President Obama to Announce: More Troops, Resources, Diplomacy for Afghanistan-Pakistan
Email
President Obama will tomorrow lay out an "unprecedented effort focused on fighting al Qaeda and its allies," administration officials said Thursday evening, describing new regional strategy for dealing with Afghanistan and Pakistan with a clearly stated goal, four thousand new troops, more civilian aid, aggressive diplomacy, timetables, and ways to ensure accountability.
The speech will be "the culmination of a very heavily consulted and highly coordinated policy review" with the leaders of Afghanistan and Pakistan, regional allies, NATO members, the European Union, military leaders, and bipartisan leaders on Capitol Hill, an administration official said.
The President will make the announcement — cautioning that the fight will not be easy, and will get tougher before it gets easier — standing in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen, and others.
Seven and a half years after the 9/11 attacks, an official said, the Al Qaeda threat remains strong. Its central leadership has moved from Kandahar, Afghanistan to unknown parts of Pakistan. The terrorist leaders are plotting against the U.S., working with their allies.
"They’re planning to do the worst they can," the official said.
The new U.S mission is clear, another administration official said. "To disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda and their allies, destroy their safe havens, and prevent them from rebuilding."
A secondary mission is to reverse the momentum Taliban fighters have achieved in the past few years, officials said. By every measure, officials said, the Taliban has been experiencing a resurgence, attacking US and NATO forces with greater strength.
The 4,000 new US troops will be tasked with training the Afghanistan National Army.
By mid-2011, the Obama administration expects a fully trained Afghan Army of 135,000 and a fully trained Afghanistan Police Force — to be trained by the French and other NATO and European Union member countries — of 80,000. There are approximately 70,000 Afghan Army troops, and fewer than 40,000 Afghan police, officials said.
President Obama spoke today to Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari and Afghan President Hamid Karzai, officials said, describing the president as being "gratified by their reception to the new strategy." The two leaders were pleased by the "refocused effort that is fully resourced with a clear goal and accountability," officials said.
The Obama administration will push continued and aggressive diplomacy with Zardari and Karzai, sending Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke to be "in the face of the parties constantly," an administration official said. Every six-to-eight weeks, Holbrooke will engaged in bilateral meetings with leaders in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and every three months he will engage in trilateral meetings
The new policy in Afghanistan will also include hundreds more civilian workers to assist in developing agriculture, governance, anti-corruption efforts, and disrupting the narcotics trade.
"This is a strategy, not a strait jacket," an official said, meaning the administration will adapt accordingly. In the Fall, the administration will evaluate the impact that has been made by the additional 30,000-plus US troops that will have been sent to Afghanistan since election day — the 10,000 or so troops President Bush sent after Election Day but before the Inauguration, the 17,000 troops the President requested a few weeks ago, and the newly-ordered 4,000.
Asked about reported tensions between the US and Karzai, an administration official said that Karzai has been criticizing the US effort in his country for being "under-resourced" and for insufficiently dealing with the Pakistani component to challenges in the areas. The new policy addresses both issues, the official said.
The Obama administration officials said that intelligence sources report that some Taliban fighters could be convinced to break away — ones fighting the US right now for the money or because of tribal feuds. "We think if we break (the Taliban’s) momentum we can have a significant impact" in eroding their fighting forces, the official said, after which would begin an "assimilation process" to bring them back into Afghan society.
But the notion of bringing Taliban into the fold should not be overstated, officials cautioned. "We are not negotiating with Mullah Omar. And Mullah Omar is not interested in negotiating with us. He is interested in running all foreigners out of his country and returning his nation to the Medieval hell it was in the 90s."
Mr. Obama, officials said, will tomorrow also announced support increasing military assistance to Pakistan focused on aiding that country’s ability to combat insurgents and terrorists — by increasing air mobility along the Western border, for instance. But that support will only come with strong conditions on and oversight of the Pakistani military.
To guard against the waste, fraud, and abuse that has marred so much of the US effort in Iraq, the Obama administration is also requesting in its budget a "dramatic increase in funding" for inspectors general in the State Department and UNSAID, officials said.
The president will also outline new diplomatic efforts in Pakistan, including support for legislation that will triple U.S. economic assistance to Pakistan, increasing it to $1.5 billion a year, with a five-year commitment at that funding level. The bill was offered by Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Dick Lugar, R-Ind., chair and ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, respectively.
The president will also support a different bipartisan bill that would create reconstruction opportunity zones along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.
- jpt
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
Let’s hope this is the beginning of the way out of the mess and not the way in to the Big Muddy (and the big fool says to push on) ala Vietnam with thousands of good, solid American troops killed for no good reason.
Posted by: sophillyfatz | March 26, 2009, 9:32 pm 9:32 pm
Some state senator somewhere is preparing a speech right about now, speaking out against committing more troops to Afghanistan and Pakistan. This state senator will end up running for President starting two years from now claiming to have the foresight and judgement to not make such a mistake. Isn’t that basically what Obama did?
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | March 26, 2009, 9:43 pm 9:43 pm
Obama = Bush 3. And he’s killed dozens of Pakistani civilians since taking office, which makes him a war criminal.
Posted by: Justin | March 26, 2009, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm
WestCoastMessenger:”Some state senator somewhere is preparing a speech right about now, speaking out against committing more troops to Afghanistan and Pakistan… Isn’t that basically what Obama did?”
Um, no, not really. But it is telling of your critical thinking ability that you think opposing starting a war would be the same as opposing adopting a particular strategy in the midst of one.
Posted by: jhw539 | March 26, 2009, 9:52 pm 9:52 pm
here we go a black bush in office!
Posted by: Cindy | March 26, 2009, 9:57 pm 9:57 pm
Obama = Bush3 * Carter2
Posted by: young_voter | March 26, 2009, 10:02 pm 10:02 pm
God speed.
Posted by: MayBee | March 26, 2009, 10:04 pm 10:04 pm
“I’m glad i don’t live in NY or DC”
As a New Yorker, that makes two of us. From the sound of it, even the most befuddled French tourist has more spine than you.
Posted by: jhw539 | March 26, 2009, 10:09 pm 10:09 pm
Obama is sending another 4000 troops to Afghanistan. That’s in addition to the 17,000 he is already sending.He is moving troops from Iraq to Afghanistan. That’s change you can believe in.!! LOL
Posted by: CW | March 26, 2009, 10:10 pm 10:10 pm
“Operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and the war on terrorism have reduced the pace of military transformation and have revealed our lack of preparation for defensive and stability operations. This Administration has OVEREXTENDED OUR MILITARY. I don’t oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war.” – Barack Obama, February 12, 2008
Posted by: Justin | March 26, 2009, 10:11 pm 10:11 pm
The NY times report of the Pakistan intelligence working with the Taliban and providing all kinds of support to fight the US troops if true is a cause for worry. The Afghan President has been pointing a finger at the ISI, the Pakistan’s spy agency. The terrorist network supported by the ISI threatens the entire region and the control of Pakistan is mostly in the hands of the non governmental factions and maybe the government of Zardari controls 10%. So wonder why the US keeps pumping foreign aid to Pakistan when the aid seems to reach the groups that are killing American soldiers (instead of the people of Pakistan)and requiring more and more troops to be deployed. 17,000 last week and 4,000 more in the near future. There is a good reason why success seems elusive; there are elements which are hunting with the hound and running with the hare. Decisive steps need to be taken to end the nexus between the Taliban and the Alqaeda. John McCain claimed during the campaign he knew where Osama is hiding, is he not sharing his secrets? I think Obama administration is right in anticipating trouble from the wild west of Pakistan and reaching the shores of America or the shores of Normandy (where the President is planning to visit). The situation is not very different from the days before 911 but I would anticipate the 91109 attack may take place in Europe or elsewhere. So it is a question of time and it would be prudent to strike before they do. American and NATO troops and the Karzai govt. need a bail out more than the AIG and the banks.
Posted by: gjkotw01 | March 26, 2009, 10:12 pm 10:12 pm
Ah yes, let’s just wait for that good, ole Obama spin.
Count down, starting now – 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0…
:D
Posted by: ceeLeelee | March 26, 2009, 10:13 pm 10:13 pm
Granted, this is exactly what Obama promised he would do during the campaign, but it still isn’t a good idea.
Posted by: Flash Override | March 26, 2009, 10:13 pm 10:13 pm
Cindy Sheehan is pissed. I hear she is planning to camp out at his house in Chicago next time he goes home for the weekend.
Posted by: Plumber | March 26, 2009, 10:16 pm 10:16 pm
Guess it’s officially Obama’s war now. Can’t wait to hear what McCain mouths off on first.
Posted by: Matt | March 26, 2009, 10:19 pm 10:19 pm
Anyone else notice that the repubs have decided to unveil their big budget response on Wednesday…the first…April Fool’s Day. Hilarious.
Posted by: Ordermonger | March 26, 2009, 10:21 pm 10:21 pm
8 years after we we committed to destroying Al Qaeda, and rebuilding Afghanistan, and 6 years after taking our eye off the ball in a personal vendetta, we are back to where we started.
Posted by: Thinking | March 26, 2009, 10:22 pm 10:22 pm
We’ll be okay, as long as the red chinese keep loaning us money. If they stop.. the troops will have to buy their ticket home with a VISA card.
Posted by: Dutch | March 26, 2009, 10:27 pm 10:27 pm
O.V.E.R.E.X.T.E.N.D.E.D.????
Posted by: Anthony | March 26, 2009, 10:28 pm 10:28 pm
Taliban are joined with Alqueda and have safe spots in both Afghanistan and Waziristan in Pakistan. We need to once again deny them safe haven in Afghanistan. The only way we can do that is by creating a troop buildup in the country so that that the military and civilian workers can start making positive change in Afghan lives. No one including the Obama administration should fool themselves into thinking this will be a short term effort, but likely decades.
The tribal areas in Pakistan are another matter, and should be avoided for they are the true grave yard of empires. That’s why the aide is being given to Pakistan in hopes they can deal with that.
I see many journalist and commentators comparing American counterinsurgency efforts with Soviet brutality which is a bad comparison. Furthermore we are not invading the tribal regions in Pakistan. The military under Petraus has shown they understand counterinsurgency with their success in Iraq and we need to give them the resources and time to get the job done.
Posted by: dawnofwarsoulstorm | March 26, 2009, 10:30 pm 10:30 pm
over extended? and what about protecting USA borders?
Posted by: Anthony | March 26, 2009, 10:30 pm 10:30 pm
Operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and the war on terrorism have reduced the pace of military transformation and have revealed our lack of preparation for defensive and stability operations. This Administration has OVEREXTENDED OUR MILITARY. I don’t oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war.” – Barack Obama, February 12, 2008
****************************************
This statement was in connection with the Iraq War. Obama has repeatedly stated that we should have concentrated on Afghanistan, and that is what he would do as President.
Like it or not no one should be surprised.
Posted by: Thinking | March 26, 2009, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm
Anthony:”over extended? and what about protecting USA borders?”
Protecting US borders is actually a much lighter duty than serving in an overseas warzone. Obama’s deployment of federal officers to the border while a significant step up from the previous lax enforcement, is a drop in the bucket compared with Iraq.
Posted by: jhw539 | March 26, 2009, 10:47 pm 10:47 pm
There is word out that Guantanamo enema detainees will be freed into the US and possibly receive benefits like welfare payments.
This should help Al Queda recruit new terrorists by being able to promise them US citizenship and welfare benefits if they are captured.
Posted by: Sigmond | March 26, 2009, 10:52 pm 10:52 pm
“Obama’s deployment of federal officers to the border while a significant step up from the previous lax enforcement, is a drop in the bucket compared with Iraq. ”
How would you know that?
Posted by: Sigmond | March 26, 2009, 10:53 pm 10:53 pm
“Barry the Great”, leading us in battle.
Community organizers sure have many
talents. I’m surprised that more of
our previous presidents haven’t had
his unique cachet. By this logic, Al
Sharpton should be Emperor of the
Universe!
Posted by: Trajan | March 26, 2009, 11:09 pm 11:09 pm
LOL!!! Wasn’t this elected democrat president SUPPOSE to reduce the amount of troops… I bet his democrat voters are really happy about that.
Posted by: LOL | March 26, 2009, 11:09 pm 11:09 pm
Things will get worse before it gets better.
More jobs will be lost before any high-skilled jobs will be created( provided you are qualified to take it or AA).
More troops will be sent before we take one soldier out.
Posted by: two cats | March 26, 2009, 11:20 pm 11:20 pm
LOL!!! Wasn’t this elected democrat president SUPPOSE to reduce the amount of troops… I bet his democrat voters are really happy about that.
****************************************
That was reduce the number of troops in Iraq; he has always promised to take the war to Al Qaeda and finish what was started in Afghanistan.
Posted by: Thinking | March 26, 2009, 11:26 pm 11:26 pm
LOL: “It’s better to let people think you’re foolish than to speak and remove all doubt”. If you don’t have anything worthwhile to post, why not go read something so you can post something intelligent for a change.
Posted by: Mike from Carolina | March 26, 2009, 11:29 pm 11:29 pm
There is word out that Guantanamo enema detainees will be freed into the US and possibly receive benefits like welfare payments.
****************************************
More radical right viral e-mails?
Posted by: Thinking | March 26, 2009, 11:32 pm 11:32 pm
I don’t want another war.
I guess we’re entering the era now of “permanent war.” This is just another way to transfer our wealth to corporations. Everythung in the military now has been outsourced to corporate campaign contributors.
Read “1984″ by George Orwell.
Posted by: Joan | March 26, 2009, 11:37 pm 11:37 pm
“More radical right viral e-mails?”
No. It was mentioned by a member of the administration – Blair, I believe.
Posted by: Sigmond | March 26, 2009, 11:43 pm 11:43 pm
“I guess we’re entering the era now of “permanent war.” This is just another way to transfer our wealth to corporations…”
-And why don’t we hear the term ‘military industrial complex’ anymore? Do you think it just went away?
Posted by: Skip | March 26, 2009, 11:45 pm 11:45 pm
Once in a while, I visit this message board to read all the moronic postings that are contrived to bash Obama—the president of the United States. One thing for sure is that most of you misguided flag waving zombies, in a million years, would not mature to the level of contemplating the presidency, much more running to win that office. So, it is comforting to hide behind your computers to display your childishness and talk about things you do not know. When can you campaign, win, and serve as president, then you can come back and post all the garbage you want. Until then, stay off the Internet!
Posted by: what667 | March 27, 2009, 12:02 am 12:02 am
Bush left us with a hell of a mess. Every time I read through the headlines I am faced with the fact that our country was neglected and the world was set on fire by the idiotic thought processes of a deranged leader for 8 long years.
We will be lucky if we can regain a sense of normalcy in our lifetime.
What a horrible Bush/Cheney dumb bell legacy.
Posted by: clarity | March 27, 2009, 12:12 am 12:12 am
Stevie Wonder should read about this article.
He just dedicated a song against war to Obama on American Idol.
He even interrupted the show with saying: ” I love you Barack Obama”
Would somebody tell him not to mix entertainment with politic!
Posted by: cilla | March 27, 2009, 12:36 am 12:36 am
well you wanted a snake oil salesman from chicago and you got one
ian
australia
Posted by: ian | March 27, 2009, 12:37 am 12:37 am
There is no “war on terror” anymore; the Obama administration has changed the term to “overseas contingency operation.” Terrorists may be nicer to us if we used more gentle terms!! Send a lot of troops to Afghanistan, get the job done, and come home. Do not worry about rhetoric coming from countries who stab us in the back anyway.
Posted by: ms1236 | March 27, 2009, 1:10 am 1:10 am
Hmmm,,I can not wait to tell my friends who voted for him because they against the war.
Posted by: catleya | March 27, 2009, 1:19 am 1:19 am
We’re going to need to get tough to keep Al Queda at bay. Unfortunately, our government seems to have lost the lessons of 9/11 and thinks it can tiptoe around and play word games. This is a dangerous game they are playing and my hope is that they wake up and begin taking protection of the U.S. and it’s citizens seriously.
Posted by: Jon | March 27, 2009, 1:27 am 1:27 am
Guaranteed!! Obama ordered “nothing.” He doesn’t know a thing about military life, military protocol, he is totally clueless in this area. Commander-in-Chief, what a joke – - put a uniform on Obama, let’s see you dance and dodge those bullets and bombs.
Posted by: Ed | March 27, 2009, 1:59 am 1:59 am
President Obama is right on target. We need to search and destroy “Al Qaeda” including the decapitation of their leaders “Osama Bin Laden” of Saudi Arabia and his evil Doctor Co-Leader from Egypt, who are guilty of mass murder. Taliban insurgents should be executed on the spot since they do not wear uniforms, and are not soldiers.
Posted by: Daniel Voglesong | March 27, 2009, 3:30 am 3:30 am
Sorry.My oppinion don’t count tonight.What do you wan’t me to say?????????
Posted by: Mary Dekeyrel | March 27, 2009, 4:20 am 4:20 am
This is crazy. Those who want to spend the rest of their lives should either join the military or the foreign legion. Those who consider civilians a lower form of life than the military should go find a tin pot dictatorship somewhere and live there.
As a nation, we’ve lost our way when we think that the only way we can survive is to engage in permanent war, refuse to break up companies proven too big to fail, and continue the death spiral in employment via job outsourcing spectacle.
Posted by: jan | March 27, 2009, 4:34 am 4:34 am
I thought he said he was going bring the troops home for good during his campaign last year before the election. Now, he sent 30,000 troops, more 17,000 troops, and more???? He lied! I am sure it making the voters (liberals) mad. It is funny! Don’t blame Bush. It is Obama’s fault.
Obama have a ‘lack’ of inexperience and leadership. I am glad I didn’t vote for Obama. I have to say is Obama stole the election my home state of North Carolina. North Carolina is a red state. Not blue state.
Posted by: anonymous | March 27, 2009, 4:52 am 4:52 am
Obama through his campaine said he wanted out of Iraq and to put more sources and troops in Afg. where they were needed and to focus on Al Queda. Why does this seem news to some and why are some saying he lied? Must not have been listening to him during the campaine. He IS keeping his word.
Posted by: CAW | March 27, 2009, 6:36 am 6:36 am
So much for those people that thought Obama was going to legalize pot and bring the troops home right away. It’s a whole lot different when someone is actually in the hot seat.
Posted by: Robert Smith | March 27, 2009, 6:40 am 6:40 am
It doesn’t take intelligence or experience to be the President of the United States. It only takes the right handlers with the proper amount of money to purchase ad time on american idol and market celebrity status. As for the terrorist threat? Welcome to Vietnam part Deux. Agricultural experts? That is a farce. The country is rocky and mountainous. The American public is being scammed again. Why? We have some shell moving to do. The handlers are going to push legislation through to get all American dollars and then go Global. All on the blood of Americans. George H.W. Bush “The New World Order” and it has nothing to do with political parties or puppet Presidents. It’s all about the handlers.
Posted by: clancy49 | March 27, 2009, 7:01 am 7:01 am
I know he said it during the campaign about increasing troops in Afghanistan but I have never understood why Iraq’s war was wrong but this one is a good one and worthy of funding. They both are funded and fueled by the samr idealogy inspite of saying they are not. Can anyone explain the difference to me?
Posted by: Jim A | March 27, 2009, 7:22 am 7:22 am
I’m going disco today…’…More More More…how do you like it..how do you like it..’
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | March 27, 2009, 7:44 am 7:44 am
We are expected to take the word of leaders who have lied to us about every significant event for the past 40 years? Remember LBJ’s War on Poverty? Reagan’s War on Drugs? Bush’s War on Terror? There is just one war, and it has gone on unabated he entire time– the War on Truth. We are fed a daily diet of lies, spin and innuendo and expected to slurp it up and clamor for more.
How many lies, exactly, do our elected leaders need to tell before we realize they are hypocritical, self-serving liars?
Does anyone else find it a fascinating coincidence that Al Qaeda favors third world countries which happen to be rich in gas, oil and mineral deposits? What happy fortune is it that we must commit our troops to THOSE places in particular in order to bomb their citizens into freedom and spread democracy from the barrel of a gun?
As Sun Tzu said, “Trust, but verify.”
Posted by: h5mind | March 27, 2009, 7:44 am 7:44 am
Moment of Truth, or Moment of Confusion for Obama in Afghanistan?
Posted by: Manish Thakur | March 27, 2009, 7:52 am 7:52 am
Obama was going to “end” the war in Iraq and bring the troops home. Now he is sending 21,000 troops to Afghanistan. He is transferring soldiers from Iraq to Afghanistan.
Posted by: CW | March 27, 2009, 8:14 am 8:14 am
One Q: America has already been Paying Pakistan Millions of $$$ to Hunt Al-Queda down for us within their own Country since they won’t let us cross their borders in pursuit of Bin Liden. If this Money hasn’t produce anything in 8 yrs but False Intel and Wasted Funds, then Why continue to support a Country that is Knowingly Harboring Bin Liden while making us Poorer as a Country and Laughing at us too. Does the American People want to Invest in Pakistan or Invest in America??
Posted by: MPass86 | March 27, 2009, 8:16 am 8:16 am
CNN is reporting that not only is he sending more troops but “The president also will call on Congress to pass a bill that triples U.S. aid to Pakistan to $1.5 billion a year over five years, the officials said.”……Outrageous!!!!
Posted by: CW | March 27, 2009, 8:20 am 8:20 am
A page from the Bush play book?
Posted by: LongT | March 27, 2009, 8:23 am 8:23 am
I thought Bush was going to march Osama Bin Laden out just before the end of his term? Oh! I almost forgot about that little conspiracy tidbit.
Posted by: LongT | March 27, 2009, 8:25 am 8:25 am
Obama was going to “end” the war in Iraq and bring the troops home. Now he is sending 21,000 troops to Afghanistan. He is transferring soldiers from Iraq to Afghanistan.
Posted by: CW—————This is what he said he was going to do even in his election campaine. I guess there were many to busy joining the rest of the GOP, McCain and Palin in slandering and bashing Obama to even listen to what he said while campaining.
Posted by: CAW | March 27, 2009, 8:44 am 8:44 am
Some wonder why Afg is ok and Iraq wasnt.
We forget quick that some 80 percent of the population in America was against the war in Iraq. Obama and myself being two of them. I do not know if Bush/Cheney misguided, told the truth about Iraq and our reasons for going in. We may never know. However Bin Laden and Al Qaeda attacked the World Trade Center, not Sadaam. Instead of putting all our resources in to going after those responsible for that attact in NY as well as many terrorist attacks around the world, we sent more resources in to Iraq on a turkey hunt and by doing so spread our forces so thin we couldnt support the troops in Afg where they were needed and asking for help. Bad military planning and management. Obama is doing what should have been done to begin with. Plus as bad as we dislike Iran, atleast Sadaam kept them in check. Iraq should have come later and its timing was wrong and posiibly the given reasons why we went in.
Posted by: CAW | March 27, 2009, 8:52 am 8:52 am
Sorry for the bad spelling in my post. I know some think these post are term papers and will point the spelling out. 52yr old eyes, need of new glasses and another cup of coffee is needed and thats my excuse.
Posted by: CAW | March 27, 2009, 8:56 am 8:56 am
So it was wrong to spend billions in Iraq because it was the wrong war, mainly because it was Bush’s war.
But it’s OK to commit billions to Afghanistan for the next five years
because this war belongs to Obama.
When the bodies start coming home that won’t be as bad either I guess–because this is Obama’s war.
Posted by: sammy | March 27, 2009, 9:55 am 9:55 am
one day in the future all will be asked ..Why did not folow the last reveald book …in that day Taleban has the answer, but the US will have it not
Posted by: theufwik | March 27, 2009, 10:07 am 10:07 am
obaba on tv = afganastan today, what will we see on tv tomorrow? He just has to be on tv, he is addicted. I am sick of seeing his face.
Posted by: Plezetta | March 27, 2009, 10:09 am 10:09 am
“But it’s OK to commit billions to Afghanistan for the next five years
because this war belongs to Obama.
When the bodies start coming home that won’t be as bad either I guess–because this is Obama’s war.”
It wouldn’t be “Obama’s war” if we hadn’t taken our eye of of it for years and ignored it while we invaded a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.
Posted by: Perspective | March 27, 2009, 10:12 am 10:12 am
“It wouldn’t be “Obama’s war” if we hadn’t taken our eye of of it for years and ignored it while we invaded a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.”
Suddenly right wingers will care about the bodies coming home.
They will weep crocodile tears when families allow coverage at Dover.
Instead of claiming that cities were more dangerous than Iraq, they will blast Obama for putting out boys in harm’s way halfway around the world.
Posted by: Ryan C the original | March 27, 2009, 12:36 pm 12:36 pm
“CNN is reporting that not only is he sending more troops but “The president also will call on Congress to pass a bill that triples U.S. aid to Pakistan to $1.5 billion a year over five years, the officials said.”……Outrageous!!!!”
How do you think the Surge/Sunni Awakening worked?
How do you think Egypt and Israel stopped going to war with each other?
We paid them off.
Posted by: Ryan C the original | March 27, 2009, 12:41 pm 12:41 pm
“So it was wrong to spend billions in Iraq because it was the wrong war, mainly because it was Bush’s war.”
Okay…I’m going to use all capital letters for you, because if you haven’t figured it out yet you obviously need a little help:
IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11 AND THERE WAS NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE THAT THEY WERE A THREAT TO THE SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES!!
Please read that as many times as it takes to sink in.
Posted by: silky | March 27, 2009, 12:42 pm 12:42 pm
I hope the money spent doesn’t end up in an Afghanistan-Pakistan politicians pocket. This make AIG small potatoes and it will be more difficult to ask for the money back.
Posted by: tillyerkt | March 27, 2009, 3:29 pm 3:29 pm
Problems with the Afghanistan speech
If the “central front on the war on terror” moves, do we move with it?
How do our carrots and sticks with Pakistan work in a region with at least 3 countries with more sticks and carrots to play with?
Is it about the central leadership of Al Qaeda and revenge against it, or is something else?
It’s NOT about the inherently weak Afghan state and yet it is. Will these 200,000 Afghan troop trainees have a govt they can follow?
Turning the Taliban – unlikely even if similar “awakening” to fit timetable of 2011 – from countryside turning on the bad guys to integrating with Kabul – 5 years minimum.
As usual, much less meat to the soundbite sandwich! At least he came before the cameras to commit troops this time though
Posted by: robert b | March 27, 2009, 3:40 pm 3:40 pm
I think the President is going to find doing anything in Afganistan is going to be one big mess. If he’s making folk to go into Afganistan I’m pretty sure that you really don’t anything at all. You should be ashamed. You said you were going to end the war and now you are starting a completely different war. You’re thinking all of us are thinking you’re are a big thinker, but not so much in my estimation. How much is your war going to cost. I think there hasn’t been anything you told us on the your campaign was going to happen and now you lied. You’re either a liar or your stupid. Don’t ever think we will forgive you lying about what would happen when your were President. Your just one more jive turkey in the neighborhood.
Posted by: elainekramer | March 27, 2009, 5:40 pm 5:40 pm
“IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11 AND THERE WAS NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE THAT THEY WERE A THREAT TO THE SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES!!”
Saddam had hoarded 550 metric TONS of yellow cake uranium ore purchased in Africa…now safely in Canada.
Let that sink in.
Iraq was a direct and ongoing threat to America’s interests and security. Sending troops into Afghanistan only would have been the same argument as only sending troops into Germany…but not North Africa, Italy, France, Belgium, and Holland in order to get Hitler.
President Bush obviously realized that putting troops into Afghanistan while having Saddam still active in Iraq was not a good idea. Also, having American and Allied troops and democracies flanking Iran on both sides was a geopolitical coup of such brilliance that in the future non-Communist historians will recognize it as such.
Posted by: RR GOP | March 28, 2009, 5:01 am 5:01 am