Posted on 11/01/2009 7:20:58 PM PST by kristinn
The Obama administration is considering an almost complete surrender in Afghanistan, if the report this weekend by the BBC's Katty Kay is accurate.
Speaking as a panelist on the Chris Matthews Show, a weekend public affairs broadcast, Kay reported on the internal debate at the White House, "There are real questions being asked, I think, about whether even with a big injection of troops this is a real country, a real war that you can win.
"And there's a new phrase which is floating around the White House which is 'minimum security'. That we're not actually aiming for a country which is stable that we are in control of, but we are aiming for a minimum amount of security and perhaps even a negotiated settlement with the Taliban."
This would tie in with reports that Obama has concluded the U.S. cannot beat the Taliban and that he has requested new studies this week, one of each province to determine which ones may be ceded to the Taliban and another for troop levels other than those requested by Gen. McChrystal over two months ago.
Kay's remarks start at the 19:10 minute in the backward clock on the video. She describes three different views on the situation in Afghanistan that have been presented to Obama: The military needs a large injection of troops to perform the current strategy; even with more troops Afghanistan will never be winnable; and "'we have no choice but to win this war' and that is what President Obama said back in March."
Obama has delayed making his decision such that it most likely will not be announced until the end of November, three months into the twelve month window left to win the war Gen. McChrystal stated in August.
Troop casualties in Afghanistan have skyrocketed in the past three months with over 1000 being wounded, and a reported 58 service members killed this past month making it the deadlist month of the eight-year long war.
On Friday, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs bragged Obama has spent almost twenty hours in meetings on Afghanistan since August.
Words fail me.....God help the Afghanis, especially the females, in the wrong provinces.
This makes me sick, but what else would one expect from these frauds.
The Russians were. They might have eventually killed all the Afghans, but they never came even close to defeating them. Maybe this is why:
kabed et-avikha v'et-imekha lema'an ya'arikhun yameikha al ha'adama asher-Adonai eloheikha noten lakh:
Or, in English:
Honour thy father and thy mother, that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
Tribal cultures have a deep loyalty to each other and their land. They have established lines of communications, deep knowledge of terrain and the capabilities of their brethren, long practiced preparation for war, an understood chain of command...
In short, you may kill a tribal culture, but they're very hard to defeat. All the Afghans needed to defeat the Russians were relatively unsophisticated modern weapons.
Nodding...
It was at least two hours long!
That’s more then 100 mins longer with the General in denmark right after the Obama olympic bid.
On your terms. Put another way, the purpose is to get the enemy to bend to your will, rather than the other way around. Stopping fighting is only part of that.
islam will (attempt to) dominate the world - and I believe 0 is a willing accomplice to this end.
Remember, he can recite the islamic something-rather in perfect Arabic, and he believes the muslim call to prayer is the sweetest sound on Earth at sunrise.
Will Hillary use this to resign & run against BHO?
Then JFK would take her place - could it even get worse ?
He never did. With his father, or the man he says is his father, a British subject when he, Junior, was born, he isn't eligible.
He could not longer hurt a fellow muslim as the sweetest sound to his ears was the muslim call to prayers......
I can’t take much more. My tear ducts are dry.
We did not desert the Kurds, we protected them under the norther "no fly zone". They were doing pretty well. We deserted the Marsh Arabs, Shiites mostly, who Saddam pounded the stuffing out of, including draining their marshes. That came about because Swartzkopf allowed the Iraqis to fly helicopters, ostensibly because we'd knocked out all the bridges accross the Tigres and Euphrates rivers in that part of the country. But they were used to attack Saddam's enemies instead, and Bush Sr did not authorize enforcement of the no fly zones against helicopters.
And didn’t he also say something about standing with the muslims when the going to rough? Well here it is, and he’s standing with them as promised (the only campaign promise he’s kept?)
Obama is not trustworthy to lead men in war. Given that, I would rather see them come home NOW than see Obama kill a lot more of them and then surrender.
Elections have consequences and we are going to pay for having elected this skull full of mush traitor while we are under attack by Muslims.
It may be difficult to define "winning" if Afghanistan but I believe that the ramifications of not "winning" will become painfully obvious very quickly.
Kristinn, I’ve really appreciated all the articles you’ve been writing and posting of late. I’ve been spreading them around to our network of folks every time I spot one. Very solid work you’re doing. Thank you!
Of course with the Pakistanis under the buss, the Al Qaeda will get their nukes.
Then the real fun will begin.
Unfortunately, I am beginning to agree.
His ROE are getting us killed. His lack of a National Security Policy is hindering our missions all over.
Is there a link for all the above or did you write this?
crap!
If this is true, I hope McCrystal resigns.
ZerO sighed, Afghans died.
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.