‘Messy’ Afghan election deepens Obama’s dilemma
All should read!
USA-Exactly one year after Barack Obama was elected president, the giddy euphoria of election night has long since given way to the harsh realities of governing. Nothing symbolizes that better than the war in Afghanistan and the grim set of options facing the president.
Militarily and politically, the war is going badly. The Taliban is aggressively seizing control of more Afghan territory and getting better at killing U.S. troops. October’s toll of 59 marked the deadliest month yet in the eight-year war. Meanwhile, Hamid Karzai was formally re-elected president Monday, despite having won a nakedly fraudulent election, after his chief rival dropped out of a planned runoff.
This “messy” process, as Obama delicately put it, deepens the president’s conundrum as he weighs Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s request for about 44,000 more U.S. troops to mount a counterinsurgency effort against the Taliban. That strategy depends on the ability to work with, and hand off to, a competent Afghan government and army — yet the U.S. is stuck with an ineffectual leader, a corrupt government and a weak Afghan security force.
It’s no wonder that Obama is deliberating — critics call it dithering — so long.
The longer John’s president dithers, the worse it will get.
Either do it right or bring our warriors home and pass the problem to another administration as dems often do.
DOR recently posted about McChrystal as if the politicians best know how to run the military.
Guess he supports the political choices with Viet Nam and Iraq (Colin Powell was opposed to the invasion).
I would think that Washington defines the tasks and the military implements them. It would be assumed the President would listen to their military strategists and not short change them in achieving the goals.
Token support is a political decision that runs up the body count.
So what’s the task ? If it is such a dilemma then pack ‘em up & bring ‘em home until we figure it out.
Charlie Wilson (former D-Texas) “The part that I’ll take to my grave with guilt is that . . . I didn’t stay the course and stay there and push and drive the other members of Congress nuts pushing for a mini-Marshall Plan,” he said. “And I let myself be frustrated and discouraged by the fact that (the Afghan) leadership was so fragmented that we were unable to do the things we needed to do, like clear the mines, like furnish them millions of tons of fertilizer to be able to replant the crops.”
Saltyd
In fairness many in the military are split on what is the best idea.
Bart
Your logic is how get into this mess!
Bart
Your logic is how we get into this mess!
Post it once more John and you win a prize!
My logic — Win or come home
John’s logic — snatch defeat from the jaws of victory
Using my logic, we would have already won because we would have gone in with the orders to WIN.
Pussyfooting around as you support John is what caused us to lose over 50,000 in Vietnam…we didn’t go in to win.
Your president is repeating the mistakes of his predecessors and it is costing American lives. So again I say, stop the dithering…WIN or come home.
Awaiting moderation…that’s what this site should be named.
John,
The buck stops somewhere – Is there some military voice (x-CIC) over McChrystal saying he is wrong ?
Or do you give everyone down the line equal voice (chaos) ?
Saltyd,
I guess I’m just too much of a fan of the Constitution of the United States of America to seek to set it aside for momentary political advantage.
Call me stubborn.
Call me traditional.
Hell, you can even call me conservative on that issue!
But, don’t expect any degree of support for letting the generals have free rein.
Generals advise presidents, not the other way around. Never.
.
“If it is such a dilemma then pack ‘em up & bring ‘em home until we figure it out.”
—Sorry, but cut-and-run isn’t a Democratic Party tradition. You can check your history books on that one.
Saltyd
I have always run companies with the big brain approach over the one man authoritarian style.
Bart
What have we won? We spent three trillion dollars and Iraq is split among war lords we pay off and Afghanistan is a mess! Buy hey you never do let facts get into the way you FEEL about the issue.
John,
We “have spent” $670 billion in Iraq…that is a fact! You constantly get that wrong.
And we won in spite of people like you who at the first sign of trouble want to cut and run…thank God people like you were not in charge a couple hundred years ago or we would all have bad teeth and talk funny.
My logic is to win, no matter what it takes. I doubt your president cares about winning anything other than passage of his domestic agenda starting with takeover of 1/6th of the US economy (added to his financial and automotive holdings, John’s president may pass Warren Buffet to become the wealthiest man in America…and he didn’t pay a dime for his acquisitions).
Obama would rather surrender and then apologize for ever trying to eradicate terrorist bases.
John,
I doubt McChrystal made his request without some pretty good discussions with the military strategists.
McChrystal was Obama’s nominee for Commander in Afganistan.
DOR,
No one is challenging the Constitution but what is with the Prez calling for the charge, not communicating with his man and then holding back on the recommended support ?
If he chooses to back off and rethink then get all the heads together and come up with a plan. Instead the media examines a second guessed General and the world watches the U.S. military and the Afgans twist in the wind.
Bart
You are using the same math that got us into trouble with Medicare and Social Security. In the real world you must factor future liabilities not just your burn rate of cash. Your math is what Jimmy Hoffa went to prison for running his pension fund the same way.
saltyd
A very good but the military community is split on what to do.
John,
You wrote, “We spent three trillion dollars…” not ‘we have future liabilities projected to be around $3 trillion dollars…’.
We have not spent $3 trillion, we HAVE spent close to $700 billion…you are wrong, again.
False projections based on political expediency are the reason Medicare/caid/SS/SCHIP are upside down, not math. Your party of libs inflicted these programs on us despite conservative objections.
Bottom line, we were talking about Afghanistan and there is no question your president is playing politics with the lives of American military personnel. He either needs to shit or get off the pot to put it bluntly!
Bart
You are a fool!
That is the standard by law via GAAP for full disclosure in the real world!
John,
Fool you! What did you write John? Did you not write “have spent”? Do you even understand words John?
Do you ever get tired of digging holes deeper after you make an ass of yourself?
Bart
Are you on drugs? Under GAAP the moment you make the obligation the money is spent. Once again you sound like Jimmy Hoffa who went to prison with the same defense.
Spin it however you like John…everybody knows you’re full of **it!
Fools like you are why we are 12 trillion in the red!
Right John, fools like me who oppose entitlements while you and your president do everything possible to increase entitlements, handouts, bailouts, etc., spend more, etc., etc….I’m the reason for the debt.
Damn, you are one dumb sumbitch sometimes!
Bart
You support the largest increase in entitlement ever the GOP Senior Bill of Rights. Once again you do not get the concept of unfunded liabilities with your support of the above bill!
Idiot response number 23 — ‘You support the GOP Senior Bill of Rights’ — At least try to tell the truth when you’re spinning John…that was pitiful.