« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Whither Obama’s war?

How long will GWOT supporters back Obama's war?

By: Dan Spencer (Diary)  |  September 2nd, 2009 at 06:15 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Add George Will to those calling for a new strategy for Obama’s war in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

In a column entitled “Time to Get Out of Afghanistan,” Will expands upon comments he made on ABC’s “This Week” and argues we should reduce our forces in Afghanistan and “do only what can be done from offshore, using intelligence, drones, cruise missiles, airstrikes and small, potent Special Forces units, concentrating on the porous 1,500-mile border with Pakistan, a nation that actually matters.”

The Will strategy comes a day after General Stanley McChrystal, the top US commander in Afghanistan, submitted a report that also calls for a new strategy in Afghanistan. According to the New York Times, McChrystal’s report lays the groundwork for more troops and “would invest the United States more extensively in Afghanistan.”

President Obama announced a new strategy for his war in Afghanistan and Pakistan at the end of March – less than six months ago. Can Obama sell another new, more intensive, Afghan strategy, while his leave Iraq by date certain policy continues to move closer to snatching defeat from the jaws of victory in that theater of the struggle formerly known as the Global War On Terror?

Can Obama muster the public support or maintain Bush-like steadfastness absent public support? Last month a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll found a majority, 54%, now oppose the war in Afghanistan. That percentage is sure to rise as the numbers of U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan continue to rise.

Antiwar groups have now turned against Obama’s war and plan an autumn campaign against Obama.

How much longer will the Afghan war remain the Obama policy that Republicans like the most? How much longer will Republicans support Obama’s war when they think about how wrong Obama was about the Iraq surge. Obama was among those who stridently opposed the surge and predicted its failure. When even Obama realized he was wrong about the surge, team Obama engaged in a silly effort to hide the evidence by erasing his criticism of the surge from the web.

How much longer will unrepentant supporters of the Global War On Terror like me continue to support Obama’s war when Obama continues to back away from war on terror, insists on closing the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay without a clue as to where he will put the terrorists, gives the green light to political show trials of Bush administration officials and allows his government to investigate CIA operatives?

How much longer will you support Obama’s war? Al Qaeda and the Taliban don’t think it will be long enough for us to win.

Tags: ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • tedpomeroy

    We need to start talking about the successes in Iraq. First, 500 tons of yellowcake uranium were found and removed safely to Canada. Second, Sunni Muslims themselves killed 80 Al-Queda operatives in Baghdad. The termination of these Al-Queda operatives was the equivalent of US having its military academy graduates killed all at once. Third, objectively the US has greatly enhanced the security of the region and most of all Iran (dividends one suspects will come later). Four, the US has prevented a succession war between the late Saddam’s psychotic sons and the implications for the region.

    In Afghanistan, it is hard to imagine payoffs for the loss of American lives. Should we not just guard Pakistan’s nuclear weapons?

    • 6eorge Jetson

      Zero™ has been wrong on the relative importance of Iraq versus Afghanistan all along. Provided Zero™ doesn’t snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in Iraq, that war will pay dividends for years. Where does an ambitious Middle Easterner go to improve his or her lot in life? Iraq could be that all-important beacon. It has a relatively well-educated population, and bountious natural resources. Iraq can become a prosperous, self-sustaining nation in an area that sorely needs the pursuit of self-interest of the individual citizens by the individual citizens.

      Afghanistan, on the other hand, has a poorly educated populous, lacks natural resources, and is limited even further by a mountainous terrain that limits the movement of goods and services.

      h/t to Bird_Dog for providing links to Joshua Foust’s excellent distillation

      Worthwhile goals for Afghanistan

      1. A basic minimal stability in Afghanistan, such that neither the Taliban nor al Qaeda is likely to develop a staging ground for international attacks, whether against neighboring countries or the United States and Europe;

      2. The permanent delegitimization of Pakistan?s insurgents, such that they can no longer push Pakistan and India toward nuclear conflict;

      and Concerns about an unfocused war effort in Afghanistan

      •The war has no strategic focus or objectives. If we can?t articulate what we?re fighting for, why are we fighting?
      •The war has no end state. At what point do we decide we have achieved victory? If we don?t have an end state, is it appropriate to continue fighting?
      •If the war is to be about al Qaeda, then we cannot ignore Pakistan, since that is where al Qaeda is based and operates. Yet, the war?s primary focus is Afghanistan?which misses the point.
      •Al Qaeda do not represent an existential threat either to the U.S. nor to Pakistan. They can be managed and degraded using means other than war.
      •The costs and benefits of the war simply do not add up: the marginal benefit we receive from the war do not justify the costs in blood and treasure
      •Given the severe resource and host country restraints, executing a counterinsurgency is wishful thinking. The U.S. should scale back its objectives to a counterterrorism focus.

  • corky

    This is AMERICA’S war

    We, on the Right, hated when the Left referred to Iraq as “Bush’s War” because the majority of us, along with the majority of our representatives, voted for action.

    There is plenty to criticize about Obama’s Afghan policy…can’t we stick to doing that instead of trying to unassume our own responsibilities for it?

    • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

      Interesting posting history there, Sparky.

      • blooch

        Sperm Whales are the deepest diving animals in the world.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NpZLhqly8s

      • corky

        But, seriously…with what part of what I said do you disagree?

        NOTE: Just because I’m a lurker, doesn’t mean I’m a moby.

        • blooch

          Just because you’re a lurker doesn’t mean you can’t master “Reply to This”… unless you were taking offense at being called “sparky”, in which case I apologize.

          • corky

            “Interesting posting history there” is an ad hominem. He’s denigrating my lack of comments and inferring that I’m a “concern troll”.

            I have an idea…why don’t we simply comment on the actual, you know, content of what I said rather than divining my intentions?

            It seems pretty simple: Pointing out that it took Obama 8 friggin’ months to come up with a plan for Afghanistan – Good. Calling Afghanistan “Obama’s War” – Bad.

            Does no one see a difference?

          • blooch

            that Afghanistan was “The War that Bush Neglected and I Will Pursue”, Obama’s War is apropos. FTR, I–or, more accurately, my other alter ego 66Chevelle at the Minority Report–came up with Obama’s Afghanistan War Plan before Obama was even elected. Money quote:

            “My question for you is…How soon will Obama start putting more troops in Afghanistan, or will he start pulling our troops out of there, too? I think Afghanistan will be a failure by the end of his term, and we’ll be pretty much gone from there by then, save for some token Special Forces to make Obama look like he’s ‘Chasing Bin Laden’. The MSM will again spin that withdrawal as wise and ‘improving our image in the Muslim World’.”

            http://www.theminorityreportblog.com/story/brian_simpson/2008/10/20/music_to_my_ears_john_stossel_20_20_politically_incorrect_guide_to_politics

          • corky

            of what I was getting at.

            Let’s focus on pointing out Obama’s idiocies w/r/t to the pursuit of his Afghan plan in the hopes that he can be swayed to do the right thing. I actually have a little bit more faith in his abilities to prosecute it than you do, if only because this war is “The Good War” and even he will have to political cover to do so (ie listen to the generals)

        • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

          ….”Your argument is wrong because your only other comment is when you defended Tina Fey’s rather vicious, self-serving attacks on the GOP last year.” “Interesting posting history there” is just me questioning your truthfulness. “Sparky” is a very mild insult.

          Do try to keep up – and threadjack’s over, by the way.

          • corky

            Questioning my truthfulness and ignoring the comment of my post IS an ad hom. imho.

            The Tina Fey post was in the same light as this one: I read this site every day and and I want to keep it as honest as possible. If I see any ridiculousness…I call it out. I didn’t think bashing Tina Fey would do anyone any good and I don’t think calling the Afghan War, Obama’s, does us any good as well.

            Anyway, bringing on the wrath of a site contributor is certainly not my intention, so I’ll drop it. If you really doubt my credentials, my only other “internet proof” would be here: http://theforvm.org/diary/corky I’m mostly a lurker there too though…

          • Aaron Gardner

            If so that comes with the additional responsibility of CINC. It’s his war by default.

          • corky

            is almost solely based on how Obama handles it. That isn’t a question. The buck stops with him.

            I just hated hearing “Bush’s War” w/r/t Iraq because those who called it that were basically wiping their hands of a war that our countrymen were still fighting and dying for! It showed a lack of support and politics continuing passed the water’s edge.

            For example, I have a lot of respect for politicians who would vote to pull our troops out of Iraq but, @ the same time, would never even consider voting against a War spending bill in an attempt to do so. You can still be against the war, but continuing to support it so long as its still going on.

            So, I think we can all agree that we are very anxious about how Obama is going to prosecute the war, particularly whether he has the balls to ‘take the gloves off’ if necessary. That still doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be praying that he is successful: a successful Afghan War is a success for ALL of us.

          • Aaron Gardner
          • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

            I reserve ‘wrath’ for incidents that are at least three levels above this one. This didn’t even merit a formal warning.

            Moe Lane

          • corky

            Me shutting up would be a type of preventative care. ;)

            (and I didn’t even need the government to pay for it!)

  • RedBeard

    Don’t the radical Islamists love us yet? Haven’t they given up their evil ways and joined with us in singing campfire songs?

    I mean, I would have thought that such things had been accomplished, after Obama so wisely went around the world apologizing for mean ol’ America, bashing Israel, kowtowing to terrorist regimes, and promoting Islam while trashing the national day of prayer. All those things were supposed to make us loved.

    Oh, well. Even if all that failed, we should still have great confidence in Obama as our Commander-in-Chief. [insert loud snorting noises here]

    • izoneguy

      Around the world, Tyranny rears it’s ugly head,
      and unchallenged, consumes the mortals to feed the belly of the beast.

      Screaming, fighting for freedom and truth,
      noble men die while lathargic youth
      lie limp and impotent willingly
      letting the beast care for them in return for slavery

      Heretic heralded she falls with severed head,
      and propelled by fear and fallicy, the monster continues it’s gory feast.

      -outpost54

  • skorrent1

    It sounds like Will wants to revert to Clinton’s policy of sanitary war. Throwing missiles at empty desert camps from afar. That worked so well in the ’90s. We sure kept Afghanistan from becoming “a staging ground for international attacks”, didn’t we.

    As to the assertion: “Al Qaeda do not represent an existential threat either to the U.S. nor (sic) to Pakistan. They can be managed and degraded using means other than war.”, what can I say? At what point after 9/11 did al Queda and its surrogates and spin-offs stop being “an existential threat” such that we can grant them an enormous boost in prestige by “declaring victory and coming home” with our tail between our legs. Does no one remember how the Sov’s abandonment of Afghanistan was received around the world? It pretty much spelled the end of USSR international prestige. Are we ready to accept the same perception for ourselves?

    Conducting an effective foreign policy during times of financial duress requires us to walk and chew gum at the same time. This may be beyond the comprehension of the MSM. And the Obama administration, for that matter.

    • illinoisconservative

      the whole of the Middle East and several Al Quaeda-friendly countries in Africa? Where does it end?

      If Al Quaeda is determined to regroup and set up training camps somewhere, it will be in a place we are not occupying.

      What is our mission in Afghanistan? What is our exit strategy and at point have we achieved the mission’s goal? Jetson above has a very good list.. Answer all of those questions.

      Personally, I think we were done when we shut down the Al Quaeda training camps. That was our mission.

  • itsallverbatim

    The current administration, Congress and it’s citizens need to consider reinstating the draft.

    Those who scoff are either unaware, unrealistic or both about the sustained, justified commitment we need to make in AFG.

    If not conscription, then perhaps it’s time for these fine organizations…

    http://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/html/index.htm
    http://goarmycadets.com/
    http://www.seacadets.org/public/

    …to be taken out of 503(c) status and realigned under the Pentagon. Augmenting or completely replacing JROTC.

    As a veteran of OEF, I can proudly say we are the most professional volunteer force on earth. If the emphasis is to remain on volunteer, and conscription is politically unsustainable, than a third option must be sought.

    I am of the opinion that third option is a vast expansion of a mandatory JROTC-esque program that doesn’t have to mandate service. However, it should mandate training while in school. The future force is then drawn from that pool.

    If President Obama is truly intent on drawing down worldwide, that is his perrogative. However, since he is predisposed to diplomacy I’m sure our dozens of embassies will stay open. And they have to be guarded or the diplomats die. We can use contractors – but he and his advisors are opposed to contractors.

    General McCrystal (who I knew as Lieutenant General McCrystal, commander, Joint Special Operations Command) is no idiot. Either Obama commits troops to Afghanistan and vastly expands the military, or he can depend exclusively on contractors. Those are his only two choices. Anyone in disagreement with that is in denial about the amusing convergence of political viability, our national security and his personal outlook on the world and the US military’s role in. If I was still in I’d be terrified but since I’m out now I am amused and curious if he pull this off successfully.

    If heads explode on the right or the left, he did it to himself. I predict riots if he increases troop strength substantially (50K+).