Last night I wrote, in some not-so politically correct words, that the President is not interested in fighting the war in Afghanistan. It appears that this news article confirms what I have believed all along.
Quote:
WASHINGTON — 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.
They said the commander of the U.S.-led international force in Afghanistan, Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, could arrive in Washington as early as Sunday to participate in the rollout of the new plan, including testifying before Congress toward the end of next week. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry also are expected to appear before congressional committees.
As it now stands, the plan calls for the deployment over a nine-month period beginning in March of three Army brigades from the 101st Airborne Division at Fort Campbell, Ky., and the 10th Mountain Division at Fort Drum, N.Y., and a Marine brigade from Camp Lejeune, N.C., for as many as 23,000 additional combat and support troops.
In addition, a 7,000-strong division headquarters would be sent to take command of U.S.-led NATO forces in southern Afghanistan — to which the U.S. has long been committed — and 4,000 U.S. military trainers would be dispatched to help accelerate an expansion of the Afghan army and police.
This all sounds nice and pretty; that is until you read down further…:
A U.S. military official used the term “decisional” to describe Monday evening’s meeting among Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Gates, Clinton, National Security Adviser Jim Jones, Eikenberry and senior U.S. military commanders.
The administration’s plan contains “off-ramps,” points starting next June at which Obama could decide to continue the flow of troops, halt the deployments and adopt a more limited strategy or “begin looking very quickly at exiting” the country, depending on political and military progress, one defense official said.
“We have to start showing progress within six months on the political side or military side or that’s it,” the U.S. defense official said.
It’s “not just how we get people there, but what’s the strategy for getting them out,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Monday.
The approach is driven in part by concerns that Afghan President Hamid Karzai won’t keep his promises to root out corruption and support political reforms, and in part by growing domestic opposition to the war, the U.S. officials said.
HotAir.com’s Ed Morrissey is not impressed at all:
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.
Ed Morrissey hit the nail square on the head. President Barack Obama was never, at any point, interested in fighting the so-called good war in Afghanistan. President Barack Obama knew that he was inheriting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; and he knew that if he continued them, that he would also inherit the backlash from the left that goes with them. Therefore, he is devising a way of getting out that region and making himself look like the saint and President George W. Bush look like the bad person. This was the plan all along; never at any point was there a plan to fight this war until victory; but rather a plan of stealth defeat.
There are many reasons why the Democrats will not fight the war on terror. Namely, it is because to a certain degree the Democrats actually sympathize with the terrorists. The Democrats have always had a disdain for Israel and its right to exist; many Democrats have always felt that President Harry Truman royally screwed up when he decided to formally recognize Israel as a sovereign Nation. It is due to the frosty relationship towards Israel that sparked the attack of the U.S.S. Liberty by a rogue faction within the Israeli Defense Force. Many people who are of the hatemonger class, like to blame Israel and the Jews for that attack; the problem is, they are blaming the wrong people, they should be blaming the Democrats for it.
Not only this, but you also have about sixty percent of the Democrats who actually blame Bush for the attacks on 9/11. They actually believe that Bush knew the attacks were coming and actually allowed them to happen. This is why Eric Holder and the justice department are having civilian trials for a few of the 9/11 conspirators. They desire to drag out of the stuff that happened in the months after 9/11, as to make a mockery of them. The remaining people within the Democratic Party and those who are of the far-leftist mentality actually have the audacity to believe that the United States of America actually deserved the attacks on 9/11, because of our capitalistic society and because of our past treatment of blacks; because we do not give enough hand-outs to poor people and so forth . President Barack Obama’s former Pastor even said as this very thing, and now President Barack Obama is allowing them to have civilian trials; ponder that scary thought for a moment.
In closing, I simply will offer this sober note. Elections have consequences. The American people elected a man, who was supposed to be a stark contrast to President George W. Bush, someone who could lead. What the American people received was an out of touch, dithering liberal elitist, who in all honesty could not even lead his own household, if the truth were told. President Barack Obama is more interested in shoving his rather idiotic social agenda, of wealth redistribution and outright class warfare onto the American people, than a fighting a war that will ultimately decide America’s success or demise. We should remember this come the elections of 2010 and of 2012 and decide wisely our choices for those we plan to put in office.
