Posted on 08/31/2009 9:12:02 PM PDT by Frankusa
From Yahoo News:
Pentagon worried about Obama's commitment to AfghanistanThe administration sent additional troops to the battlefield before it "was comfortable with its plan", because of political reasons.The prospect that U.S. Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal may ask for as many as 45,000 additional American troops in Afghanistan is fueling growing tension within President Barack Obama's administration over the U.S. commitment to the war there.
On Monday, McChrystal sent his assessment of the situation in Afghanistan to the Pentagon... Although the assessment didn't include any request for more troops, senior military officials said they expect McChrystal later in September to seek between 21,000 and 45,000 more troops...
With tough battles ahead on health care, the budget and other issues, Vice President Joe Biden and other officials are increasingly anxious about how the American public would respond to sending additional troops.
The officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to talk to the media, said Biden has argued that without sustained support from the American people, the U.S. can't make the long-term commitment that would be needed to stabilize Afghanistan and dismantle al Qaida . Biden's office declined to comment.
"I think they (the Obama administration) thought this would be more popular and easier," a senior Pentagon official said. "We are not getting a Bush-like commitment to this war."
Monday's assessment initially was to include troop recommendations, but political concerns prompted White House and Pentagon officials to agree that those recommendations would come later, advisers to McChrystal said...
Some White House officials said the administration feels it was pressured to send the additional 17,500 combat troops and 4,000 trainers earlier this year, before the administration was comfortable with its plan for Afghanistan , because of the country's election in August...
Good grief!
Those who do not learn from history...are stupid!
‘Biden has argued that without sustained support from the American people, the U.S. can’t make the long-term commitment that would be needed to stabilize Afghanistan and dismantle al Qaida’ —————He should be worried about it...he stood on the Senate floor and called for the pull out of Iraq, declaring ‘THIS WAR IS LOST’ as our troops fought to keep us safe at night. As he and Obama and their thugs did everything possible to make sure we didn’t win in Iraq. As they caused the hatred and vitriol over the wars....fighting against funding, fighting against the surge....
If I were president, this issue is the one that would keep me awake at nights. Meaning, the long term objective. By all means, give them 40k if that is what they require now.
I think these clowns are so impressed with themselves that they have no clue how far over their heads they are.
Hence their motto: When in a hole, keep on diggin' and keep on lyin'.
I really don't think Obama is in touch with reality enough to be kept awake at night.
I think he puts his head on the pillow and starts chanting, "I am the President of the United States" over and over until he's fast asleep.
That leaves every decent, sane American to worry about what foolish actions he'll bestow upon the nation when he awakes.
Deja Vu
Not me. Nuke the entire Afghan-Pak border until nothing is left twitching. Call in B-52 strikes with 2000 pounders for a month, then drop whatever Chem weapons we have left on it.
If so much as a snake is seen moving, repeat the process.
For good measure, toss a half a dozen W-88s at Mecca. No more muzzies, no more muzzie problems.
L
Maybe Obama don’t want to many U.S troops on American soil.
They could get in the way.
I been having this bad feeling lately that “commander’n turd worlder” placeholder is looking more and more like a LBJ legacy. I posted yesterday, to “US Afghan strategy ‘not working’” some of the following:
So I guess that Captain Kenya with his hopey-changey thing is not working or is he just another Robert McNamara, believing containment abroad and Communism at home virtually ensures success; for whom? Crime Lords, Islamofascists and enemies of America. Oh, that’s right he is best buds with all the Marxists and like minded anti-American crowd; a wolf playing sheep, to the fold.
Although I do have a suggestion, eliminate the enemies of America first and stop playing around with ROE; for dead guys don’t fight back. If not done now, it will have to be done later at a very heavy cost! Have not we learned that the Euro-thrash and fellow travelers have been here before with their history or they’re just too busy flying around seeking Thranus unable to notice?
Hey Hey, LBJ,,,
Obama has to provide security for the Caspian Sea pipeline.
All courtesy of American blood. What a hypocrite.
Me too, but I swear to you, I read today that Gibbs said Obama hadn't yet read McChrystal's latest update; that the update was making its way up the chain of command. !!!
Maybe Obama don’t want to many U.S troops on American soil.
They could get in the way.
___________________________________________
That’s right.
His economic policy is to try to imitate tactics that didn’t succeed when FDR tried them, and it looks like his war strategy will imitate LBJ’s strategy of gradual escalation.
First off the Obama campaign’s dominant mantras about Iraq and Afghanistan were that (a)Iraq was the bad, “unnecessary”, un-winable war, (b) that the war in Afghanistan was only floundering due to insufficient troop commitment and (c)with that commitment alone (forget whatever Pakistan does or doesn’t do or whatever Karzai does or doesn’t do) the Taliban could be defeated in Afghanistan.
But, the reality, even with changes in Pakistan and Afghanistan is demonstrating NOT that the general commitment to Afghanistan was wrong, but that the Obamanaughts ideas about that commitment were naive and maybe even politically dangerous (oversold).
Someone - I think it was that ole GW Bush - said at one time that the situation in Iraq may be like that in Israel for a time, no matter how many troops we may or may not have there. I think that is probably true in Afghanistan as well.
Just as we have not completely eliminated the mob or organized crime in America, and just as we continue to battle them as much as possible all the time, the Israelis, the Iraqis and the Afghans may have internal terrorists disrupting their civil societies for many years to come.
It takes very few actual terrorists in number, to keep their activities going in spite of huge organizations arrayed against them. Those huge organizations are trying to protect everyone, everywhere, all the time, while the terrorists must only strike a few places, at random times, on random occasions and even without actually upending the sovereign authorities arrayed against them, and still be rightly seen as a major threat.
It is a “war” they do not actually have to “win” in order to continue to be “successful”, while we will never be permitted to say we “win” unless they are totally, irreversibly annihilated everywhere; which will likely never happen.
The most we can hope for - as Bush said - will be for Iraq (and Afghanistan) to eventually, in time, control this problem as independently and as well as the Israelis control their terrorist security situation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.