Posted on 09/19/2009 7:09:27 AM PDT by MestaMachine
Six months after it announced its strategy for Afghanistan, the Obama administration is sending mixed signals about its objectives there and how many troops are needed to achieve them.
The conflicting messages are drawing increasing ire from U.S. commanders in Afghanistan and frustrating military leaders, who are trying to figure out how to demonstrate that they're making progress in the 12-18 months that the administration has given them.
Adding to the frustration, according to officials in Kabul and Washington, are White House and Pentagon directives made over the last six weeks that Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. military commander in Afghanistan, not submit his request for as many as 45,000 additional troops because the administration isn't ready for it.> snip
Three officers at the Pentagon and in Kabul told McClatchy Newspapers that the McChrystal they know would resign before he would stand behind a faltering policy that he thought would endanger his forces or the strategy. >snip
The White House still hasn't decided how much political capital it wants to invest in Afghanistan, and it considers a health care overhaul, financial regulatory revisions and energy policy its priorities, the senior defense official said.
In Kabul, however, U.S. commanders said they thought that Obama's strategy was based on McChrystal's assessment of what he needs. "We thought that bringing McChrystal here was their strategy," one said.
Those officials said that taking time could be costly because the U.S. risked losing the Afghans' support. "Dithering is just as destructive as 10 car bombs," the senior official in Kabul said. "They have seen us leave before. They are really good at picking the right side to ally with."
(Excerpt) Read more at miamiherald.com ...
•Obama has yet to define U.S. objectives in Afghanistan
Obama has yet to define U.S. objectives in AfghanistanAs the Obama administration and Congress begin a heated debate about how many more American troops to send to Afghanistan, military observers, soldiers on the ground there and some top Pentagon officials are warning that dispatching even tens of thousands more soldiers and Marines might not ensure success.
Some even fear that deploying more U.S. troops, especially in the wake of a U.S. airstrike last week that killed and wounded scores of Afghan civilians, would convince more Afghans that the Americans are occupiers rather than allies and relieve the pressure on the Afghan government to improve its own security forces.
The heart of the problem, soldiers fighting in Afghanistan and some officials in Washington told McClatchy Newspapers, is that neither Barack Obama's White House nor the Pentagon has clearly defined America's mission in Afghanistan. As a result, some soldiers in the field said, they aren't sure what their objectives are.
Obama is trying to figure out how to lose in the worst possible way.
PING!
This is unconscionable! o is riding his media horse to 5, count them, FIVE Sunday TV News shows to talk about deathcare and evil insurance, while our Troops wait...and DIE!!!
He is MURDERING our Troops. This cannot stand. The military MUST do something!
Kinda like the NY Mets
Obama is not willing to do what needs to be done in order to win.
Part of his plan to de-develop the USA.
This Marxist and traitor is putting the country in harms way more than just the examples you’ve indicated.
As Obama waffles, SOLDIERS DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Right- the TOTUS plans to dither with “his war” for 12-18 months as many brave Americans (and allies) risk their lives and DIE waiting for him to figure out what to do
God forbid the marxists should employ Petraeus or any other “Bush” advisor
Gates as SecDef, you are a massive sellout. Shame on you, sir.
There is NO curent govt official now worthy of issuing orders to risk life to even the lowest ranking American soldier.
God Bless and protect them, so many are just teenagers and others, on their 3-4-5th tours i that hellish place as the American values they fight for are under vicious attack right at home
The man is a clueless I-N-C-O-M-P-E-T-E-N-T
Somebody in Congress needs to get up on their hindlegs and demand a coherent policy from the White House.
might be a good time for career military to retire....
like they did in droves under Clinton.
obama doesnt think we are spending enough
I have come to believe this myself. As the someone said in the article, dithering is worse than 10 car bombs.
The Taliban is watching our European Allies pussy out. They can read the Fringe Media and see that support for Obama's war in Afghanistan is flagging. And they just saw what we did to the Czechs and Poles.
Pulling out is bad-- staying in but not fighting to win really will make Afghanistan "Obama's Vietnam."
I have come to believe this myself. As the someone said in the article, dithering is worse than 10 car bombs.
The Taliban is watching our European Allies pussy out. They can read the Fringe Media and see that support for Obama's war in Afghanistan is flagging. And they just saw what we did to the Czechs and Poles.
Pulling out is bad-- staying in but not fighting to win really will make Afghanistan "Obama's Vietnam."
In HIS view, he is winning by weakening this country in every possible way. Noice that he won't reveal his long term vision for America because his goal is to tear it down.
The teleprompter needs to show some leadership here. Either support a plan for victory or get out now. Anything in between can lead to another Vietnam. I would greatly prefer a path to victory, but it’s likely to be costly. Mountainous terrain evens the playing field for friend and foe.
With recent events of the potential prosecution of CIA agents and former Bush attorneys, granting rights to terrorists, elimination of the “global war on terror,” and the scrapping of the Eastern Europe missle defense program; I suspect our TOTUS will get out now. He doesn’t want to repeat the mistakes of LBJ, nor, evidently, does he care about the potentially weakened image of American resolve against our enemies.
I’ve always believed that America is far safer from a position of strength. Our enemies need to respect and fear us— especially the crazy ones. Although I much prefer a victory in Afghanistan, a “get out now” decision won’t bother me as much as a half-hearted play-not-to-lose strategy.
I want America to succeed even if it benefits our president. Our soldiers bleed no matter who’s in office.
We simply cannot afford to lose in Afghanistan.
The consequences would be devastating to us.
We’ve already suffered a serious setback on the missile shield debacle which is sending the wrong message to our enemies and scaring our friends.
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.