AMF: Afghan Frustration
Hey, folks! Just a few items for this week's AMF.
Roman emperors' amphitheatre found (BBC, BBC, Times)
AP: Powerful Cleric Slams Saudi Arabia Coed University
CNN: Kurdish play to premiere in Turkish theater
BBC: 'Different' Afghan strategy urged
Guardian: Putin in the firing lineWhile Medvedev isn't currently presenting a serious challenge, Putin faces looming problems that could be his undoing
Times: Forces’ favourite Sandbag flies in to his new home - After months of waiting and working, the British Army's dog mascot and a few others have finally been pulled out of Iraq for a new life in the United Kingdom.
Times: Forget the Lisbon treaty. Europe’s on the right path
Wired Danger Room: Video: On the Front [Afghan] Lines with Echo Company
* * *
Beyond those stories, there are a handful of stories about Afghanistan that I'd like to comment on, briefly.
AFP: White House slams Republicans on Afghanistan
Times: White House split on second Afghan troop surge
Michael Yon (in the Washington Times): The Greatest Afghan War
I'm very concerned about Afghanistan. Congressional Democrats played politics with the Iraq War - I'm not alleging, I'm saying it as fact. All the while, their claim - from Senator Kerry in 2004 to Senators Clinton and Obama in '08 - was that President Bush had "taken his eyes off of the real fight in Afghanistan" for an "elective war in Iraq" - a war that President Clinton had continued in the late 1990's, and that American military policy had been based around the anticipation of since the cessation of major hostilities in 1991. Afghanistan has been the sacred cow of left wing defense policy for around six years now, and their criticism of the handling of Afghanistan formed a major portion of the Democrat political platform in the '08 election.
Afghanistan is being called Obama's War. Now that President Bush is out of office, President Obama's allies in Congress are openly against doing what it would take to win in Afghanistan - Speaker Pelosi, for example. Now, President Obama, who has already stalled twice on determining his "strategy" for Afghanistan, appears to be publicly dismissing the advice and requests of his top generals. Our NATO allies, who were entrusted with accomplishing the mission, have largely failed, and are likely to fall out one by one in the next two or three years.
I understand the arguments for pulling out of Afghanistan; but, quite frankly, I find them to be unacceptable. Beyond the simple stupid patriotism of wanting to demonstrate that America can accomplish anything it sets its national will to accomplishing, abandoning or failing to resource the war in Afghanistan would leave both Afghanistan and Pakistan as continued security risks. Can we really afford the economic, political, and social fallout of another 9/11? I'm not one to constantly use 9/11 as a rallying call, but let's remember what happened to America's economy, and its standing abroad, in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. Is the risk of allowing that kind of disaster to happen again, through pure inaction and political lethargy, really one that America should be willing to take?
I've heard conservatives who have praised President Obama for authorizing the first troop surge in Afghanistan. They obviously haven't been paying attention, because President Obama authorized about half the number of troops that the generals were asking for - enough to make the public think that he has a plan for Afghanistan, but not enough to satisfy the manpower needs. If President Obama continues to play politics with resourcing for the Afghan War, both American and Afghan lives will be lost, and to no justifiable end.
If President Obama, who championed the Afghan War during the campaign, isn't willing to do what it takes to win, we should stop putting American troops in harm's way in Afghanistan and pull them out. However, what he should actually do is give the generals the resources and the troops that they require to successfully complete the mission, regardless of the timetable; meanwhile, he should take off the gloves with respect to Pakistan and Iran, because schizophrenic Pakistan and malignant Iran are big parts of the problem as well, and must be part of the eventual solution. It's the right thing to do for America, it's the right thing to do for the Afghan people, and it's imperative that President Obama figure this out. He was full of talk in 2008, and if he wants any moderates to even consider voting for him in 2012, this would be a good way of countering the swelling assessment that he is, indeed, all talk. America needs a Commander-in-Chief with a backbone, not a telemprompter; and America needs to win in Afghanistan, for our sake and for theirs.
* * *
I had intended to post something else today, but it can wait until Monday. Be sure to check back Monday, because in addition to the undisclosed item that's being delayed from today, I'll be posting my most recent chat transcript with the Crypto King - always exciting, always entertaining. Have a great weekend, folks!
Beyond those stories, there are a handful of stories about Afghanistan that I'd like to comment on, briefly.
I'm very concerned about Afghanistan. Congressional Democrats played politics with the Iraq War - I'm not alleging, I'm saying it as fact. All the while, their claim - from Senator Kerry in 2004 to Senators Clinton and Obama in '08 - was that President Bush had "taken his eyes off of the real fight in Afghanistan" for an "elective war in Iraq" - a war that President Clinton had continued in the late 1990's, and that American military policy had been based around the anticipation of since the cessation of major hostilities in 1991. Afghanistan has been the sacred cow of left wing defense policy for around six years now, and their criticism of the handling of Afghanistan formed a major portion of the Democrat political platform in the '08 election.
Afghanistan is being called Obama's War. Now that President Bush is out of office, President Obama's allies in Congress are openly against doing what it would take to win in Afghanistan - Speaker Pelosi, for example. Now, President Obama, who has already stalled twice on determining his "strategy" for Afghanistan, appears to be publicly dismissing the advice and requests of his top generals. Our NATO allies, who were entrusted with accomplishing the mission, have largely failed, and are likely to fall out one by one in the next two or three years.
I understand the arguments for pulling out of Afghanistan; but, quite frankly, I find them to be unacceptable. Beyond the simple stupid patriotism of wanting to demonstrate that America can accomplish anything it sets its national will to accomplishing, abandoning or failing to resource the war in Afghanistan would leave both Afghanistan and Pakistan as continued security risks. Can we really afford the economic, political, and social fallout of another 9/11? I'm not one to constantly use 9/11 as a rallying call, but let's remember what happened to America's economy, and its standing abroad, in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. Is the risk of allowing that kind of disaster to happen again, through pure inaction and political lethargy, really one that America should be willing to take?
I've heard conservatives who have praised President Obama for authorizing the first troop surge in Afghanistan. They obviously haven't been paying attention, because President Obama authorized about half the number of troops that the generals were asking for - enough to make the public think that he has a plan for Afghanistan, but not enough to satisfy the manpower needs. If President Obama continues to play politics with resourcing for the Afghan War, both American and Afghan lives will be lost, and to no justifiable end.
If President Obama, who championed the Afghan War during the campaign, isn't willing to do what it takes to win, we should stop putting American troops in harm's way in Afghanistan and pull them out. However, what he should actually do is give the generals the resources and the troops that they require to successfully complete the mission, regardless of the timetable; meanwhile, he should take off the gloves with respect to Pakistan and Iran, because schizophrenic Pakistan and malignant Iran are big parts of the problem as well, and must be part of the eventual solution. It's the right thing to do for America, it's the right thing to do for the Afghan people, and it's imperative that President Obama figure this out. He was full of talk in 2008, and if he wants any moderates to even consider voting for him in 2012, this would be a good way of countering the swelling assessment that he is, indeed, all talk. America needs a Commander-in-Chief with a backbone, not a telemprompter; and America needs to win in Afghanistan, for our sake and for theirs.
I had intended to post something else today, but it can wait until Monday. Be sure to check back Monday, because in addition to the undisclosed item that's being delayed from today, I'll be posting my most recent chat transcript with the Crypto King - always exciting, always entertaining. Have a great weekend, folks!
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home