Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Obama caves on Afghanistan

McClatchy is reporting that Obama will announce on 1 December, the decision to send an additional 34000 soldiers to Afghanistan.

The Monday evening meeting was the ninth that Obama has held on the crisis in Afghanistan, where the worsening war entered its ninth year last month. This year has seen violence reach unprecedented levels as the Taliban and allied groups have gained strength and expanded their reach.

A U.S. military official used the term "decisional" to describe Monday evening's meeting among Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Gates, Clinton, National Security Adviser Jim Jones, Eikenberry and senior U.S. military commanders.

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.

So continues a long American tradition (dating back to the insurgency battles in the Philippines) of the United States committing troops [or escalating in this case] against an enemy who neither attacked us nor poses a security threat to us. This decision spotlights the Obama Administration as decidedly un-liberal and bringing about little to no 'hope' or 'change'.

This decision further taxes our already worn military establishment, allowing for nearly no reserves in contingency.

This decision also comes amidst our ironically recent tradition of funding and supporting our own enemies.

No word yet on any substantial strategy shift from the Administration.......but as we have not yet defined the mission......after eight years.....what's the point right? War seems to be good business.

In a related note House Appropriations Chairman David Obey has called for a 'war surtax' to fund the ongoing....and going.....and going....effort.

"On the merits, I think it is a mistake to deepen our involvement," Obey said. "But if we are going to do that, then at least we ought to pay for it. Because if we don't, if we don't pay for it, the cost of the Afghan war will wipe out every initiative we have to rebuild our own economy."

Normally, I'm set against almost any new taxes....but as we have not been asked to mobilize, sacrifice or contribute to this allegedly vital effort.....maybe it's times this splendid little adventure hits it's ardent [and armchair] supporters where it hurts.

Strangely...Mr. HopeandChange states today.....

Signaling he's decided on new troop levels for the Afghanistan war, President Barack Obama said Tuesday he intends to "finish the job" on his watch and destroy terrorist networks in the region.

As Al Qaeda is not in Afghanistan [save a few footsoldiers/forward observers], how are more troops in Afghanistan going to accomplish that?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.