RECENT POSTS
- Oprah, Health Care Lobbyists, Among Recent Visitors to White House
- An Obama Thanksgiving Menu, with an Extra Serving of Pie
- White House Thanksgiving Traditions: Broken and Observed
- Obama, GOP Air Differences Over Jobs, Economy In Thanksgiving Addresses
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
On Afghanistan, President Obama Presses Pentagon for More Information Before Making Decision
November 12, 2009 10:11 AM
Some White House officials thought that President Obama's 8th "war council" meeting Wednesday to decide on a strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan might be the last. But by the time it wrapped up, no decisions had been made and so many lingering questions remained about the strategy forward, it seemed clear that more meetings were necessary and any announcement will be delayed far beyond the unofficial November 11 deadline administration aides had been shooting for.
In Wednesday's meeting, Pentagon officials presented more details about four strategies -- two from Gen. Stanley McChrystal, and two others -- but President Obama was not satisfied with their assessments.
Specicially, he pushed the generals to clarify how and when U.S. troops would be able to turn over responsibility to the Afghan government.
"The key sticking points appear to be timelines and mounting questions about the credibility of the Afghan government," an administration official said, adding that the President "wants to make it clear that the U.S. commitment in Afghanistan is not open-ended. After years of substantial investments by the American people, governance in Afghanistan must improve in a reasonable period of time to ensure a successful transition to our Afghan partner."
Currently 68,000 US troops are in Afghanistan. All four of the options the president and his war council are discussing add more troops, but with different troop levels, costs and strategies. The most ambitious strategy, from Gen. McChrystal, would send 40,000 more troops.
In London, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced that he expects President Obama "to announce in a few days what his numbers for Afghanistan will be."
But White House officials disagreed, saying a decision was still weeks away.
The Washington Post reported Thursday that US. Ambassador to Afghanistan Gen. Karl Eikenberry (Ret.), whose opinion the President is said to respect quite a bit, has sent two classified cables underlining how problematic it will be to send more troops until President Hamid Karzai demonstrates a willingness to clean up his government.
-jpt
November 12, 2009 in Afghanistan, Obama, Barack | Permalink | Share | User Comments (242)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
You know I think this Afghanistan thing has got to be over with, how long do Americans have to keep dying in that godforsaken place.
Posted by: ariel | Nov 24, 2009 8:04:38 PM
"Just like Vietnam. Yes I am a veteran. The politicians ran the war and ignored the in theatre commanders..."
Doesn't matter. Vietnam, Afghanistan and Pakistan are not "wars" that are going to be won through military action. You can't conquer Afghanistan - that's been proven over thousands of years.
The "war on terrorism" is not a military war it is a political one. We have to defend ourselves from terrorism while finding a way to disenfranchise the enemy from their power base.
Just killing guerrillas is not sufficient to stop the threat, you have to cut them off at the source - persuade people that the enemy is does not represent them. Or more importantly that we are not their enemy.
Posted by: OB-Wan222 | Nov 13, 2009 10:02:32 PM
"Wasn't WWII fought this way and WE WON with the help of OUR ALLIES !"
Actually if you knew anything about WWII you would know that the allies rarely agreed on what should be done. The British wanted to keep going in Italy, the US wanted to withdraw troops to prepare for D-Day and the Russians wanted us to invade Europe in 1943.
There are always difficult decisions to be made in wartime and throwing more troops into the situation is not always the best answer.
Posted by: OB-Wan222 | Nov 13, 2009 9:55:03 PM
Good God Almighty !!
When fighting two(2) wars at the same time, one must have first priority for troops and supplies. Wasn't WWII fought this way and WE WON with the help of OUR ALLIES !
Stop looking for benchmarks for success--This is War !
The only benchmark that really count is the death of our enemies or total surrender. So.
Stop looking at Afghan as Vietnam. It will be helpful to look at that Police Action some 60yrs ago, that has not ended. The Korean War is still alive today and slowly growing stronger.
President Obama DOES NOT have the hearts and mind (real support) for our brave fighting soldiers in todays military.
Obama's hesitancy is only destorying our troops morale and a distrust among our allies toward the U.S.
Posted by: TobinMCRet | Nov 13, 2009 7:52:10 PM
Obama will be a one term president because he is helping illegal aliens and wants amnesty for them. The majority of the American public do not want amnesty. Furthermore, I think this administration has been to do with the resignation of Lou Dobbs (CNN). The reason? Because Lou Dobbs told us the thruth about illegal aliens and other issues as well. --------------
---------------- It was what on my mind too. Freedom of speech is in danger.
Posted by: talk from sf | Nov 13, 2009 7:32:45 PM
I am not sure we even know who the enemy is anymore. First it was Sadam
then the different groups that struggled
for power after Sadam was gone, then
the Taliban, and then the groups in
Palistine, and then...... I thought
we were suppose to be after Bin Laden?
Posted by: wasteofmoney | Nov 13, 2009 2:18:58 PM
It is obvious that many of you use
the word "win" in a totally military
physical view point. The situation is much more complicated
than that and their are more variables
to consider... Thank God some of you are not active military now.. This is not world war II. We will never fight
a war like that again and that war
was only 5 years... open your eyes.
Bad mistakes kill more troops such as
the valley and Fort Hood. Oh, those are Obama's fault also..Hey where was the
homeland security in that later? You
have such a false sense of security thinking they are all still in some cave.
Posted by: baddecisions | Nov 13, 2009 2:15:05 PM
Mike From carolina how about this! We Are At War" Make any since? We Are AT War and they WILL come to America again because this president will show them he is a coward just like Jimmy Carter and desk job Clinton
Posted by: Jim Rod | Nov 13, 2009 11:56:18 AM
Just like Vietnam. Yes I am a veteran. The politicians ran the war and ignored the in theatre commanders. Lets see? wake up at home to bacon and eggs and read the morning paper drink my coffee politicians or' wake up in the field/ combat to C or K rations and sleep with your weapon in hand, take a cold rinse if your lucky, forget the shave because your already under fire. Think I would listen to the guy who is protecting my a--.
Posted by: Jim Rod | Nov 13, 2009 11:53:13 AM
He is so full of himself
and arrogant, but surely no evidence
he should be that confident because he
comes off as such a dufus.
________________________________
Yet another example of insult and name calling as intelligent political discussion.
Posted by: tierra | Nov 13, 2009 10:29:04 AM
I cannot stomach to even watch Obama
on tv anymore.He is so full of himself
and arrogant, but surely no evidence
he should be that confident because he
comes off as such a dufus. All style
and no substance. We have been duped.
Posted by: wis134 | Nov 13, 2009 7:09:32 AM
Obama will be a one term president because he is helping illegal aliens and wants amnesty for them. The majority of the American public do not want amnesty. Furthermore, I think this administration has been to do with the resignation of Lou Dobbs (CNN). The reason? Because Lou Dobbs told us the thruth about illegal aliens and other issues as well. For these issues and the current economy, Barack Obama will not be reelected. I will not vote for Barack Obama.
Posted by: Lesly | Nov 13, 2009 7:02:36 AM
When the President, who served in Congress 2 years before becoming president, actually believes he knows more than the Pentagon and blows off their recomendations
___________________________________
Seems he wants to see an exit strategy - a long-term approach. You remember how Bush and Cheney still didn't have a strategy after 7 years - and then threw one together in the fall of 2008? I don't think Obama wants our troops to be in there for another 7 years - or more.
Posted by: tierra | Nov 13, 2009 3:55:02 AM
When the President, who served in Congress 2 years before becoming president, actually believes he knows more than the Pentagon and blows off their recomendations, there's a BIG problem. It's called arrogance. Obama obviously wants to be in control over any and everthing. Said state of affairs. This is not the hope and change people thought they were getting.
Posted by: bailedout | Nov 13, 2009 3:31:38 AM
Does Obama have the courage to make the right decision and reverse a self immolating foreign policy that he didn't create... That is left to him, and him alone...
Jafo asks if Odumbo has courage. Answer = no. Other presidents had a foreign policy of protecting the US. Obummer sees the muslim terrorists as his friends and that is why he is having a hard time doing the right thing.
Posted by: liberwhacker | Nov 13, 2009 3:00:43 AM
There must not have been a "Surrender with Apology" option for Obungle to chose.
Posted by: liberwhacker | Nov 13, 2009 2:54:24 AM
We all know who really 'dithered' and that was Bush and Cheney.
For 7 years they left Afghanistan on the back burner to simmer as the Taliban and al Qaeda regrouped and got stronger. Finally during the fall of 2008 they threw together a strategy - just before getting booted out of office.
Our troops and the Afghani people are paying a terrible price for the 'dithering' Bush and Cheney did.
Even the Generals are saying Obama has and should have the time to make this decision - they wouldn't be moving any troops in until next year anyway.
Posted by: tierra | Nov 13, 2009 2:27:13 AM
===========================
Not only is Obama smarter than Wall Street, the automobile industry, the insurance industry and the healthcare industry. Now he's smarter than every general in the United States military.
===========================
WOW!! All this from a junior senator with less than 2 years of federal government experience.
If the private sector put a CEO in position with less than 2 years experience, we'd say that was nuts.
Posted by: N Waff | Nov 13, 2009 1:55:16 AM
Jimmy Carter, Jr. 2012 can't come too soon.
Posted by: C Wagner | Nov 13, 2009 12:12:15 AM
supporting our servicemen in combat.
Posted by: ragnar
just curious, why didn't Bush send more troops when he received the request..
guess he was Jimmy Carter too....
Posted by: YO | Nov 13, 2009 12:09:11 AM
Post a comment


