A confused strategy from a confused Commander in Chief!
Bob Schieffer of CBS News set the tone:
“I think … we’ll look back on this and say THIS WAS THE DEFINING MOMENT OF THE OBAMA PRESIDENCY. This was the night when Barack Obama took full ownership of the war in Afghanistan. We’re going to have 100,000 troops there, and more than half of them will have been sent there by the president. … How do you on the one hand say: ‘We need to send these troops over there; it’s critical; this is in our national-security interest to do this.’ But then say: ‘But we’re only going to keep them there for 18 months; we’re going to start to withdraw them after 18 months’? I just don’t understand the logic of how that works. It seems to me that what the president did tonight was try to make a speech that had a little something for everybody … I don’t understand, Katie, how you can set a deadline on what you’re going to do. This is not a football game, where the time runs out. To win this war, you have to defeat the enemy.”
Obama in 2008 and earlier 2009 promising to make Afghanistan a priority….
And the always brilliant Charles Krauthammer:
An “uncertain trumpet.” Obama is no Churchill. He’s not even up to Bush standards!
If so much is at stake how can you promise to quite by 2011?
“For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?”
I Corinthians 14:8
What the hell is John McCain saying! How can we support “the policy” when the policy includes a written-in exit date of 18 months from now?!? That is not a policy we should support. We should oppose such a disastrous policy. McCain supports sending the 30K troops, but that’s not the freaking policy, John, it’s only part of the policy.
I’m sick of this stupid RINO.
The “anointed ones” speech was just a fools attempt to try and sway his eroding public opinion numbers while showing a half ass attempt as a commander in chief of the armed forces. The man is uncommitted and once again has no comprehension of foreign affairs.
Yes Mike, Woods does need to improve on his mistess taste….:)
To quote Patvann on newer thread, “The Afghanis, and the warriors who fight and die are but pawns for his political gamesmanship.” That statement is in the 10 ring. A 90 day shave-tail has a better grasp of the situation than was on display in the President’s comments last eve. If taken at his word, Mr. Obama is going to waste time and resources, but moreover lives, and to what end? Recognizing that is a giant IF and has little relationship to reality, should we telegraph an end date with no completion of mission standard? We would be better off just to bring all of our forces home now. I do not even see the “take that hill” portion of this strategy yet we have “by 0200 hours” portion. How about “go over there and mill around” and be targets until “0200 hours”? Is this not insane? Give them a clear mission and the resources to perform that mission or bring them all home without any more casualties. What will happen to the Afghans will happen at some time unless “someone” is introduced to the word “win”. Otherwise, just turn the calendar pages and count the dead.
Well said, son of Yesugi.
Here is a story on the Columbian special operations force. Obama and the liberals can learn a lot from this story on how after 35 years of war, the Bush administration stepped up aid and in less than 10 years, FARC went from owning 50% of Columbia to owning less than 5% of Columbia. The Columbian special operations force, which is less than 10 years old, is now in Afghanistan.