When it comes to Afghanistan, it all depends upon who you ask.
Nearly a month after Obama unveiled his revised Afghanistan strategy, military and civilian leaders have come away with differing views of several fundamental aspects of the president’s new approach, according to more than a dozen senior administration and military officials involved in Afghanistan policy, all of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.
Members of Obama’s war cabinet disagree over the meaning of his pledge to begin drawing down forces in July 2011 and whether the mission has been narrowed from a proposal advanced by McChrystal in his August assessment of the war. The disagreements have opened a fault line between a desire for an early exit among several senior officials at the White House and a conviction among military commanders that victory is still achievable on their terms.
Which to me, is troubling.
The core principal ingrained in every military officer is that their mission is to “fight and win the nation’s wars.” The White House instead is focusing on a narrower mission that may be more pragmatic, based on the facts on the ground in Afghanistan, but is equally likely to be based upon political calculations. Seen that way, the Afghan surge becomes a “good old college try” before the troops come home in time for the national election in 2012. We gave it all we had, you know. Terrible thing.
Nothing more to be done.
Should that come to pass, the war in Afghanistan will have been magically transmogrified from a “good war” that had to be fought, to just another mess from the previous administration left to be swept up.
Stay tuned.
Seen that way, the Afghan surge becomes a “good old college try” before the troops come home in time for the national election in 2012. We gave it all we had, you know. Terrible thing.
Quite right, old pip.
Not at all like that unfortunate business with the Sudetenland in ’38, because if we had *known* that Bavarian upstart was going to come after us, we would have worded our displeasure in a much sterner manner.
Chai?
The Democrats have become a party of cowards, and appeasers. Harry Truman must not be resting very easily. They just can’y believe that feeding everyone else to the crocodile will not keep them from being eaten in turn.
You are up early on the West Coast, Sir!
Which there was a son to transport to the airport for his flight back to P-Cola, and it’s not like TSA has gotten any simpler these days…
Is the young man turning out to be a “good stick?”
Better yet: How many vignettes of his current experiences mirrored your very own, so many years ago?
Some things never change…except the names of the actors in the play.
I trust it was a wonderful time for the whole family.
Ah, he’s still in a pool, waiting for a class date. I suspect while Navy waits to find out how many aircraft carriers we get to keep.
I’m not a big fan of Harry after reading the history of the Korean “police action” and how his botched foreign policy essentially invited Stalin to “green light” Korea’s attack. Truman basically told the world we wouldn’t fight to defend the South.
Paul, you need to read more history. Specifically about Mr. Truman, the era, and the players if your sole data point is Korea. A bit simplistic IMO.
Most of the historical documents that I’ve read and listened to indicate that HT never meant for NK (really the USSR using NK a a proxy, and to a lesser extent China) to attack SK.
Should you have any evidence that HT gave a “green light” for North Korea (with Chinese assistance far more than from the USSR) I would be most interested in the links to same. Please do not reference the speech by Acheson as evidence of a “green light” as that old dog has not hunted for quite some time. I agree that Stalin did intrepet Acheson’s speech as one of the elements in his decision to tell NK to attack, but is was only one of the elements: again, HT never said that is was o.k with him if NK attacked SK.
One might also ask that if HT told the world we would not fight, then why did HT immediately take steps to do so, in concurrence with the U.N., after SK was attacked?
HT has been consistently rated one of the top ten Presidents, and that rating is based upon the challenges, effort and accomplishments of his Presidency, not a single event. On the other hand, I guess you can be a fan of whomever you wish, for whatever reason you desire.
Somewhat tongue-in-cheek, if I looked at nothing else other than HT authorizing dropping the bombs on Japan, that alone makes up for Korea in my mind. Knowing that using the bombs on Japan meant my Father was able to come home from his walking scenic tour of the ETO instead of going the Pacific would of course never color my opinion.
Spengler” in the Asia Times has a particularly thoughtful article on this subject in which he takes a comprehensive look at the tactics/strategy that should be utilized taking into consideration the entire region to include China and India–the two countries he believes ultimately hold the key to both Afghanistan and Pakistan’s fate–both of which will, in any event he believes continue to be running sores, but manageable ones with the increased “input”/influence of these two nations. But they will only do so at the prodding of a strong America, he believes. And our Obama/Gates led unilateral disarmament is no way to do that or inspire their confidence, he opines, and will drive them into the arms of the Russians seeking advanced arms to boot. Everyone should go read this extensive but very good article.
Once again, I hate to sound like a broken record. But with skin in the game, so to speak, if I ever become convinced that his service was wasted in this manner, I will be well past pissed on the outrage scale.
Interesting anecdote from our two week float around Central America with the swells. Two hundred folks on the boat, 120 Americans. Median age was probably around 55, so kids ultimately came into the dinner conversation. Probably talked to 100 of the 120 — we were the only couple on board with a child currently on active duty. One woman, wife of a Walnut Creek doc, was going on and on about her son’s recent Boalt Hall graduation, and the tough life he faced as a lawyer. Only consolation was that he was headed to Thailand for three months on a last “fling” before he applies the grindstone to his nose. I said, “Yea, my son is going on a one year foreign trip.” “Oh, how wonderful. Where is he going?” “Afghanistan.” Coulda heard a pin drop.
I thought the young child of incredible privilege (honeymooners, Wall Street banker, hedge fund manager wife — in their late twenties, they scarfed caviar like it was chicken nuggets, and obviously something they were pretty used to) was going to unzip my pants right there and reprise Marilyn’s famous Olangopo show. You could tell he was shamed that someone else was fighting for his right to caviar and champagne. What is really painful, is that these people have an intellectual interest in our battles — AW1, others, and I have an emotional interest. This isn’t conceptual, it is real. I understand Biden had a son serve in Iraq. But he wasn’t toting a SAW like Knucklehead Two will be — he was writing POAs and giving LOAC lectures. Again, intellectual investment. It isn’t the same.
Thanks for the chance to vent.
FWIW, keep venting. People need to hear this…in all corners.
Godspeed to Knucklehead Two, and to all the lads and lasses on a ‘foreign trip’. I look forward to reading of his safe return.
Scott
You Sir, are a dick. I mean that in the best way.
God bless your son, you, and your entire family. I am hoping you are all together next Christmas having a good laugh.
Scott my Man! I only wish I could have been there to see the look on their faces! I used to love being at polite, “cerebral” cocktail-parties with the “swells” in Louisville in the late 70s and when the conversation came around to what I, as a new-comer to Louisville did in my “former” life the conversation would inevitably come to a grinding halt as my concluding sentence would contain something like: “…and I/we obviously didn’t kill enough of ‘em.” People would start to drift away in ever-expanding concentric circles. I, for one, enjoyed the hell out of it, (chortle) but my poor already suffering new wife would be appalled: “Why? Why? MUST you insist on doing that?…Do you want to ensure that we NEVER make any new friends!”, etc.
No, Scott, fellow Prairie-Stater Hemmingway was wrong. Today’s modern rich ARE different–so very substantially different– from we here in more ways than besides the fact they may have more money–as your little vignette so aptly reveals.
Rant on, Scott, rant on…
I am hoping that rants are healthy -if not I am in more trouble than I think I am.
Scott, as always for yourself and others that have loved ones serving, esp. overseas, my very best to all.
Regards,
Why is it that, in my minds eye, I can see and hear you actually go “chortle”?
Scott,
I wish that I could have been there to drop the pin…
And my fervent wish is for Knucklehead Two to be laughing with you and the rest of the family at the Christmas table next year.
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the blog post From the Front: 12/28/2009 News and Personal dispatches from the front and the home front.