Obama's Blunder
After weeks of vacillation, the President gave in to his advisors and ordered the deployment of an additional 30,000 US troops to Afghanistan (on top of the 21,000 sent previously by his Administration, or 68, 000 total already there). This is a foolish mistake. Just as the end of one quagmire, Iraq, is finally in sight, Obama is rushing headlong into another. At a time when huge deficits already threaten us with bankrupcy, this costly move will push us further toward the abyss.
Why is Obama doing this? It appears he is a victim of his own campaign rhetoric. Rightly sensing that Iraq was a terrible waste of resources, but wary of looking like a liberal pacifist, Obama opposed the Iraq war on the grounds that "the real fight against terror is in Afghanistan." That was a clever campaign position, but unwise if translated into policy. Since the US crushed the Afghan Taliban, al-Qaida has become more of a nonterritorial movement. It does not require an Afghan base to function. It also has Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen. Apparently, Obama's advisors talked him into sending reinforcements as part of a longterm strategy to prevent Pakistan's nuclear arsenal from falling into militant Islamic hands. But US troops are superfluous. The Pakistani armed forces are quite capable of keeping the militants at bay on their own. They beat them in Swat and in Wasiristan. Ironically, a US Afghan surge may worsen matters for Pakistan, simply by forcing the Taliban across the border, intensifying the pressure on Pakistan.
While Obama's long delay in approving McCrystal's request for reinforcements attests to his reluctance, or realization that it is bad policy, another consideration made him finally give in. The blunder stemmed from a desire to improve his political standing--what else is new in this country? Eager to appeal to a broader and more conservative base of Americans, Obama is partly motivated by a desire to be a great "wartime President," protecting this country from the dire threat of 60-100 Pakistani nukes in terrorist hands. Yet again, real national interests are being sacrificed on the alter of politics.
Why is Obama doing this? It appears he is a victim of his own campaign rhetoric. Rightly sensing that Iraq was a terrible waste of resources, but wary of looking like a liberal pacifist, Obama opposed the Iraq war on the grounds that "the real fight against terror is in Afghanistan." That was a clever campaign position, but unwise if translated into policy. Since the US crushed the Afghan Taliban, al-Qaida has become more of a nonterritorial movement. It does not require an Afghan base to function. It also has Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen. Apparently, Obama's advisors talked him into sending reinforcements as part of a longterm strategy to prevent Pakistan's nuclear arsenal from falling into militant Islamic hands. But US troops are superfluous. The Pakistani armed forces are quite capable of keeping the militants at bay on their own. They beat them in Swat and in Wasiristan. Ironically, a US Afghan surge may worsen matters for Pakistan, simply by forcing the Taliban across the border, intensifying the pressure on Pakistan.
While Obama's long delay in approving McCrystal's request for reinforcements attests to his reluctance, or realization that it is bad policy, another consideration made him finally give in. The blunder stemmed from a desire to improve his political standing--what else is new in this country? Eager to appeal to a broader and more conservative base of Americans, Obama is partly motivated by a desire to be a great "wartime President," protecting this country from the dire threat of 60-100 Pakistani nukes in terrorist hands. Yet again, real national interests are being sacrificed on the alter of politics.
posted by starman at 3:19 AM
6 Comments:
If Obama proceeds with his plan, he will make an enormous mistake. The situation in Afghanistan has turned into a quagmire for the U.S. It and the siutation in Iraq are the worst messes that the U.S. has been in since the Vietname War. The American economy is in a terrible condition. America cannot afford to continue being bogged down in quagmires. Obama should pull American troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan now. The Republicans got America into those messes and Obama should immediately get us out of them.
Neal Robbins
Couldn't agree more Neal but now it seems he's doing the exact opposite....I wonder if lack of enough Congressional support might yet reverse this decision.
I'm hoping that Congress will not go along with the plan to send more troops to Afghanistan. If Congress does support the idea of escalating the American troop presence in Afghanistan and Obama steps up the American involvement there, it will prove that Democrats are no better than Republicans.
Neal
Well said Neal. Now is the time for the intelligent to make their displeasure known in Washington. The congressional delegation around here has misgivings about this.
Reinstating the draft would be a gigantic mistake. People would be going to Canada wherever else they could flee to avoid being drafted. It would be political suicide for the Democrats, insofar as the next presidential election is concerned.
Many cities are drafting petitions against the war in Afghanistan. If the war is escalated, the U.S. could have the biggest series of anti-war demonstrations since the Vietnam War.
Neal
Unfortunately, from what I've heard, there isn't enough congressional opposition to the Afghanistan reinforcement. Or so called "grassroots" opposition.
Post a Comment
<< Home