McChrystal statement: Obama’s given me the resources I need

posted at 8:41 pm on December 1, 2009 by Allahpundit

For what it’s worth.

“The Afghanistan-Pakistan review led by the President has provided me with a clear military mission and the resources to accomplish our task. The clarity, commitment and resolve outlined in the President’s address are critical steps toward bringing security to Afghanistan and eliminating terrorist safe havens that threaten regional and global security.

“The NATO International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) objective is equally clear: We will work toward improved security for Afghanistan and the transfer of responsibility to Afghan security forces as rapidly as conditions allow. In the meantime, our Afghan partners need the support of Coalition forces while we grow and develop the capacity of the Afghan army and police. That will be the main focus of our campaign in the months ahead.

“The 42 other nations of the Coalition will benefit from a strengthened U.S. commitment, as success in Afghanistan must be an international, integrated civil-military effort – from our security and training capacity to the governance and economic development assistance that sustains long-term stability. The concerted commitment of the international community will prevail in bringing real change to Afghanistan — a secure and stable environment that allows for effective governance, improved economic opportunity and the freedom of every Afghan to choose how they live.

“We face many challenges in Afghanistan, but our efforts are sustained by one unassailable reality: neither the Afghan people nor the international community want Afghanistan to remain a sanctuary for terror and violence. The coalition is encouraged by President Obama’s commitment and we remain resolute to empowering the Afghan people to reject the insurgency and build their own future.”

The final magic number settled on by The One: 30,000 troops, roughly halfway between what McChrystal claimed was needed for a medium-risk and high-risk mission going forward. Here’s the transcript of Obama’s speech. I recommend the beginning, where, true to form, he reminds his audience that he’s only trying to clean up Bush’s Iraq-induced mess, and the part where he notes that he wasn’t really dithering because McChrystal never asked for new troops to be deployed this year. Which, of course, conveniently ignores the fact that the general told him we only had 12 months to win the war … three months ago.

This part is cute too, coming as it does from the master of the trillion-dollar deficit:

As President, I refuse to set goals that go beyond our responsibility, our means, our or interests. And I must weigh all of the challenges that our nation faces. I do not have the luxury of committing to just one. Indeed, I am mindful of the words of President Eisenhower, who – in discussing our national security – said, “Each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs.”

Over the past several years, we have lost that balance, and failed to appreciate the connection between our national security and our economy. In the wake of an economic crisis, too many of our friends and neighbors are out of work and struggle to pay the bills, and too many Americans are worried about the future facing our children. Meanwhile, competition within the global economy has grown more fierce. So we simply cannot afford to ignore the price of these wars.

We can afford to ignore the price of everything else, but not the $30 billion or so a year — less than one-fifth of the deficit incurred just in the month of October — that it’ll cost to staff Afghanistan with new troops. Exit quotation from Niall Ferguson, writing this week in Newsweek: “This is how empires decline. It begins with a debt explosion. It ends with an inexorable reduction in the resources available for the Army, Navy, and Air Force. Which is why voters are right to worry about America’s debt crisis.”

Update: Oh, and as predicted, the moral argument for Afghanistan was almost completely absent from the speech.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2

Man, I haven’t heard from Hawkdriver in over a week, I wonder what he thinks of all of this?

Cindy Munford on December 1, 2009 at 9:51 PM

What a sack…

royzer on December 1, 2009 at 9:56 PM

Do you have your head in Monkei`s ass as well, I think so.

bluemarlin on December 1, 2009 at 9:33 PM

I think you have your head in Cheney’s colostomy bag, that’s why there’s nothing but sh*t coming out both your mouths.

The problem wasn’t going to war with the Taliban, the “mess” was in reference to the lack of strategy in Afghanistan by Bush and Cheney.

Norman Blizter on December 1, 2009 at 10:04 PM

I always appreciate a subtle way to present snark. Although I must say I laugh every time you call the president a filthy lying coward.

Cindy Munford on December 1, 2009 at 9:45 PM
…and highhopes has mellowed somewhat since November ’08!

Vince on December 1, 2009 at 10:05 PM

The problem wasn’t going to war with the Taliban, the “mess” was in reference to the lack of strategy in Afghanistan by Bush and Cheney.

Norman Blizter on December 1, 2009 at 10:04 PM

So you think Obama should make a bigger mess of it?

Vince on December 1, 2009 at 10:09 PM

The problem wasn’t going to war with the Taliban, the “mess” was in reference to the lack of strategy in Afghanistan by Bush and Cheney.

Norman Blizter on December 1, 2009 at 10:04 PM

If it is such a mess, why is Obama basically going with the same blueprint and basically only adding a time table to the suggestions put forward by Bush administration. Seems to me the strategy is the same and he is filling in numbers for troops and time tables.

bluemarlin on December 1, 2009 at 10:13 PM

I won’t call McChrystal a deliberate liar…but I will say that I know a please-the-boss speech when I see one.

Don’t blame him one bit for it, though. The poor guy had to do everything short of yelling in Obama’s ear with a bullhorn to even get a paltry 30,000 troops and no visible change in the ROEs. His ‘influence budget’ with 0bama Bin Laden is long since spent and the administration is doubtlessly trying to think up ways to make him go away…not praising the One’s holy name for what he’s being given would be a very unwise idea right about now.

Dark-Star on December 1, 2009 at 10:32 PM

McChrystal faces the Lewinsky Dilemma. Put out or get fired.

viking01 on December 1, 2009 at 10:48 PM

If he gave him the resources he needs, then why didn’t he just ask for 30,000 more men in the first place?

The song The Auctioneer comes to my mind for some reason.

Dr. ZhivBlago on December 1, 2009 at 10:59 PM

I guess that proves that military men lie all the time….

Tim Burton on December 2, 2009 at 12:10 AM

Having spent twenty six years in the military and now a training instructor for young soldiers, my take on war is this; If you are going to commit even one American life to war then you must go all out to win and by any means necessary. If you won’t make it a total commitment, stay home.

Big John on December 2, 2009 at 1:22 AM

Oh, and another thing…you don’t make any type of Flag Officer (Gen, Admiral, etc) without losing your moral compass and becoming a career ass-kisser (in case you can’t tell, I was enlisted).

Big John on December 2, 2009 at 1:25 AM

You stupid conservative jackasses got America into this mess and now you want to blame Obama if anything goes wrong.

Norman Blizter on December 1, 2009 at 9:13 PM

It was Obama who described Afghanistan as a “war of necessity.” Obviously, you can’t blame conservatives for doing what was necessary.

Now you see what happens when you start ad-libbing your posts. Go find the approved talking points before you make a bigger fool of yourself.

There Goes The Neighborhood on December 2, 2009 at 3:01 AM

suckhole.

LtE126 on December 2, 2009 at 7:22 AM

Oh, and another thing…you don’t make any type of Flag Officer (Gen, Admiral, etc) without losing your moral compass and becoming a career ass-kisser (in case you can’t tell, I was enlisted).

Big John on December 2, 2009 at 1:25 AM

Though there’s some truth to that, I would say there’s quite a few flags who would take issue with that, particularly special operators. The best example that comes to mind is Eldon Bargewell, a special ops general. I’m not a snake eater, but I worked for him in Germany and I guarantee you he is the ANTI-asskisser. And there’s plenty more like him, he’s just the best example. Look him up on the net. He had quite the career.

NavyMustang on December 2, 2009 at 7:58 AM

Having spent twenty six years in the military and now a training instructor for young soldiers, my take on war is this; If you are going to commit even one American life to war then you must go all out to win and by any means necessary. If you won’t make it a total commitment, stay home.

Big John on December 2, 2009 at 1:22 AM

An emphatic +1

NavyMustang on December 2, 2009 at 7:59 AM

What’s the spirit of the bayonet?

KILL KILL KILL ARRRRRRGH!!!!!!!

What’s the spirit of the PC-Net?

COMPROMISE SENSITIZE APOLOGIZE WEEEEEEEE!!!!

MaiDee on December 2, 2009 at 8:38 AM

So 30,000 more troops and he has one (1) year (once all the new troops are there) to win the war, destroy al Queda and the Taliban in the area, etc, etc, etc before the troops are withdrawn…
The countdown begins.

Gee, if I was a Talibahn I would just lay low for a year or so, rebuild, work the local area and just wait for the Obama Retreat.

albill on December 2, 2009 at 8:38 AM

I thought McCrystal asked for 40,000. 30,000 sounds reasonable to me.

I think McCrystal won all the way around here.

AnninCA on December 1, 2009 at 8:50 PM

If the 10,000 difference was in deaths, would that still sound reasonable to you?

Wade on December 2, 2009 at 8:44 AM

Not surprising as it’s par for the course, but many of you are so set on creating a scenario where the POUTS let down the troops, you ignore fact.

While parroting the “12 months to win” assessment you conveniently ignore the *fact* that no troops were requested prior to the start 2010.

So, even if you take the “12 months to win” as fact and argue that 3 months are gone, those same 3 months would have been gone irregardless, no troops were requested prior to 2010.

I know this fact won’t make a difference to the “we hate Obama” crowd as facts don’t seem to matter, but those are the facts.

So stop using the troops as a political ploy and argue the merits of your argument. They’ve been used as props far too often. See: Mission Accomplished.

NextGen on December 2, 2009 at 9:24 AM

I have not read McChrystals report, but it would not surprise me to find out that Obama took from the report the minimum number of troops and the lowest time commitment.

Two diametrically opposed items. If true, then McChrystall has been given smallest force possible to achieve the mission in the time allowed for the largest force increase.

davod on December 2, 2009 at 10:32 AM

If the 10,000 difference was in deaths, would that still sound reasonable to you?

Wade on December 2, 2009 at 8:44 AM

Bingo! And therein lies the primary reason Dhimmicrats cannot be trusted with national security. Because they aren’t about defeating obvious enemies of our country. They are about protecting the poor soldiers who have to fight them by only giving them half of what they need, so they won’t hurt anybody on the other side too much, they hang out exposed to our enemies because they can’t crush them immediately, but they also will suffer many more casualties to win Victory because Dhimmicrats just aren’t sure about this Victory stuff.

You know, fighting the terrorists only breeds more terrorists! If they are zombies, that is. How many dead terrorists are now statements for desertion by young Muslims in the war? How many dead terrorists cause those same young Muslims to reconsider the tenets of their religion and shy away from future violent adventures, if they survive contact with US forces in the first place.

This war has put a tremendous dent in al Qaeda recruitment. Getting your ass shot off for Allah has never looked so bad to most Muslims. Their enthusiasm for the fight wanes with each defeat they suffer. And it is going to get worse for them from here.

Press on. Til Victory.

Subsunk

Subsunk on December 2, 2009 at 10:33 AM

Not surprising as it’s par for the course, but many of you are so set on creating a scenario where the POUTS let down the troops, you ignore fact.

While parroting the “12 months to win” assessment you conveniently ignore the *fact* that no troops were requested prior to the start 2010.

So, even if you take the “12 months to win” as fact and argue that 3 months are gone, those same 3 months would have been gone irregardless, no troops were requested prior to 2010.

I know this fact won’t make a difference to the “we hate Obama” crowd as facts don’t seem to matter, but those are the facts.

So stop using the troops as a political ploy and argue the merits of your argument. They’ve been used as props far too often. See: Mission Accomplished.

NextGen on December 2, 2009 at 9:24 AM

You’re an idiot son. GEN McChrystal asked for the troops as soon as possible because “we only have about 12 months to turn” this thing around. You don’t win by giving the other guy an extra 9 months to prepare for your coming. You win by giving the professionals what they asked for and getting out of their way, and letting them do their jobs. George Bush understood and followed that rule. President Obama thinks he’s smarter at warfighting than Men with over 25 years experience in warfighting and combat about how to win wars.

The drool off your chin makes you look stupid, or like an adoring prostitute. The only troops used as a prop were those who died waiting for their Commander in Chief to send them the relief they requested, or explain why he was abandoning them without support.

Subsunk

Subsunk on December 2, 2009 at 10:39 AM

First I’m not your son, I would be ashamed, using the troops as a political tool as you do. George Bush was in bed with the Saudi’s and sacraficed American lives to avoid the truth, the majoriy of the 9/11 bombers came from Saudi and most funding did and still comes from Saudi, do you deny that?

More important and as a true demonstration of your blindness, you follow the lead of Deferment Dick Cheney. A man who when his country called found excuse after excuse not to serve yet has NO qualms sending my and my brothers (which we have by the way) off to serve and possibly die.

So don’t lecture me on courage or professionals. Generals are not Presidents, they serve and request, it’s the nature of our republic, or did they not teach that at the chicken hawk school you attended with deferment Dick?

NextGen on December 2, 2009 at 10:48 AM

NextGen on December 2, 2009 at 10:48 AM

You are correct. My son is a far better Man than you are.

The Saudi saw that 15 of 19 killers were Saudi and were told to cooperate or be hammered by Bush. They cooperated and gave us more info than any other country on their terrorist brethren. Once they did that, are you still chomping at the bit to go to war with them? Take over Mecca and Medina and then suffer the outcry and onslaught occupying those two cities would bring from the supposedly moderate Muslim world? It is you who are ignorant of the world, boy.

I don’t use troops as political tools. If the country goes to war, it goes whole hog or not at all because otherwise young Men die without cause. I’m for Victory in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the Horn of Africa, and anywhere else Muslim radicals live and breathe. You are not. That is plain.

I follow the lead of Mr. Cheney because he is correct. I followed Mr. Clinton because he was the President. I followed Mr. Bush because he was President also. I follow Mr. Obama because he is the President. The country voted to go to war for each of those men. I followed their orders.

Mr. Cheney has served his country well for dozens of years, including as the Secretary of Defense. Hundreds of thousands of young men got deferments in the 60s and 70s and they aren’t labelled as cowards and chickenhawks today, except by pussies like you. Perhaps your father or an uncle also got a deferment and didn’t go. Does that make him wrong or a coward? Especially if he went to college or was married and single men were supposed to go before the married men?

I’ll lecture you on whatever I choose to. Its is a free country still. Or it will be unless Dhimmicrats like you pass enough thugocratic rules to outlaw all the free speech left in the World War II, Korean War, VietNam War, Gulf War, and GWOT veterans in the country today. I’m not shutting up until you shoot me in the head like the Gestapo thugs your party supports in the world today.

We served in harms way. Some of us on the front lines. I’ve been deployed to hazardous places and seen some things most Americans don’t see. The school I attended believes that our Men and Women in uniform deserve the support they ask for without some politician weighing whether he is smarter than the General requesting the assistance, or how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Politicians got only one purpose in war. To decide to support it, or not. If they don’t then get us out. Now. Today. Immediately. Not one more boy killed or drop of blood spilt. Let the Afghans be massacred. You don’t care. All you care about is power for your party. I care about safety and security of my friends and neighbors, and we didn’t start this war. Muslims did.

Welcome to the Soviet Union, boy. Where your party affiliation is far more important than whether your country wins its wars or not. That’s what you are supporting with your rationalizing a delay of 3 months while over 150 American soldiers died waiting for the extra support. You disgust me.

Subsunk

Subsunk on December 2, 2009 at 5:37 PM

Readers digest version…

Subsunk

“Yes Dick Cheney was a coward who after seeking deferment for himself when called to serve gladly sends young men and women to die, doing what he would not. But my head is so far up the GOP hind parts I can’t even admit that fact. I am so bitter and afraid, wanting “my country back” I can’t even admit the truth. The Saudi’s continued to fund Madrassas IN THE UNITED STATES well into Bushes final term but I don’t care because he was a republican. I’ve been lead by cowards who think sacrificing the blood of our brave, somehow makes them brave but I do not care, I am a republican”

I pity your son, truly, you make excuses for cowards while attacking he very people who have actually served and didn’t seek 8 deferments. Pathetic confused, old man go back to your bunker.

NextGen on December 2, 2009 at 7:08 PM

I pity your son, truly, you make excuses for cowards while attacking he very people who have actually served and didn’t seek 8 deferments. Pathetic confused, old man go back to your bunker.

NextGen on December 2, 2009 at 7:08 PM

I don’t use the funds for our troops or hold the leadership hostage to an election timetable as a political ploy to gain power in the US, as the Dhimmicrats do, and you so obviously support. If you don’t like taking orders from Mr. Cheney because he didn’t serve, what is your excuse for taking orders from Mr. Obama and Mr. Clinton, neither of whom served? Either you follow the orders of the folks appointed over you, or you don’t, jackass.

And on my worst day, I can still kick your silly young ass in a debate on war, boy. I’m not going back in my hole and let your socialist party memebers take over the country I gave 21 yrs of my life to, 24/7. I’m quite proud of my son for trying to serve his country. What is your excuse for hating your former profession so much? Do too many drugs or something?

Subsunk

Subsunk on December 3, 2009 at 7:41 AM

Who plays politics with the military?

Don’t come back to play again unless you got some brains to back you up, boy.

Subsunk

Subsunk on December 3, 2009 at 1:01 PM

Comment pages: 1 2