« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Obama’s three-quarters have it both ways Afghan strategy

A necessary war vital to our national interest worth fighting for only 18 more months

By: Dan Spencer (Diary)  |  December 1st, 2009 at 10:45 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

President Obama’s big speech announcing, after three months of indecision, that he will give Gen. McChrystal only three-quarters of the 40,000 additional troops the general told Obama he needed to achieve victory in Afghanistan left a lot to be desired.

Like Obama has done with issue after issue, his new “strategy ” for the War in Afghanistan tries to have it both ways. Obama’s strategy is a Bush-like surge, but with a timetable for ending, not winning the war.

I have determined that it is in our vital national interest to send an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan. After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home.

I have been an unrepentant supporter of the war, but a war our leaders are not willing to fight to win, is not a war we should fight.

Obama said he made his have it both ways decision because our national security is at stake:

I make this decision because I am convinced that our security is at stake in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

How can the Commander-in-Chief put a time limit on fighting for our national security?

I do not know if I can continue to support a war effort that Obama previously referred to as a “necessary war” and now calls a “vital national interest,” but is nevertheless only willing to continue for 18 more months. If it is necessary and vital should we not be willing to carry on until we are victorious?

Tags: ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • bobmontgomery

    or perhaps not, Obama said he wasn’t interested in nation-building in Afghanistan, but more concerned with “building our own country”. Do the words “fundamentaL TRANSFORMATION OF aMERICA” COME TO MIND?

  • ciscoguy

    what other purpose but appeasing his base is setting a timeline for withdrawl on the same night you announce the surge? Why is it necessary that the american people (and the enemy alike) know how long we’ll be there before we give up and go home? Did we set withdrawl deadlines for WWII? What has this country become? Folks, this is what happens when the kids of hippies go on to become president.

  • GregInFla

    enemy combatant camp on Cuba’s coast that will be empty in a month. Wait, maybe another six months… when my new lawyer looks into it, I’ll have a good estimate.

    Everyone knows these deadlines are ridiculous except the radical leftists.

    • eliteuser

      the U.S. military is fully capable of doing that
      having a loose time-limit can pressure the Afghan government/army to get their act together
      and having a time-limit gives some “relief” to people who care about the future budget deficits

      • RedBeard

        I mean, if only he had been as wise as Obama, he could have declared a timetable on WWII and had our troops home by Christmas 1943.

  • eliteuser

    because he believes we don’t have enough resources to keep fighting for longer than that, and also, he believes that America can win before july 2011 anyways, and the Afghans will be able to take care of themselves and then America can pull out.

    • 6eorge Jetson

      Just hold on for 18 months & then you can begin to pummel our weakening effort.

      • RedBeard
  • http://www.letfreedomringblog.com ggross56

    For some reason tonight, I didn’t think President Obama’s speech fit together. It almost felt disjointed.

  • anotherindyfilmguy

    MUST be the “O”‘s objective.

    The “O” just told the enemy that if they can survive until his *benchmarks* are *somehow* met, or a relatively short time passes, we will withdraw… then they can go in and win after we leave. Reminds me of the end of Vietnam, peace with honor… followed by withdrawal and the conflict being restarted without the US being willing to go back… ask the South Vietnamese how well that worked out…

    Let us declare victory and pull out our main military force leaving an *advisory* group that won’t be able to do anything when the war resumes after we leave… that is what we did to end the Vietnam war. Words escape me as to the stupidity, ignorance and incompetence on display.

    If this isn’t proof that the “O” should be impeached for incompetence nothing will meet the test.

  • larryp

    See on the growund what your policies hath wrought. Visit th forward bases.
    Check out Kandahar and Helmond. See the troops and visit w/ Pres Karzai.
    Go Obama,

  • bk

    If I recall correctly, Obama said the evil BushCheney cabal was overworking our troops, and so they would reinstate a 12 months in/12 months out policy in Iraq/Afghanistan. Is that correct? If so, then…

    If “don’t call it a surge” troops are sent in during Jan-Jun 2010, then their tours would be up in Jan-Jun 2011. So instead of beginning to withdraw “dcias” troops in Jun 11 that’s when the last of them would be out, correct? It’s not realistic to send over replacements for just a few months is it? If all this is correct, then…

    What Obama REALLY said is that we’d be sending over surge (oops) troops for a year’s tour, or IOW 12 months worth of troops spread over an 18 month period, leaving only the middle six months when McChrystal would have the full 30K.

    Breaking it out evenly, the totals would be something like this:
    Jan 10 – 5K (first contingent arrives)
    Feb 10 – 10K
    Mar 10 – 15K
    Apr 10 – 20K
    May 10 – 25K
    Jun 10 – 30K (all have now arrived)
    Jul 10 – Dec 10 – 30K (all are there and none have returned yet)
    Jan 11 – 25K (the Jan 10 arrivals come back home)
    Feb 11 – 20K
    Mar 11 – 15K
    Apr 11 – 10K
    May 11 – 5K
    Jun 11 – 0 (the last of them have returned home)

  • Steve Summers

    The Taliban, not being idiots, will simply agree to stop fighting as soon as Obama asks them. They’ll disappear into the villages and hills, and Obama will declare victory, and point to this as an example of his “nice guy” diplomacy winning the day.

    There won’t be much motivation for the Afghan police and military forces to get very well trained, since there will no longer be much of a threat, so they’ll declare that “mission accomplished” pretty quickly too. Then we’ll pull out our troops- somewhat ahead of the timetable, so Obama can tout his unprecedented military prowess during his next campaign.

    And then, once we’re out of there, the rested, recharged, re-armed Taliban will come swarming out of the hills like a hoard of rats, and re-take the country. And from that secure base, they’ll take over Pakistan too.

    Great plan. Nothing calms the enemy more than announcing your strategy up-front and telling them exactly when you’re planning to leave.