Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Obama plans to send 34,000 troops to Afghanistan


It appears that The Won has finally made a decision about Afghanistan. From McClatchy:
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.
General Stanley McChrystal gave Obama three options, a low-risk option of 80,000 troops, a medium-risk option of 40,000 troops and a high-risk option of 20,000 troops. Obama decision seems to fall short of the medium risk option and it will be interesting to hear his decision why. Here is the breakdown of the troops Obama will send:

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.
But what is rather disturbing is that the plan contains “off-ramps”. These are dates for Obama to decide whether to continue the flow of troops or to retreat.

 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. 
I just don’t understand the need to announce to your enemies when and why you will throw in the towel. It should seem quite obvious that if the Taliban wants us out of Afghanistan all they have to do is intensify the fighting over the next six months.  Furthermore, the whole idea behind McChrystal’s surge is to gain confidence from the Afghan people so that they will begin helping US forces. Why should they help out if our commitment is so tentative? It would be far safer for them to wait the six months to make sure we stay.


Something tells me come June 1, we will be packing it in under the banner of defeat and the White House claiming it was Bush’s fault.


Via: McClatchy


CYQ4QSA5RB9V

5 comments:

MKotyk88 said...

As a veteran, I see the President's dithering on Afghanistan as showing his poor grasp on his role as commmander in chief. I can't imagine Roosevelt delaying re-enforcements to Patton during the Battle of the Bulge or holding up troops to Iwo Jima or Guadalcanal so that he can 'think about it'. I was talking to a friend of mine who served in the Air Force and we agree, when you go to war, you go with the full intention of winning the conflict and engaging the enemy no matter where he goes. You give a 110% effort to winning. So far, I'd say that America's effort has been about 80%. I see too many of my friends going on their 4th or 5th tour of duty in either Iraq or Afghanistan while I continue to see 20 year old mulling around my neighborhood doing absolutely nothing but getting drunk, chasing girls or looking for their next high. I'm angry over how the whole war has been handled. I want to see a draft! Let's win this thing and get it over with.

joshow98 said...

Unfortunately, we don't have a Commander in Chief. President Obama is merely a Campaigner in Chief. He doens't have the sense of duty to see it through.

As someone with friends over there, in harm's way, I would rather win. But if he isn't going to do what is needed, stop the bleeding now.

Joe Howell
Editor, The Right Viewpoint
http://www.rightviewpoint.com

Soloman said...

As elections are just a few months after, June is just in time to pull out or stop sending in reinforcements in order to satisfy the base, if things are not improving.

Of course if the situation improves he'll be the hero to the left regardless of their disdain for war, and at that point I'd actually credit him with a correct decision as long as he continued to fight toward a positive ending.

Uffda said...

What a joke. What a sick joke.

Uffda said...

So it takes you three months to decide to do almost exactly what your commanders told you to do three months ago?

Heaven help us if we ever get attacked.

I wish these stupid politicians would just let our guys fight. You gotta fight to win, and you gotta win to come home. Unless you want to see this country lose.

Related Posts with Thumbnails