Afghanistan now is Obama's war

SFGate: Politics Blog ^ | 7/15/9 | Helen Thomas

[SmithL]

I had an historical flashback recently when I read a Washington Post news story about how the U.S. commander in Afghanistan thinks he may need many thousands more troops to win the war.

Shades of Vietnam. Do we ever learn?

It brought back memories of the late Gen. William C. Westmoreland, the U.S. commander in Southeast Asia, who kept escalating the troop numbers after the 1967 Tet offensive in Vietnam. His strategy produced a debacle for us.

When the besieged Westmoreland asked for 240,000 more troops, President Lyndon B. Johnson was shocked. The command in Vietnam had been giving him rosy reports about U.S. military progress that he wanted to believe.

Johnson had been preparing to run for reelection in 1968. But after the devastating Westmoreland request, Johnson threw in the towel and made the electrifying announcement that he would not seek another term.

Fast forward to Afghanistan, 2009.

Seven years into the war there, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the new U.S. commander in Afghanistan, is in the middle of a 60-day assessment of the war, due next month. But the Washington Post article says he has been giving Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates weekly updates about the need to bolster the size of the Afghan army and police force and the likely deployment of thousands more U.S. trainers and advisers.

The present Pentagon plan calls for about 68,000 U.S. troops to be in Afghanistan by late this year.

Afghanistan, which once harbored Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda training camps, has been on Obama's agenda since his presidential campaign. Now it's his war -- big time -- even as it takes on the appearance of another quagmire for U.S. forces in their effort to quell the Taliban and al Qaeda fighters.

[SmithL]

Consider the source.

[Rodebrecht]

When will the “anti-war” left begin protesting again?

[max americana]

Every war to a liberal is an automatic quagmire.

[Rodebrecht]

Unless it was a Democrat's war coughKosovocough.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Every war to a liberal is an automatic quagmire.

. . . because otherwise valor would avail for something - and every good liberal knows that nothing comes of doing - the only thing that matters is talking.

[DeusExMachina05]

But..but...Afghanistan was the good war and Iraq was the bad war..right????
This should be good, getting the popcorn. Too bad our national security and the troops lives are in the hands of these fools.

[DuncanWaring]

Even I know the most memorable Tet offensive was in 1968, not 1967.

But, the dementia was probably starting to set in even then.

[VietVet]

For a reporter, Thomas managed to get almost every fact wrong about the Viet Nam War.

The Tet “General Uprising” was in 1968, not ‘67.

Johnson was already contemplating not running for re-election in the Fall of ‘67, according to Washington based columnists, and the gossip going around D.C. He made his final decision and annoucement after losing a primary in New England; Which he lost in spite of getting a majority of the vote, interestingly enough.

Westmoreland was far from “beseiged” after the ‘68 Tet offensive; It was one of the worst defeats the Viet Cong suffered. Of course, it wasn’t reported that way.

And so on. But what else should we expect from Helen Thomas?

VietVet

[nufsed]

On March 12, McCarthy won 42% of the primary vote to Johnson's 49%, an amazingly strong showing for such a challenger, and one which gave McCarthy's campaign legitimacy and momentum. The momentum ended, however, when Senator Kennedy announced his candidacy four days later, on March 16, as McCarthy supporters cried betrayal and vowed to defeat Kennedy. Thereafter McCarthy and Kennedy would engage in an increasingly bitter series of state primaries; although Kennedy won most of the primaries, he could never shake McCarthy and his devoted following of antiwar activists, which included many Hollywood celebrities such as Paul Newman, Barbra Streisand, and Burt Lancaster.

On March 31, 1968, following the New Hampshire primaries and Kennedy's entry into the election, the President startled the nation by announcing he would not seek re-election. (Not discussed publicly at the time was Johnson's concern that he might not survive another term - Johnson's health was poor, and he had suffered a serious heart attack in 1955.

[Brad from Tennessee]

[Maybe the president should have asked the Russians. . .how it was that a superpower like the Soviet Union could have been forced to retreat from Afghanistan in the 1980s, despite its modern military might.]

The Stinger missile.

[max americana]

Yup, hence the liberal mantra:

“freedom for me but not for thee..”