Sunday Opinion], is fundamentally wrong. Although their goals are sound — preventing terrorist attacks from the region on the United States — the writers’ logic and conclusions about the resources required are flawed. It is possible to protect U.S. interests across that region after 2014 with a force in Afghanistan of 10,000 or fewer American troops.

The United States has two vital interests in that part of the world: preventing terrorist attacks on this country and its allies, and preventing nuclear weapons or materials from falling into the hands of terrorists.…  Seguir leyendo »