Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley said today he will prosecute dispensaries that sell medical marijuana even if the Los Angeles City Council adopts an ordinance that does not ban such sales.

On Monday, two council committees rejected the city attorney’s advice and changed a provision in the proposed ordinance, allowing cash transactions as long as they complied with state law.

“Undermining those laws via their ordinance powers is counterproductive, and, quite frankly, we’re ignoring them. They are absolutely so irrelevant it’s not funny,” Cooley said.

Cooley said state law and state court decisions have made it clear that collectives cannot sell marijuana at dispensaries.

He reiterated his view that most, if not all, dispensaries in the county were in violation of the law. “We don’t know of one that’s not engaging in just over-the-counter sales,” he said.

The district attorney said his office was already prosecuting some dispensaries, and he promised to step up efforts next month. Cooley said he decided to weigh in today because he was irritated that the council had ignored the advice of the city attorney, Carmen Trutanich.

“What the City Council is doing is beyond meaningless and irrelevant,” he said.

The district attorney’s view could complicate the City Council’s deliberations. The council is scheduled to consider the ordinance Wednesday, more than four years after it first began to study the issue of dispensaries.

“These guys over there, God love them, are four years into this, and they won’t listen to their good lawyer,” Cooley said. “They’re sort of doing their own thing.”

[Updated at 12:58 p.m.: Councilman Ed Reyes, who has overseen the development of the city’s ordinance, said he did not think Cooley’s comments would cause the council to rethink whether to allow sales. “This is not about Cooley versus Reyes, or Cooley versus the council. This is about the quality of life. We all have better things to do than to do this legal jousting,” he said.

Reyes said the law was not clear on the issue. “We’ll let the courts decide,” he said. “We are trying our very best to work with a system that is very vague at this moment.”

He also noted that Cooley and Trutanich were allies and that both spoke at a training session for narcotics officers focused on eradicating dispensaries. “We’re here to serve the people, not to serve each other’s political agenda,” he said. “It makes no sense to play political football with people’s lives.”

Once the council acts on the issue, Reyes said, “We expect the city attorney to vigorous defend our medical marijuana ordinance.”]

Reporting from Washington – In an unexpected dissent at a critical moment, the U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan has warned in classified cables against any further buildup of American forces in the country, senior U.S. officials said Wednesday.

Ambassador Karl Eikenberry, a retired general and former commander of U.S. forces in the country, objected in two cables delivered to the State Department that additional troops would be unwise because of the corruption and ineffectiveness of the Afghan government, officials said.

The advice in the cables, sent last week, comes at a time when most signs suggest that President Obama soon will announce plans to send thousands of additional troops to Afghanistan in hopes of turning the tide against militants.

It also pits Eikenberry against a former military colleague, Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the commander of U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan, who has told Obama that more than 40,000 troops are needed if the country is to be stabilized.

Eikenberry’s advice came to light on a day when Obama met with his top national security advisors in what may have been a pivotal meeting to discuss the policy makeover. The group is weighing four options that would add between 10,000 and 40,000 U.S. troops to the 68,000 already there.

McChrystal’s strategy aims to protect the Afghan population in the hope of winning its support in the battle against Islamic extremism. But the strategy postulates that allied forces won’t succeed in their mission unless the Afghan government is honest and effective.

The fraud-tainted Aug. 20 presidential election has sharpened American and European concerns about the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai. In recent days, a succession of American and European officials have warned that Karzai must change his ways for the costly international effort to succeed.

After the meeting on Wednesday, a senior administration official said Obama remains concerned about the reliability of the administration’s Afghan partners.

“The president believes that we need to make clear to the Afghan government that our commitment is not open ended,” the official said. “After years of substantial investments by the American people, governance in Afghanistan must improve in a reasonable period of time.”

Several senior civilian officials, including Vice President Joe Biden and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, have privately expressed reservations about a further troop buildup. But few senior military officials have lined up among the doubters, giving Eikenberry’s statement a special impact.

Eikenberry oversaw the Afghan mission in 2006 and 2007. He was sworn in as ambassador in April after retiring from the military.

During his confirmation hearing as ambassador in March, Eikenberry warned that without strengthening the government and reducing corruption, progress in Afghanistan would be difficult to achieve. He also criticized as inadequate the job by U.S. officials and their allies were doing providing the civilian expertise needed to improve the Afghan government and develop the economy.

A senior Obama administration official declined to discuss the classified cables but noted that “success in Afghanistan depends on having a true partner in the Afghan government.” Several State Department officials declined comment.

Staff writer Christi Parsons contributed to this report.