The record will show that I am certainly no fan of the O-bomb. But while I would gladly take part in another political flogging of the president, I will give him credit for his decision to send reinforcements to Afghanistan.
Obama’s decision was certainly a pleasant surprise to me. By this time I would have expected the Democrat to hand Iraq back to the insurgents and leave the Afghans and Pakistanis alone to fight the extremists on their own. Instead I hear today that he will send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan to reinforce those already stationed there. This tells me that he intends to get the job done and not cut and run as many expected him to. This after his pledge earlier this year to send another 17,000 troops to the war-torn country.
I will throw this one jab his way and say that the delay in his decision was a political stunt meant to avoid the appearance of a “rush to war” president as he has routinely accused Bush 43. With his delayed decision, he maintains the position of having thought long and hard while not taking such a decision lightly. According to the White House, he took the time to meet with his commanders including Defense Secretary Robert Gates and General David Petraeus.
Obama will no doubt lose face with his base for his decision to escalate the war. Already Michael Moore, rumored to be carrier zero of Swine Flu, has called Obama the “New War President” and MoveOn has posted links to petitions and other flamboyantly lame attempts at activism with a touch of political grand-standing.
Lucky for the United States, and indeed the world, Obama has just this once set aside the politics. While many of the fanatically antiwar protestors have applied their Iraq-style unconditional disdain towards Afghanistan, the rational and logical world realizes what is at stake:
Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons.
The Taliban are now fighting a two front war, with their real target being the nuclear weapons of their moderate Islamic neighbor. If the government in Pakistan falls, then surely a fundamentalist Islamic Regime will rise in its place, assuming stewardship of the big red button. This would give the Taliban and Al Qaeda what they’ve always wanted, a means of destroying Israel and the United States with a single blow.
Instead, we now have the Taliban sandwiched. A newly invigorated Pakistan on its right flank, taking back the territory it foolishly ceded the fanatics in hopes of peace. To the right, a force of 100,000 American Soldiers reinforced by NATO troops and an ever growing Afghan Army.
Clearly the Taliban and Al Qaeda are in a desperate position. They previously attempted to destabilize the Pakistani government by dragging India into the conflict through the Mumbai attack of 2008. This was clearly a lesson they learned from Saddam Hussein in the first Gulf War when he attempted to destroy the alliance of American, European, and Arab countries by firing missiles into Israel. Saddam knew that an Israeli counter attack would bring the Muslim countries over to his side. Similarly, the Taliban knew that Indian involvement in the War on Terror would cause Pakistan, a long time enemy of India, to side with the Jihadis.
Thanks to Indian restraint, Pakistani courage, and now Obama’s double down, the Taliban are certainly sweating in their dirty pajamas tonight. I would not expect them to do nothing. They will undoubtedly attempt to fill the headlines with suicide bombers and IEDs. But these are the last, desperate attacks of a enemy whose days are numbered.
To those who would say this is just more war mongering from another conservative, I am happy to say that I was able to enjoy this Thanksgiving with my cousin, who only recently returned from a 15 month tour (his second) in Afghanistan. Also there were his three young boys and newborn baby girl along with his wonderful wife who handled the four kids on her own while her husband was overseas operating on wounded soldiers and Afghan civilians for more than a year. So I am absolutely NOT in a hurry to see him deployed again. But I also don’t want all of that to be for nothing. I want the job done and it’s starting to look like the President does as well.
~Man Overboard
Image used in this Post
Soldier in Afghanistan photo courtesy of Flickr user The_US_Army published under the CC license.
6 Comments
Great article.
I am anti-war and I voted for President Obama. But I believe he made the right choice here to send a large amount of troops. This war has gone on waaaaay too long, and I think a massive surge will help finish this job sooner than later.
And hopefully Obama can catch Osama while he’s at it.
As of my ride into work this morning, I heard the number of additional troops has been increased to 35,000. We’ll find out officially tonight when the President addresses the nation.
Either way, Obama’s move deserves to be applauded on its own merit and I applaud you Jack for giving said merit. The President clearly listened to his military advisors and trusted the recommendations of those more clearly informed than himself. It will be interesting to see the political shakedown that comes from the mouthpieces of his own party where there is a steadfast liberal agenda that denounces unilateralism.
Perhaps Obama will continue to break rank, make tough political decisions and walk a more moderate path in an effort to be reelected.
I’m a little apprehensive about this move, if for no other reason but that we are supporting another corrupt strongman in Karzai which has all the makings of turning Afghanistan into Iran circa 1979, Cuba circa 1959, etc. Then there’s the part about no foreign country ever successfully occupying Afghanistan. I am definitely disappointed in this decision, but the alternative wouldn’t be any better. Why can’t they just get their own friggin act together?
You’ve just summed up the problem with our foreign policy of proxy wars during the cold war and the political challenges of the war of terror in a single paragraph.
Unfortunately, the answer to both is nothing more than ungodly ammounts of money or manpower. We literally need to buy the allegience of the Afghans through security and public works. Petreaus’ Iraq surge moto of “money is ammunition” is dead on here. Give these people some semblence of a future and you give them a reason to reject the Taliban.
But if we just hand them a crate of weapons and then walk away, then we’re making the same mistake we made in the 80’s with the soviet occupation that put the Taliban in power.
This is definitely the way to go. We’ve been neglecting Afghanistan for 6 years now, and it’s high time that we put money into their training, security, and education. The calls from the left wingnuts to leave Afghanistan are hollow and ignore the reality that the country a) isn’t stable b) needs a profitable profession that isn’t “poppy farmer” c) is drastically undereducated. Even someone who accidentally stumbled into a screening of “Charlie Wilson’s War” looking for “National Treasures: Book of Secrets” would know enough to shrug this aside as line toeing.
However, I think that Obama was right to wait. He had all of the time in the world! All reports coming out of Afghanistan for the past few years have sounded the same tone: the insurgency is dangerous, the country is stable, and the complicated landscape of tribal boundaries makes the situation more complicated than anyone imagined. None of this has changed for *years.* Taking an extra month to get it right is probably a hell of a lot cheaper than the alternative.
I agree with Jake’s sentiment in what Afghanistan needs to be successful and stable. One thing I am concerned about, and this goes for all of the conflicts the U.S. has gotten itself ever since, and including, Korea, is that we deploy troops and various forms of aid in hopes that the people of those countries will be uplifted and end their oppression.
What we have either not realized, or not been able to help affect in those countries, is supporting a strong and leader(s) who is (are) not corrupt with a clear and inspiring vision for their people. We have limited capabilities just by being foreigners. Native leadership must be the vehicle to bring their people from the depths of oppression and despair with a plan for a better future. It would be better to find and support these types of individuals who are already respected by their people, and offer the aid that is asked of us rather than forcing the types of aid and infrastructure we believe to be worthwhile. That removes the argument of the opposition groups who argue the leaders we support are U.S. puppets, because we are assisting the people in the way they demand, not the way we see fit. Even if that means sometimes providing aid in forms we do not agree with, as long as it is not harmful or threatening to our security.
Easier said than done, I know. Many will argue with me saying that is exactly what we have attempted to do in Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, etc. But I disagree. That is just stroking your U.S.-centric self in believing that we truly were acting in the best interests of all of those people. We were very different cultures, and continue to be, so we need to recognize that sometimes other people want to live differently from us and that is OK as long as they respect us and do not threaten us economically or militarily.