Obama’s decision: 34,000 troops to Afghanistan
posted at 8:48 am on November 24, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
McClatchy reports that Barack Obama made his decision last night on Afghanistan, and has decided on a number between McChrystal’s medium- and high-risk plans. Instead of 40,000 or 20,000, Obama will send an additional 34,000 troops to bolster the NATO forces and employ the counterinsurgency strategy that he publicly demanded for two years and made official US policy in March. However, McClatchy also reports that Obama won’t announce the new numbers until next week:
President Barack Obama met Monday evening with his national security team to finalize a plan to dispatch some 34,000 additional U.S. troops over the next year to what he’s called “a war of necessity” in Afghanistan, U.S. officials told McClatchy.
Obama is expected to announce his long-awaited decision on Dec. 1, followed by meetings on Capitol Hill aimed at winning congressional support amid opposition by some Democrats who are worried about the strain on the U.S. Treasury and whether Afghanistan has become a quagmire, the officials said.
The U.S. officials all spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the issue publicly and because, one official said, the White House is incensed by leaks on its Afghanistan policy that didn’t originate in the White House.
Perhaps part of their reluctance would also be that Obama threatened to fire anyone who leaked information about his decision. The comment about “not originating in the White House” seems odd, too. Did the White House want to pin the leaks on the Pentagon? Sourcing these as “US officials” makes it as generic as possible; that term could apply to an EPA clerk.
The new plan contains the “off-ramps” Obama demanded from his national security team. Those begin to arrive as early as June, according to McClatchy, giving the US a few easy outs if Obama chooses to retreat. If the “political side” or the war itself doesn’t improve, Obama apparently wants to get out altogether. In other words, this looks like McChrystal’s last stand. Next week, McChrystal will return to DC in order to help Obama roll this out, where Obama will almost certainly get significant pushback from Democrats in Congress over the cost and the need to keep fighting.
The increase in troops is a good decision, but the off-ramps almost completely undermine it. The point in extending our footprint is to win the trust of the local communities and prove our reliability in providing them security, which is the central thrust of McChrystal’s COIN strategy. By getting them to trust our commitment, we can get them to help fight the Taliban themselves, as we did with the Anbar Awakening in Iraq against al-Qaeda, and greatly improve the intel we get from the locals. If we send 34,000 more troops but give ourselves a six-month time frame for success or bug-out, the locals will very quickly come to the realization that allying with us will be suicide. The COIN strategy only worked in Iraq because George W. Bush was adamant that we would stay until we won.
A Commander in Chief doesn’t need “off-ramps.” Any President can call an end to a deployment based on his own judgment. Putting these conditions into the American strategy signals weakness — a desire to pull out without getting blamed for the decision. Obama wants to be off the hook for an eventual withdrawal by claiming that he’s forced to do it because of these benchmark failures. And if Obama’s that keen to retreat, he should just do it now.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
I hope he does send the troops…and all the other support necessary with orders to pursue the war and win it.
I have my doubts, but I want to win and want to have the absolute backing of the WH to win this war…if not then don’t send the troops.
If this is a “photo-op”, another diversion, if his heart is not in it…then don’t send the troops, bring them home.
Send them to win, for victory on the battlefield, not a victory at the polls.
right2bright on November 24, 2009 at 9:38 AM
This should guarantee him a second term – which was the whole purpose of the exercise.
OldEnglish on November 24, 2009 at 9:39 AM
Slightly off topic:
I had to get a ride back from the car dealership this am. A neighbor gave me a ride. First thing out of his mouth was that he was in his office yesterday when a coworker got a phone call telling her that her brother had been killed in Afghanistan. Inconsolible. His son is at West Point so you can imagine the worry on top of the grief.
I couldn’t help but wonder if this inexcusible dithering could have prevented this soldier’s death.
It is clear to me that Obama is making these decisions through the lens of domestic partisan politics. Inexcusible.
turfmann on November 24, 2009 at 9:39 AM
We need to commit to this. I don’t blame Obama for having so called “off ramps”, unless he’s already planning on withdrawing at the first sign of further trouble.
therightwinger on November 24, 2009 at 9:40 AM
It’s amazing how they worry so much about the financial cost of this war, and like to take their sweet ass time in deciding what to do. Yet they are in such a hurry to try and pass a gov. controlled healthcare bill. O’reily calls them progressives; I call them regressive tyrants.
Lets not forget it takes 6 months or more to get the troops ready for deployment; My older sister was recently deployed to Afghanistan and I remember her telling me about is months ago, so with the 34,000 being deployed I wouldn’t be surprising if he changed his mind or he just saying it to stop people from bugging him about it. He’s very slick in trying to blame others, even in his administration for his dumb decisions.
jaboba on November 24, 2009 at 9:40 AM
And I’m sure Democrats played no part in Bush’s reluctance to tackle Afghanistan (with them already fighting him tooth and nail on Iraq trying to sink his presidency rather than deal with the situation)?
I’m glad Obama has decided to send 34,000 troops – but it undercuts the mission to build in explicit ‘off-ramps’. The enemy will simply adjust their strategy to try to get us to not meet enough of these to make Obama call it quits – it’s easy to play chicken with someone when they’ve already told you they will give up after a specified point.
gwelf on November 24, 2009 at 9:41 AM
Um, this is a tad embarassing, but would someone please explain what “off ramps” means?
ProfessorMiao on November 24, 2009 at 9:41 AM
It’s what the liberals have been whining for years regarding Iraq – ‘goals’ that have to be met in order for us to stay in the fight. Usually things like “Iraq/Afghanistan needs to be fully functioning and independent democracy by date X”.
gwelf on November 24, 2009 at 9:43 AM
Six months? That would be in the winter when not much moves in or out and the Taliban pretty much hunkers down it its caves?
Wethal on November 24, 2009 at 9:43 AM
“Exit strategies” if “benchmarks” are not met.
Wethal on November 24, 2009 at 9:44 AM
Exactly. And I wonder if those 34,000 also include the 7,000 that were already committed to Kandahar as part of the NATO Bridging Strategy from under the Bush Administration.
Thanks to Donks like you making us fight the war with one hand tied behind our back (right next to that knife you guys have pointed there). And BTW, you’re irrelevant at this point.
hawkdriver on November 24, 2009 at 9:45 AM
Professor, that’s not a stupid question. Its a stupid analogy on the part of the administration to liken their reservations to reverse their decision with using an exit on a highway.
Highway to hell, that is.
turfmann on November 24, 2009 at 9:45 AM
Here’s a little something for Bleeds Blue on November 24, 2009 at 9:15 AM:
Personally, I detest politicians of ANY party being directly involved in the prosecution of ANY military activity beyond the point of its genesis. You continue to invoke the politics of George Bush in defense of the politics of Barack Obama when your concern should be for the folks IN THEATER, who are actually getting the mission accomplished. I’ve spoken and written AGAINST the decisions of George W. Bush and now am exercising that same Right with regard to Barack Obama. The difference being; I’M NOT DEFENDING GEORGE W. BUSH, while you insist on defending Barack Obama.
I served in ‘Nam, my two sons served in Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom, and I have a granddaughter ready to deploy to Afghanistan early next year. I have a CLUE as to what this is all about and it should NOT be partisan politics.
GoldenEagle4444 on November 24, 2009 at 9:46 AM
You can bet he’s not sincere — I think this whole thing’s just a smokescreen. The BO08 is a coward and a fool.
I haven’t heard the “Great Uniter” meme, repeated ad nauseum during the campaign, since he got elected. Could libtards be coming to the realization that his utter lack of leadership, his cowardly attempt to please both sides, is, in fact, divisive?
Naah. They’ll just have another glass of Kool-Aid.
mr.blacksheep on November 24, 2009 at 9:46 AM
I guess we should be comforted in the fact that most highway accidents occur near offramps.
Good Lt on November 24, 2009 at 9:46 AM
why doesn’t the enemy just retreat and wait for the ‘off ramps’?
tarpon on November 24, 2009 at 9:47 AM
Ed’s last paragraph sums it up pretty well:
gh on November 24, 2009 at 9:49 AM
Hey – I thought this was Boooooooooooooooosh’s fault?
/ Bleeds Blue
gwelf on November 24, 2009 at 9:50 AM
Obama is preparing to make an announcement on sending additional troops, actually hasn’t officially made the announcement, won’t have all of the troops deployed for a year and Bleeds declares the war is all but won.
Wars are won by soldiers, not by self-aggrandizing politicians who will run for the hills if a poll number starts to slide.
What’s it like to live in your dream world? Are the unicorns rainbow-colored there?
fogw on November 24, 2009 at 9:51 AM
Like all the great military leaders of history, the BO08 recognizes the importance to morale of keeping the path to retreat open, much like the little-publicized off-ramps they had installed on the beaches at Normandy.
mr.blacksheep on November 24, 2009 at 9:51 AM
Great post.
gwelf on November 24, 2009 at 9:52 AM
They will, right after the NYT publishes a complete list of the “leaked” benchmarks.
Bishop on November 24, 2009 at 9:52 AM
“to finalize a plan”
“is expected to announce”
News? Quit projecting expectations as determinations. Until Obama announces, it’s all hype. After Obama announces, it’s hype to the degree that he meant it when he said it before he changed his mind.
maverick muse on November 24, 2009 at 9:52 AM
Demand that Obama rescind his rules of engagement handcuffs on our troops.
PC KILLS AMERICANS
maverick muse on November 24, 2009 at 9:53 AM
They are working a carefully coordinated plan. NOTHING that this man-child is doing is “by accident” or without planning. Soros has been working this plan for years.
OSUBuciz1 on November 24, 2009 at 9:54 AM
It’s the path Obama will be taking when HE EXITS 1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
Rovin on November 24, 2009 at 9:55 AM
Aristocracy.
LibTired on November 24, 2009 at 9:55 AM
There is some serious BS going on here.Most of these troops have been on the deployment rotation for nearly a year already.The big movement is in April 2010.I was notified 8 months ago and we have been preparing ever since.He is going to take credit for doing something that was decided months ago.
docflash on November 24, 2009 at 9:56 AM
Indeed I am not declaring the war won. I am deeply skeptical about our Afghanistan adventure. But I am pleased that, for the first time in many years, we seem to have a CiC who is paying attention, and a general in the field who has a plan.
As much as you guys hate Obama, you have to admit that he’s doing a far better job in Afghanistan than his predecessor.
Bleeds Blue on November 24, 2009 at 9:57 AM
Ummm, and drop a nuclear bomb?
Do you know what a COIN strategy means? No, it’s not mentioned in Palin’s book. You would need some real education for that.
rightistliberal on November 24, 2009 at 9:58 AM
You troll. The situation was stable to a point as Foriegn Fighter concentrated on Iraq. The reason Afghanistan is more active now is because for one, they have shifted their forces here and two, they have seen the weakness in the changing political climate in America for teh last three years.
You can generalize and rationalize all you want but the fact of the matter is we and George Bush have fought our hearts out on both fronts and the biggest impediment to the war has in fact been idiots like you and liberals in Congress pretty much the the enemy daily to just be patient. Kill a couple more American troops and we’ll give you the front page. We want President Bush and his administration to look bad and we don’t much like the troops who are fighting for him either.
You have blood on your hands as much as George Bush, Troll.
Freaking hateful liberal dick. ANd what you said about Trig Palin the other day ought to cause to kick your evil cold-blooded liberal donk ass off of here forever.
You really have no idea on the depths of contempt you guys stir in me.
hawkdriver on November 24, 2009 at 9:59 AM
Oh no….what did he say?
Bishop on November 24, 2009 at 10:00 AM
To get into a game with losing strategy ready. WOW.
DISGRACE.
antisocial on November 24, 2009 at 10:00 AM
…pretty much “telling”…
hawkdriver on November 24, 2009 at 10:01 AM
Thanks to everybody who helped me understand the significance of the phrase “off ramps” in this context. I can hardly wait to hear what the benchmarks and time lines are. ‘Set up to fail’ comes to mind… I’m sure this will help to improve morale in theater. (sarc tag there)
ProfessorMiao on November 24, 2009 at 10:01 AM
Sire, your point is well taken. But there is a reason why the C-I-C outranks the Generals. The idea that Obama or any other president should just rubber stamp what the general may want is simply impossible.
rightistliberal on November 24, 2009 at 10:02 AM
You pretend to know what you are posting about…but you throw this in.
What a strange and convoluted way of comprehending what has historically happened…just pull stuff of an anti-Bush website and regurgitate it, without any problem.
We are reminded of how the left thinks with the revelation that the recovery figures are so wrong…but they won’t change the figures on the website, even though proven to be totally wrong, because they “don’t want to confuse the people”. Lies from a liberal is more powerful then the truth.
When you finally finish school, I hope you will be educated enough not to follow the patterns of your liberal friends.
right2bright on November 24, 2009 at 10:03 AM
So according to crazies here, Obama who has sent 20000 additional troops within this year, and is perhaps sending another 34000 has a secret plan to lose!
And then they feel offended when I call them Kossians of the Right.
rightistliberal on November 24, 2009 at 10:03 AM
This should guarantee him a second term – which was the whole purpose of the exercise.
OldEnglish on November 24, 2009 at 9:39 AM
Not if what i just read on Atlas Shrugs gets out. They are reporting that Obama has our Ambassader negotiating territorys with Taliban. If this is true ,I hope it gets screamed from the rooftops. If true, that is Treason and total betrayal of American Policy. I know I should`nt be shocked but I am.
LSUMama on November 24, 2009 at 10:03 AM
Adventure??? Is that what you call people dying for you ass? Despicable moron.
ProfessorMiao on November 24, 2009 at 10:03 AM
“some Democrats who are worried about the strain on the U.S. Treasury”
Heh. Good one.
KS Rex on November 24, 2009 at 10:04 AM
I boggles me that people think President Obama is the one making these actual decisions when he is off spending all his time on the event and campaign trail.
I have just one question, who exactly is running our country right now?
JeffinSac on November 24, 2009 at 10:05 AM
I wonder how much Obey’s comments influenced this decision, not so much about taxing the rich as much as the political reason why the troops have been used by this regime as political pawns.
madmonkphotog on November 24, 2009 at 10:05 AM
Remind me, why did George Bush went to Iraq again?
He took his eyes off the war in Afghanistan. Period.
rightistliberal on November 24, 2009 at 10:06 AM
Must suck going thru life with only a 2 word vocabulary…
Del Dolemonte on November 24, 2009 at 10:06 AM
Errr.do you know what was Anbar awakening about?
rightistliberal on November 24, 2009 at 10:07 AM
Yeah, tell that to the soldiers on the roads getting their asses blown up because obama made the ROE stricter. Tell that to the units who can’t conduct as many ops looking for IED emplacers because your boy diverted billions from operational funds in our theater to stateside programs. That’s ops money and the gas to run them. The AAF will end up owning the roads.
This CinC is an epic fail, and that’s from us here in the freaking thick of it.
Dude, stick with subjects you’re good at, like making fun of special needs children.
hawkdriver on November 24, 2009 at 10:08 AM
another narcissistic leftist parasite bleeting about something he knows nothing about.
elduende on November 24, 2009 at 10:08 AM
That kid has no idea of the hate he spews…he thinks it is just his policy. Liberals do not understand how hateful, how truly hateful their beliefs are. They don’t understand how their leaders honestly despise the military and all that it stands for.
He is the type that in a crowd would begin cheering for the death of our soldiers…they are so easily manipulated.
When he grows up, we just pray he understands what sacrifice means…
right2bright on November 24, 2009 at 10:08 AM
“I am deeply skeptical about our Afghanistan adventure.”
This is a perfect example of the liberal mindset—WAR is an “adventure”.????
(note to bleeding blue: Harry Potter is an adventure.)
Rovin on November 24, 2009 at 10:09 AM
Ooh, I see Mom taught you 2 more words. Good for her!
Del Dolemonte on November 24, 2009 at 10:10 AM
A lot of high level Al Quaida operatives seemed to have been killed in this ‘diversion’.
gwelf on November 24, 2009 at 10:10 AM
Do you know the first rule of COIN operations? It is to win the hearts and minds which means laying off the population…go and read the Good General’s report first! Go and read about COIN next.
Good lord. but then you guys are anti-elite! Knowledge, college education, reading such things bad in Palin land.
rightistliberal on November 24, 2009 at 10:10 AM
It took him HOW LONG? to split the difference?
Willie on November 24, 2009 at 10:10 AM
Amazes me how they still can’t get over Bush.
Bush wouldn’t have had to do what he did if Clinton hadn’t cigared an intern in the Oval Office.
mr.blacksheep on November 24, 2009 at 10:11 AM
Really? Sure, the ones who joined AQ in Mesopotamia after the invasion.
Most of the AQ brass which has been killed has been killed in Pakistan.
rightistliberal on November 24, 2009 at 10:12 AM
Not another one…another one that has not read history…but reads the media matters or huffpo sites?
In case you haven’t heard…Iraq had free elections, you don’t know about that?
right2bright on November 24, 2009 at 10:12 AM
Why should I care if Iraq has free elections or not? China does not have free elections or elections of any kind. We planning to invade them?
rightistliberal on November 24, 2009 at 10:14 AM
Yeah, it is always a good strategy to reveal your war plans. Heck, they did’nt even have to send in spies.
Johan Klaus on November 24, 2009 at 10:15 AM
Unfortunately, the Left, and the world in general, will be quite happy to go that route. The weakening of american power is paramount in the minds of the majority of people, and Obama is only too happy to oblige.
The last thing that they want to see is another Japan or Germany being lifted up by the US.
OldEnglish on November 24, 2009 at 10:16 AM
Hey, back off. He’s a man of genius. It wasn’t splitting the difference, the BO08 knows exactly, to a man, how many troops are needed. Why, just look at how he predicted unemployment vis a vis the “stimulus” if you find yourself doubting.
mr.blacksheep on November 24, 2009 at 10:16 AM
Right. And every other liberal including Bill Clinton and Al Gore et al were possessing the same concerns as George Bush. Forget that we were operating both Northern and Southern Watch and our jets were constantly being attacked. Forget that they had already had been at war with two of their neighbors and threatened a third. Forget all that was reported and publicly stated by both Republicans and Donks and go on generalizing the George Bush, eye on the ball, yada yada, yeah got it, crap. I’ve been in both theaters and it’s been a global involvement of Islamic extremists pouring into both countries from everywhere.
The only thing George Bush ever took his eyes off of were the freaking traitorous liberals who couldn’t let politics stop at our shoreline.
hawkdriver on November 24, 2009 at 10:17 AM
Ah, I see you’ve gone with the stock answer of “Booooooooosh helped AQ recruit!”. Then how do you explain the fact that the overwhelming majority of AQ operatives in Iraq were not Iraqi and that part of our success in Iraq was turning Iraqi’s against AQ?
gwelf on November 24, 2009 at 10:17 AM
Del Dolemonte on November 24, 2009 at 10:17 AM
From the Lenin/Goebbels school, I see.
Johan Klaus on November 24, 2009 at 10:18 AM
Del Dolemonte on November 24, 2009 at 10:17 AM
You owe me some more Windex, Del. Sweet tea all over the monitor.
kingsjester on November 24, 2009 at 10:19 AM
And they all still deny the fact that Clinton’s Justice Department confirmed a link between Iraq and al Qaeda in 1998. Read the bin Laden indictment.
Del Dolemonte on November 24, 2009 at 10:19 AM
Sweet tea? Must be murder to clean that off.
Del Dolemonte on November 24, 2009 at 10:21 AM
War of necessity and off ramps are terms which don’t go well together.
a capella on November 24, 2009 at 10:21 AM
Considering that benchmarks will start triggering in June it looks like Afghanistan will have about 2x as long to start shaping up as it took Obama to make this decision. Victory!
gwelf on November 24, 2009 at 10:22 AM
I said nothing about Trig. It was his cynical mother whom I found disgusting.
I respect your service and that of your sons and granddaughter. Thank you.
And, while we may disagree on many things, I agree with your last line. This should not be about partisan politics. Which is why I get a little testy about the criticism of Obama who, love him or hate him (Yeah, I know where most of y’all come down on that one) is taking the lives of the men and women in service as seriously as he can while making a very difficult strategic decision.
Bleeds Blue on November 24, 2009 at 10:22 AM
You forgot proletarate and bourgeois.
Johan Klaus on November 24, 2009 at 10:22 AM
Well constructed, Ed.
Obama’s a pathetic weenie, as demonstrated by his silly bowing and curtseying around Asia. Our enemies are laughing at him and our allies have a quizzical look. Happily, he has decided to send his moral and intellectual betters to Afghanistan clean up after him.
Jaibones on November 24, 2009 at 10:24 AM
Yeah, that is why he waited so long to send the additioinal troops, huh?
Johan Klaus on November 24, 2009 at 10:24 AM
Right. And every other liberal including Bill Clinton and Al Gore et al were possessing the same concerns as George Bush. Forget that we were operating both Northern and Southern Watch and our jets were constantly being attacked. Forget that they had already had been at war with two of their neighbors and threatened a third.
Hold on, buddy.
a) Bush was president not Al Gore. How does it matter what Al Gore thought? In case you cared so much about his opinion, you should have let him win in 2000. He did carry the popular vote, you know.
b) Our jets were getting attacked! So we needed a freaking invasion? Dude! We could have just a few more bombs, for heaven sake. Or taken out the Soviet era Iraqi AF. Come on! Is that the latest excuse?
c) I guess you refer to Iran and Kuwait. Iran happened in 1980′s…so we are now concerned about what happens to Iran! And for Kuwait, we already kicked their butt in the first Persian war.
Next?
rightistliberal on November 24, 2009 at 10:24 AM
If, as many do, you have comitted to memory large sections of ‘Monty Python and the Holy Grail’, recall the words to the song ‘Brave Sir Robin’ and you will have your answer.
Vashta.Nerada on November 24, 2009 at 10:24 AM
This decision was made weeks ago but, even if the decision was finalized last night, the announcement today would step on the filthy lying coward’s first state dinner for the India’s leader. Given the track record on these things, I’m guessing the Obama’s will be serving hamburgers and hot dogs.
highhopes on November 24, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Clearly time for Bleeds Bile to take the next off-ramp
DarkCurrent on November 24, 2009 at 10:25 AM
This has got me thinking:
“In 12 months I’ve been unable to get several key pieces of legislation through a Congress which is controlled by my party, I’m not going to close Gitmo, and I’ve raised the deficit to levels that would even embarrass Bush. What I need from you Afghanistan is to come together defeat the Taliban and AQ and become a stable country in about the same amount of time it took me to, uhhh, ummmm….” / Obama
gwelf on November 24, 2009 at 10:26 AM
In Afghan, at the end of 2007 only about 2 to 3,000 Taliban regular troops were in operation.
48,250 in June of 2008, then an additional withdrawas of troops from Iraq, and redeployed to Afghan. And then in Sept. 3 we attacked a Taliban stronghold in 2008 in Pakistan, severely wounding the Taliban organization.
Since the beginning of 2009 Taliban has been rebuilding, as our president has been dithering…
The classic case of Rome burning while someone was fiddling…we were moving for total control, it was, along with detailed plans, handed off to Obama and his team…and he sat on it, and sat on it…
“On the plains of hesitation lay the countless bones of the millions, who at the dawn of victory, sat and waited, and waited died…”
right2bright on November 24, 2009 at 10:26 AM
Same thing as relief valves. Essentially points where the filthy lying coward can declare defeat if things are not going well (as opposed to escalation of a failed strategy). What the bastard doesn’t tell you is that he and his party were calling for an off ramp in Iraq when the administration was pushing for the commitment that ultimately stabalized the situation. In Afghanistan it is all about finding an excuse to blame the military and bring them home in disgrace.
highhopes on November 24, 2009 at 10:28 AM
Moving for total control? When? Palin told you that? Because Afghanistan has been going downhill for the last 3 years!
he has been dithering…by sending 20000 additional troops in March?
rightistliberal on November 24, 2009 at 10:28 AM
And you ain’t alone, Bro. To think that guys like you are risking your lives and making sacrifices 24/7 for the very rights these pond scum daily abuse makes my eyes bleed with anger.
The sad part is that the trolls here are mere reflections of how their effin’ politicians actually think.
Stay safe.
TXUS on November 24, 2009 at 10:29 AM
Obama waited, the taliban skated.
Johan Klaus on November 24, 2009 at 10:29 AM
They could not beat a rag-tag militia in 7 years while consuming 20% of American budget. That’s pretty disgraceful, actually.
rightistliberal on November 24, 2009 at 10:29 AM
My criticisms of Obama on this issue have been partisan? If you want to offhandedly dismiss any and all criticism of Obama as partisan in order to pretend there aren’t any legitimate criticisms of Obama then it is you, sir, who are engaging in political hackery of the worse kind.
gwelf on November 24, 2009 at 10:30 AM
As much as you guys hate Obama, you have to admit that he’s doing a far better job in Afghanistan than his predecessor.
Bleeds Blue on November 24, 2009 at 9:57 AM
Quite frankly, that comment supports my statement perfectly. You have a one track mind; defend Barack Obama by inserting George W. Bush.
Did it ever occur to you that they were BOTH wrong?
Bush certainly made mistakes (politicians do that!), but it’s nothing compared to the road the fraud in the White House is taking us down, as we speak.
Obama is “allowing” the war in Afghanistan to continue to a point where he can raise the white flag and get out. He should either fight it to WIN it or get the Hell out NOW.
If the goal is NOT to win, it’s not worth one more American life.
GoldenEagle4444 on November 24, 2009 at 10:30 AM
We’ve got your six.
Johan Klaus on November 24, 2009 at 10:30 AM
Yet again you’ve demonstrated your utter lack of understanding of the situation.
gwelf on November 24, 2009 at 10:32 AM
ROE and the treasonous left.
Johan Klaus on November 24, 2009 at 10:34 AM
lol, Really, tell me all about it. Everything that you can tell me about the war in Afghanistan. I’m your student.
hawkdriver on November 24, 2009 at 10:35 AM
First of all, the AQ was a small part of the Iraqi insurgency much of which was home grown. And that is why Anbar awakening worked when we bought off best of the worst.
Yes, it is true that AQ branch in Iraq which owned some allegiance to the two guys in Afghanistan had a fair number of foreign fighters. Indeed, so were most of the suicide bombers. But those were the guys who had trooped to Iraq to fight the american invasion there because they saw it as challenge to Islam e.t.c…..
Did they need an excuse to fight America? Probably not. But then we did not need to invade Iraq for that; they would have come to Afghanistan.
Note: I support the decision to stay the course in Iraq once we had invaded precisely because we could not leave to the kinds of terrorists our invasion had fostered there. So surge and Bush’s decision to stick around was right. But that does not make the invasion right.
rightistliberal on November 24, 2009 at 10:36 AM
Hey, buttsniffing liberal jackass, go back and read Ed’s opening comments and try to learn something. Obama was bellowing about Afghan policy the instant he became a Senator, which is two years before he ever saw a U.S. soldier. He is 100% partisan politics, 100% of the time.
This story comes 9 months after this effing pansy announced his “new policy” on Afghanistan, during which time he has fu**ed the dog, su**ed off some Emperors, rushed socialist legislation into congress, and spent money like…well, like nothing ever seen before in the history of mankind.
So, which is it? If this decision is the result of courageous, thoughtful consideration, then what describes his rhetoric for the past three years?
Jaibones on November 24, 2009 at 10:36 AM
Yep, since the dems got control of congress.
Johan Klaus on November 24, 2009 at 10:37 AM
Really, so you mean Bush imposed such ROE’s too? Then why blame Obama?
rightistliberal on November 24, 2009 at 10:37 AM
Mind if I watch this from over here on the sidelines? Heh.
Jaibones on November 24, 2009 at 10:37 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »