Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Some real thinking on Afghanistan?




I am greatly encouraged to see that the Obama admin. is seriously reconsidering the escalation in Afghanistan that we've been drifting towards since our new president took office. Here's an article in the NYT about Obama's seeming reticence to commit further: "Obama Considers Strategy Shift in Afghan War." My favorite line:




Although Mr. Obama has said that a stable Afghanistan is central to the security of the United States, some advisers said he was also wary of becoming trapped in an overseas quagmire. Some Pentagon officials say they worry that he is having what they called “buyer’s remorse” after ordering an extra 21,000 troops there within weeks of taking office before even settling on a strategy.



Does it strike anyone else as nuts that anyone wouldn't have "buyers remorse" after committing to something this deadly serious before they'd even had a chance to consider whether it was a good idea?


This article from Spencer Ackermann sheds light on how the politics of escalation are playing out in the byzantine world of our national security establishment: "Gates at the Gates: The Most Important Man in the Afhganistan Debate."

1 comment:

  1. Obama's decision to add 21,000 troops to Afghanistan without completing the policy review or outline a strategy for victory (whatever that may mean) was an indication that he is committed to escalating the war or is trying to buy time to figure out what he wants to do with American lives and dollars.

    While I find his recent skepticism of sending more soldiers to Afghanistan encouraging, I am worried that he is painting himself into a corner. On Sunday he went on five different TV shows and expressed his skepticism, only to have a memo from the US Commander in Afghanistan leak the next day saying that without a change in strategy and more troops thee war will be lost (whatever that may mean). This does not inspire much confidence in the Admin's ability to control the narrative.

    Is this a war of necessity or of choice? Obama has insisted that it is the former, and I fear he way muddle his way through the conflict (at great cost to America) simply to avoid the perception that he "lost" the war.

    ReplyDelete