Afghanistan speech

[bytor2112]

I didn't watch the speech.......anybody have any thoughts? Personally, I think if he is going to announce the exit date, we should just exit now.

Der Speigel.

One didn't have to be a cadet on Tuesday to feel a bit of nausea upon hearing Obama's speech. It was the least truthful address that he has ever held. He spoke of responsibility, but almost every sentence smelled of party tactics. He demanded sacrifice, but he was unable to say what it was for exactly.

Seems Rummy is calling the Prez out a false claim:

In a rare break in his public silence since leaving the Pentagon, Rumsfeld rejected the claim as a "bald misstatement" and "disservice" that cannot go unanswered.

[bytor2112]

I don't follow foreign affairs nearly as close as economic news. Economic news tends to dominate my thoughts...because that is the business I am in. I have always had mixed feelings about Iraq and Afghanistan. I want America to succeed...but at the same time, I wouldn't want my sons to be over there.

I would hate to be making the decisions. On that note, I pray for President Obama as I did President Bush in the hopes that he will use every means at his disposal to achieve the objective (whatever that may be) and bring our folks home.

[Vort]

I thought it was a very good speech. I can see why this man won the confidence of most of the US (and the rest of the world), despite being a Chicago politician who seemingly stands on the wrong side of almost every issue. I'm not qualified to talk about the veracity of his statements.

[ADoyle90815]

I thought it was a good speech, as Afghanistan still needs more troops as we are still at war against terrorists and those who support them. I do have a cousin who is in that country right now, doing his part in fighting this war.

[Just_A_Guy]

I didn't see the speech. Regarding the strategy itself: announcing an exit date isn't what I'd have done, but if it helps us get the Afghan people on our side then that could neutralize a lot of opposition and encourage the Afghans to step up to the plate to build themselves a peaceful and stable country. I'll give the President the benefit of the doubt on this; a couple of years from now we'll all know whether he deserved it.

[Maxel]

I'm always amazed at how politicians can make the most double-minded plan seem resolute and like a good idea.

30,000 troops? As opposed to the 40,000 suggested by General McCrystal? Are we in this war to win it or not? If a real timeline is set for winning the war, and we don't sacrifice enough resources to win in that time, what's going to happen? If I were a Taliban 'mastermind', I'd retreat, maybe make it look like the Americans are winning while secretly maintaining a strong presence so that, once the opposing armies are gone, I could once again regain control.

In that case, the thousands of lives that have been marred by this war will have been marred in vain. It's frustrating and infuriating.

[Vort]

I will say that I thought his stated strategy of withdrawal was a foolish thing to say. Better to make the withdrawal plan secret and tell only our allies rather than publicly announce it. I think Maxel has hit the nail on the head.

[FunkyTown]

I am agog. This was the most mature, wonderful, amazing posting I have seen on here in a while.

I would pray for the boys, too. I want them all to come home safe and I hope this whole mess in Afghanistan gets sorted out because of this.

[Guest Godless]

I will say that I thought his stated strategy of withdrawal was a foolish thing to say. Better to make the withdrawal plan secret and tell only our allies rather than publicly announce it. I think Maxel has hit the nail on the head.

Agreed. Telling the enemy how long they have to lay low is a pretty dumb thing to do. And I can't shake the feeling that the timeline may have been influenced by reelection prospects in 2012. Only time will tell though.

[Just_A_Guy]

And I can't shake the feeling that the timeline may have been influenced by reelection prospects in 2012. Only time will tell though.

I, for one, thought it was a gutsy move. But if things don't settle down, then right before an election year the President will either have to a) antagonize his base (and delight [but not satisfy] his opposition) by breaking his promise and keeping the troops there; or b) tell the electorate that less than four years after George Bush implemented a "surge" in Iraq to generally favorable results, Obama was unable to make the same strategy work in Afghanistan.

My understanding was that because the way the local terrain interplays with logistics and infrastructure requirements, Afghanistan couldn't really take a larger US military presence than what was already there (or, at least that a larger presence couldn't be deployed effectively). Godless--any thoughts?

Edited December 2, 2009 by Just_A_Guy

[bluedreams]

I thought it was a pretty good speech....unfortunately I wasn't all up for politics last night and fell asleep nearer the end of the first half. I haven't been following the coverage on the afghanistan front as much as I could....but it didn't seem that bad to my not so educated self. Feasible with possible holes in the plan, but not large gaping ones that I could see possibly sucker punching us later on.

With luv,

BD

[Vort]

I, for one, thought it was a gutsy move.

What was courageous about it? It was designed to pander to his base while mollifying his opposition. Can you point out the brave parts of what he said?

[bytor2112]

The concerning thing is that he said pretty much the same thing as he did in a couple of earlier speeches....which begs the question, WHY, did you wait so long to announce the same plan you outlined in March? Why the delay Mr. President?

[Guest Godless]

I, for one, thought it was a gutsy move. But if things don't settle down, then right before an election year the President will either have to a) antagonize his base (and delight [but not satisfy] his opposition) by breaking his promise and keeping the troops there; or b) tell the electorate that less than four years after George Bush implemented a "surge" in Iraq to generally favorable results, Obama was unable to make the same strategy work in Afghanistan.

The surge is a gutsy move, and I'm not necessarily against it. It worked fairly well in Iraq, after all. I just don't see a reason to announce a timeline for withdrawal before those 30,000 troops even have orders.

My understanding was that because the way the local terrain interplays with logistics and infrastructure requirements, Afghanistan couldn't really take a larger US military presence than what was already there (or, at least that a larger presence couldn't be deployed effectively). Godless--any thoughts?

You may be right. I know that convoy operations are pretty thin over there due to the geography, which is why I haven't been over there yet. As far as other logistical/support operations are concerned, I honestly have no clue how or if geography would be a factor. It's possible that the bulk of this surge will consist of additional infantry and armor units to beef up the actual combat force, but that's just pure unfounded speculation on my part.

[Just_A_Guy]

What was courageous about it? It was designed to pander to his base while mollifying his opposition. Can you point out the brave parts of what he said?

I edited an early draft of this post poorly, Vort, and thus included some confusing language. I think it's gutsy of the President because, if it doesn't work, the electoral consequences will for him be so dire.