Video: Gates says “no deadline” on war in Afghanistan
posted at 10:00 am on December 6, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Well, someone’s confused. Four days ago, Barack Obama said that July 2011 was “locked in” as the withdrawal date for withdrawal from Afghanistan. Today, Defense Secretary Robert Gates tells CBS that “there is no deadline,” and that the 18-month date is when Americans will start transferring security responsibilities to the Afghans — and then only when they can handle it. Maybe the Commander in Chief needs to get some clarity on what has become a complete muddle:
Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Saturday that President Obama’s 18-month time frame to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Afghanistan “isn’t a deadline” during an interview for “Face the Nation.”
“Mr. Secretary, is there a deadline or is there not?” CBS News Senior Washington Correspondent Bob Schieffer asked Gates.
“There isn’t a deadline,” Gates said. “What we have is a specific date which we will begin transferring responsibility for security district by district, province by province in Afghanistan to the Afghans.”
It appears that President Obama spent the better part of four months vacillating on policy, only to have reached a conclusion that what he needed was … more vacillation. One has to hope that Gates has this right and everyone else wrong, but that seems rather unlikely. It sounds more like Gates is playing to the conservatives, Obama is playing to the Left, and Hillary isn’t sure what which side she’s supposed to be courting. As politics, it’s particularly inept, and as war management, it’s worse.
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 Next »
if this administration wants to jack around the American people on healthcare & economics, then have at it (oops, they already are).
but don’t jack around with the lives of our soldiers.
kelley in virginia on December 6, 2009 at 10:04 AM
I have been wondering why anybody would give Gates the benefit of the doubt since he became SecDef. He has no policy input and just tries to implement/justify whatever Obama’s confused ‘whim of the day’ happens to be…this is the result.
AUINSC on December 6, 2009 at 10:04 AM
What we have here is a failure to communicate!
fourdeucer on December 6, 2009 at 10:06 AM
Obama seems to be trying a little too hard to be on both sides of this issue. The only problem is, when you are in charge, people expect results.
Mord on December 6, 2009 at 10:06 AM
Perhaps the Obama Administration thinks that multiple messages on the withdrawal date is strategery.
myrenovations on December 6, 2009 at 10:06 AM
What this all really means is that Obama is weak and a coward, which has almost certainly been noticed by our allies and will definitely be exploited by our enemies. To not be able to convey a strong and definite message with respect to Afghanistan (no matter what that strategy is) is nothing short of incompetent at best and dangerous at worst. The main problem that I have with what he’s doing (or not doing) is that it’s obvious that he doesn’t really believe in this mission (compare his quest for NHC for comparison, if he wants it he goes after it) and that it will be guided primarily by the political winds rather than a quest for victory. He doesn’t have the political will or courage to do what he obviously wants to do which is pull the troops out. He’s laying the foundation for his own political destruction, it’s just that he may not know it yet.
volnation on December 6, 2009 at 10:07 AM
What does Gates care about conservatives? You think we’re getting out in 2011? That was a bone to the left, and a fake one at that. We’ll be there until the dollar collapses and maybe even longer than that.
The Calibur on December 6, 2009 at 10:07 AM
Mr. Gates, beware the oncoming bus.
turfmann on December 6, 2009 at 10:07 AM
… the 18-month date is when Americans will start transferring security responsibilities to the Afghans — and then only when they can handle it.
And if they can’t?
Tony737 on December 6, 2009 at 10:10 AM
It’s not a deadline…….it’s a “happy point.”
At some point in the future we’ll kind of start transferring control but not withdrawing completely as in the sense of a retreat but we’ve got to leave sometime and we don’t want’ to lose but victory is not our number 1 objective yet we don’t want to be “conquerers” but we do want to get Bin Laden unless that’s just too much trouble but we don’t want to give that impression to anyone blah, blah, blah….
Anyone else think this same thing will be going on a year or two from now……….Obama undulating around with talking points designed for the specific audience at hand all designed to help his reelection…?
JoeinTX on December 6, 2009 at 10:11 AM
This isn’t the first time Gates has said this since the West Point speech. After the first, clarification was widely broadcast that the 2011 date was firm. So is this a “clarification” of that clarification? Do any of them have a clue what they are doing?
ProfessorMiao on December 6, 2009 at 10:12 AM
The President to Gates – You Lie!!!
yoda on December 6, 2009 at 10:13 AM
Oh yeah, about the only thing he seems to be any good at is convincing people he is saying what they want to hear.
ProfessorMiao on December 6, 2009 at 10:13 AM
Have we now reverted to redefining the word “is”?
What “is” a deadline?
What “is” sex with some woman?
Lexical strategery…
ted c on December 6, 2009 at 10:13 AM
Mr. Obama has never had to stand by anything he has said, why would now be any different?
Cindy Munford on December 6, 2009 at 10:13 AM
It’s as if we elected a man with no executive experience or something.
Exurban Jon on December 6, 2009 at 10:14 AM
To lead is to choose. A truism which Bambi has not yet, and perhaps never will, learn.
PackerBronco on December 6, 2009 at 10:14 AM
Gates serves at the pleasure of Obama.
maverick muse on December 6, 2009 at 10:15 AM
no, no, no…it’s not a lack of executive leadership you’re seeing here….
it’s nuance
mctowler on December 6, 2009 at 10:17 AM
If the entire administration can’t even decide to defeat or degrade the enemy, how can they inspire confidence about what anyone says or doesn’t say.
fourdeucer on December 6, 2009 at 10:17 AM
Well said.
volnation on December 6, 2009 at 10:17 AM
“nuance” as in….
I’m a complete freaking idiot
B. Obama
mctowler on December 6, 2009 at 10:18 AM
That would be EX-DEFENSE SECRETARY Robert Gates.
As for the all knowing, all seeing Obowma, whose wisdom knows no bounds, will appoint AL Gore as defense secretary.
It seems Al has been very defensive lately.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/03/gore-cancels-personal-appearance-copenhagen/
http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/04/gore-cancels-copenhagen-book-event/
Al has the patent rights for the new armored Big Wheel, the internet he created and carbon credit offsets.
dthorny on December 6, 2009 at 10:18 AM
But Gibbsy said July 2011 saw “set in stone.” He even claimed to have the chisel.
The Monday press briefing should be interesting.
Wethal on December 6, 2009 at 10:19 AM
most incoherent admin evah!.
moonbatkiller on December 6, 2009 at 10:19 AM
Let’s assume for the argument that Obama retains Gates.
Gates is a one-war-at-a-time strategist.
If indeed Obama were committed to defeating Muslim terrorists, which he is NOT, then one could project that the Obama/Gates strategy is to spend approximately 18-months per location/nation chasing the enemy (with our hands tied PC behind our back). Pull troops from one place to the next, round robin, spreading the “wealth”.
maverick muse on December 6, 2009 at 10:20 AM
A man without wisdom cannot make a decision.
Obowma cannot make a decision.
Sooo…
dthorny on December 6, 2009 at 10:20 AM
I can’t decide whether “The Not-Ready-for-Prime-Time Players” or “The Gang That Couldn’t Shoot Straight” would be appropriate for this bunch. Either.
Wethal on December 6, 2009 at 10:21 AM
Well, without knowing all the facts, I still think Gates acted ‘stupidly’ !
We were so glad to see ‘Mr. Diversity’ leave Texas A&M that we didn’t give a lot of thought to what he could do to us in the age of Obama…still glad his sorry butt is gone from College Station.
He is now Obama’s problem.
DoctorDentons on December 6, 2009 at 10:21 AM
Exodus; Chapter 32, Verse 19 “It happened as He (Moses) drew near the camp and he saw the calf and the dances, that Moses’ anger burned, He (Moses) threw down the Tablets”…
Overs.
maverick muse on December 6, 2009 at 10:22 AM
Our enemy knows we have a deadline. Bozo surrendered.
dogsoldier on December 6, 2009 at 10:22 AM
DUMB AND DUMBER.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photo/_new/080827-biden-obama-hmed-834.h2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26420389/&usg=__zWR_Bgsrm6oGMnsTAe9U4RbB0Xo=&h=272&w=423&sz=17&hl=en&start=29&um=1&tbnid=MYPSlNNC59nWjM:&tbnh=81&tbnw=126&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dobama%2Band%2Bbiden%26ndsp%3D20%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26start%3D20%26um%3D1
dthorny on December 6, 2009 at 10:25 AM
I am thinking back to the overwhelming air of incongruity of the assembled Corps of Cadets and senior Army officers being addressed by Barack Obama, a man who has on multiple occasions aired his desire to reduce the spending on, and thus the effectiveness of, the armed forces that he now leads.
This incongruity is again demonstrated in the inability to communicate a cohesive message from the administration as they flock to the Sunday talk shows.
I watched General Petraeus, a West Pointer himself, deftly answer all of Chris Wallace’s questions, including his questions on the General’s political stances and possible future as an elective official.
l think we would all be the richer if, after the conclusion of his military career, he agreed to serve as Secretary of State or Defense. Hell, there really is no office that he could not handle, in my opinion.
turfmann on December 6, 2009 at 10:28 AM
100 YEARS.
Del Dolemonte on December 6, 2009 at 10:29 AM
Never thought I’d be sounding like the Dems did re: Iraq – but this thing is starting to sound and feel like Vietnam.
Constantly shifting goals, overcontrol of the military rules of engagement, loss of focus as to what we want to do.
I say we’d better set some firm, simple goals, right quick, and stick to them, along with consistent leadership from the top, or a lot of our young folk are going to suffer and die for nothing. A young fellow I know is fixing to head over for his first tour of duty and I am afraid for himself – not because it’s war, but because it’s not total war.
Rip the bandage off quickly and get it done, or rip it slowly and hurt a lot more.
Not the most accurate metaphor, but you know what I mean.
You CANNOT mention deadlines to the enemy, even as part of a nuaced approach. The enemy is not thinking in nuanced terms!
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 10:32 AM
turfmann-
exactly!
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 10:33 AM
OK now I am thoroughly confused. Hey, perhaps now I am qualified to be in the administration.
I’m thinking…… Czar of Jack Daniels…..Or Hooters restaurants.
conservnut on December 6, 2009 at 10:33 AM
Nixon had the “Madman Strategy” to misdirect and worry American’s foreign enemies. Obama’s got the “Confused Man Strategy” to misdirect and worry America.
We probably won’t know until about April of 2011 what Barack actually plans to do, and he won’t know until they poll the moderate swing voters to see what they want him to do.
jon1979 on December 6, 2009 at 10:34 AM
Like say umm, I don’t know…….. WIN.
conservnut on December 6, 2009 at 10:35 AM
Gibbsy will “clarify” what Gates really said or meant to say.
yakwill83 on December 6, 2009 at 10:36 AM
If Obama had any guts, he’d make a deal with McCain to keep his nose out of domestic politics, in exchange for making him Sec’y of Defense and win the damn war.
I do think that despite McCain’s many faults, he’d do a good job at Defense. Having been through Vietnam, McCain at least would be able to see things from the soldier’s view, unless Barry.
Also, that would get a RINO out of the Senate who wants to legalize all the border-crashers
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 10:37 AM
dang – guess I’d better stick to preview thia A.M,
But let;s complete the typo- -”….unless Barry couldn’t keep his hands out of battlefield tactics, a la LBJ.”
Just speculation, does anyone think that Obama is discussing tactics at all, or do you guys think he’s sticking only to strategery?
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 10:39 AM
While I think you are probably right. I am troubled by his stance on “enhanced interrogation”.
conservnut on December 6, 2009 at 10:40 AM
LOL
PIMF
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 10:40 AM
It’s cold here and my fingers aren’t moving too well!
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 10:40 AM
This administration has given me whip lash.
Amadeus on December 6, 2009 at 10:41 AM
James Jones said it too. We ain’t leaving any time soon.
The Calibur on December 6, 2009 at 10:42 AM
conservnut,
Yes, McCain’s personal experience obviously has created a blind spot.
But…… have you considered that Johnny Mac might institute a quiet “no prisoners” policy?
I for one would willingly trade out intelligence-gathering from prisoners for the deterrent the enemy would feel knowing they’re going to be lined up and executed as illegal combatants on the spot.
I seriously think this would help us win the war.
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 10:44 AM
Well, whatever the case, as Obeyme has said incessantly….. his decision( or lack of decision) is “unprecedented” like all others. At least, THAT is predictable. This man( I use the term loosely), is a total Toad!
MNDavenotPC on December 6, 2009 at 10:44 AM
Sounds like someone in the White House finally realized that utter inanity of announcing a drawdown date to your enemies in combat. Duh!!
ProfessorMiao on December 6, 2009 at 10:45 AM
jon 1979,
Sadly, you could be right. Worse, unlike many, I DON’T think Obama is doing this intentionally. This is just the way he’s wired – the sum total of years of immersion in moral relativism. He can’t and won’t change. This will likely be his undoing.
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 10:46 AM
ProfessorMiao,
But the damage is done. Now the enemy has reason to hope, and our troops have reason to fear. This little sequence of events HAS to be damaging morale.
No excuse for it.
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 10:48 AM
The administration really has a secret withdrawal plan that he’s not going to reveal because he knows the enemy is listening. Gates is just trying to confuse the enemy.
/s
scalleywag on December 6, 2009 at 10:49 AM
Oh, I know. And this particular amateurism will cost many good men and women their lives. It is worse than incompetence.
ProfessorMiao on December 6, 2009 at 10:51 AM
Next Sunday the administration will reveal the exact date of the troops arrival in Afghanistan, and their location. Gates will deny it and this will throw the enemy off.
scalleywag on December 6, 2009 at 10:51 AM
We can only hope it won’t be the undoing of the country.
Drained Brain on December 6, 2009 at 10:54 AM
Since when are our military goals announced on “Face the Nation?” This is utter bullshit. The Sec’y of Defense should not be out there having to make clarifications. Who do we believe, the president or Gates? BULLSHIT! American lives are on the line. Barry should shut the hell up until he’s SURE that what he’s going to say matches what the Sec’y of Defense is going to say.
Can impeachment derive from an unending series of incompetent screw-ups that add up to total incapacity for the job, or does it have to be one big thing???? In most jobs, you can be drummed out early if you show a total inability to perform it. IMO, this waffling with the lives of our troops may be the most serious error yet, because I don’t think you can undo it in the minds of the enemy. The genie can’t be put back in the lamp.
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 10:54 AM
Actually, it is good war management (on SecDef’s part, bad war management by the Office of the President).
What Gates is saying, (more or less, and he has to say it), while we’re in this fight, we fight to win. (He’s addressing the troops here.) Pay no attention to the politicians playing politics. We’re in Afghanistan, we’re staying in Afghanistan. If the politicians decide we leave, then we’re outa here, but until they make that decision we fight to win.
It points out that other post about McChrystal understanding his orders.
Skandia Recluse on December 6, 2009 at 10:55 AM
That’s called a DEADLINE.
jnelchef on December 6, 2009 at 10:56 AM
Obowma’a idea of bringing HOPE AND CHANGE to the Taliban?
dthorny on December 6, 2009 at 10:57 AM
You know, there are plenty of ways to say that Ronald Reagan is not ready to be president. And I have taken a long time to warm to him.
But, by God, what he does have is simplicity and clarity of message.
After 4 years of unending doublespeak and disaster, this trait alone will be enough to end Carter’s dithering.
Landslide!
/Palin
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 10:59 AM
Stupid movie, but still immensely more entertaining than the “won”
chemman on December 6, 2009 at 10:59 AM
And it all points to a juvenile president who is trying to have his cake and eat it, too, with his base. Rather than acting like a president and working to get public support behind the surge, he’s setting up the military to fail, and returning soldiers to a Vietnam era-type reception. This man makes me sick.
ProfessorMiao on December 6, 2009 at 10:59 AM
Skandia recluse -
I agree with you totally. But Gates should not be out there. It should be coming from the top.
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Who wants to bet that the word “recalibrate” gets used after this “misspeaking” becomes a full-up problem?
Plan on drinking 1 beer if gibbsy uses it.
2 beers if gates uses it.
full up six pack if The President uses it.
ted c on December 6, 2009 at 11:00 AM
I agree with you totally. But Gates should not be out there. It should be coming from the top.
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 11:00 AM
why, the speech was given at WP, the military was given what they asked for, and the president went back to his domestic agenda?
/s
ted c on December 6, 2009 at 11:01 AM
“You can have it either way”
the_nile on December 6, 2009 at 11:01 AM
Now they couldjust get their mins around the idea that announcing ANYTHING to your enemy is likely to work to the benefit of your enemy. Oh wait. Maybe this is what he meant when he promised transparancy. He meant for them, not for us.
MikeA on December 6, 2009 at 11:02 AM
Kissing Brezhnev, giving away the Panama Canal, gas lines, Afghanistan invaded, disco, killer rabbit, lusting in his heart, cardigan sweater, Communism in Central America, hostages in Iran, rescue “attempt,” gold $800, Community Redevelopment Agency, Billy Beer, big lips, (come on, help me out here)….
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 11:05 AM
Is Gates “too big” to be pushed under the bus?
It’s obvious there’s room for Hillary – accepting SecState and its’ subsequent neutering puts her in a very bad spot.
Gates, though… Could 0bama fire him on, say, May 5 2011?
Mew
acat on December 6, 2009 at 11:06 AM
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 11:05 AM
—–
Gas crisis, Gas crisis, crazy-bad inflation. iirc, gas rationing was seriously considered. Moog synthesizers. Sharon Carpenter.
Mew
acat on December 6, 2009 at 11:07 AM
The world was told that the teacher was sick and Obama was going to be the substitute teacher and to act nice.
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 11:08 AM
It all depends on the meaning of the words “set in stone”. – Barack Hussein Obama
kingsjester on December 6, 2009 at 11:08 AM
Showing Obama “how it’s done”.
Failure.
TXUS on December 6, 2009 at 11:09 AM
Son of Sam, Hillside Strangler, Chris Boyce, Jane Fonda, Three-Mile Island….
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Wonder who will be resigning their office first?
Hillary or Gates or both?
albill on December 6, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Substitute teacher is busy playing GameBoy at the front desk while the class knocks holes in the wall. After all, HE didn’t paint the wall – the regular teacher did last summer!
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 11:11 AM
Do y’all think anyone at the White House actually thinks there’s a problem? I don’t. Soetero is rationalizing all this aways and thinks he dun good straddlin’ that fence.
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 11:13 AM
We should all buy stock in companies that make straight jackets. The loon base of the democrat party will not go for this, and the democrat party will not withstand this. Ironic that the dude the media told us made the democrats a majority party for the next 40 years is the one that will end the democrat party.
SouthernGent on December 6, 2009 at 11:16 AM
Surely there is someone here innovative enough to criticize the president.
What are ya, a bunch of cowards?
:: ))
Observation on December 6, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Wait until Taliban flood in from “Pock-ee-stahn” to fight the reinforcements and start killing our guys. Barry has to fight the Muslims. Maybe he’ll use some “taqiyya” or whatever the word is? Let’s hope he’s as good at lying to the Pakis as he is to Americans
cane_loader on December 6, 2009 at 11:24 AM
McCain’s with Gregory on NBC discussing this at the moment.
I noticed on Leno that John Travolta has developed the same botox jaw set, neck, and even same voice as John McCain. So when will Travolta play McCain in a terrorist disaster movie?
maverick muse on December 6, 2009 at 11:38 AM
Your post remained me of something I wondered about during the sermon by the O, the other day. Not being a linguist, I wondered why he pronounces the endings of Pakistan and Afghanistan so differently, even in the same sentence.
MikeA on December 6, 2009 at 11:41 AM
McCain is ambidextrous. While stroking Obama’s decision, McCain nailed Obama’s “nuance” that implied the Afghans are responsible for what “Obama inherited” (getting over Bush since he’s hanging on to Gates), and Obama will only play marbles for 18 months before withdrawing “responsibly”, handing Afghanistan to the Afghans.
I’m still waiting for the Obama Doctrine to bomb Pakistan as he threatened during the potus campaign in the potus debates and in speeches.
maverick muse on December 6, 2009 at 11:45 AM
MikeA on December 6, 2009 at 11:41 AM
It’s Obama’s take on the Tribal Order or caste system. Obama “respects” the Pakistani tribes nearer to India and disrespects the mountain tribes that populate near/in Afghanistan. RACIST!
maverick muse on December 6, 2009 at 11:48 AM
I think that maybe Obama has turned that whole icky war thingee over to Gates. And so I trust Gates. Obama on the other hand….
Terrye on December 6, 2009 at 11:50 AM
Ed, I think you are over analyzing this in a way…I think Obama is thinking that all he has to do is move a platoon out of Afghanistan in the summer of 2011 and he has it covered.
Terrye on December 6, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Ogabe..”Screw triangulation…clusker f#@k is my plan”
Caper29 on December 6, 2009 at 11:56 AM
Silence, you malcontent!
s/
csdeven on December 6, 2009 at 12:00 PM
From the “Let me be perfectly clear” POTUS too. Me thinks someone is going under the bus this week.
deadly.
conservative pilgrim on December 6, 2009 at 12:01 PM
In many religions there are those antinomies, simultaneous contradictory truths. In Obammunism it’s much the same. 18 months is set in stone AND it’s flexible. Don’t you understand?
Mojave Mark on December 6, 2009 at 12:11 PM
This administration talks out of both sides of its bottom.
ElectricPhase on December 6, 2009 at 1:07 PM
This looks like what he did during the campaign (i.e. abortion funding), telling one group what he’s really going to do and telling another (or having someone else tell them) something contradictory.
It only works if the press refuses to report on it.
29Victor on December 6, 2009 at 1:14 PM
+100
cmsinaz on December 6, 2009 at 1:26 PM
So it looks like their focus group failed to gain “consensus” after all?
cs89 on December 6, 2009 at 1:34 PM
Gates is a sellout, and is full of it here.
Obama needs his base back in the dem tent by the election of 2012, and the only way he can get them back in will be to cut and run from Afghanistan.
If Gates had any integrity at all, he would have resigned months ago.
Dave R. on December 6, 2009 at 2:00 PM
Man, if Obama and Gates are trying to confuse the country about their intentions, they sure are doing a heck of a job.
Instead of all this backpedalling and double talk, how about just keeping your intentions to do anything other than kick ash in A-stan to yourself, dear leaders?
james23 on December 6, 2009 at 2:24 PM
Somehow, Obama managed to vote ‘present’ on this.
tatersalad on December 6, 2009 at 3:03 PM
As I understood him he said July 2011 was the date to start the withdrawal. I didn’t hear him say anything about the speed of the withdrawal. If he starts withdrawing one brigade of even one battalion or even one company every month or even every year he has met that so all this seems to me to be much to do about next to nothing.
Those who wanted another big troop escalation over what George Bush had in the Mullah’s Hemorrhoid called Afghanistan have got it so I don’t know why you are complaining. You might complain about other things but complaining about this seems very strange.
MB4 on December 6, 2009 at 4:32 PM
You should be embracing Obama on this as you got another big troop escalation (Obama already did a previous one in July). He will have more than twice the troops in Afghanistan than Bush had. You should be calling him even better, much better, on Afghanistan than Bush was. It would drive the left completely crazy.
MB4 on December 6, 2009 at 4:41 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »