New Afghan Strategy Options Coming

President Obama is obviously inexperienced. With so many lives at risk, Obama might want to listen to his military leaders without question as soon as possible.

Obama seems to hope that the more weeks go by
( through his indecision) the problem in Afghanistan
will go away or show him in which direction to go.
With no administration before him, have I ever felt so abandoned.

Let’s not forget how important Biden’s imput can be as well. He had that great idea for Iraq and predicted the surge would fail as did most dem’s. Keep in mind that a camel is end result of a committee trying to design a horse.

Why is it up to us to save these people from the Taliban? If the Afghan people want to free themselves from the Taliban then I wish them the best of luck but it is not our duty to fight their war. Isn’t it time we stop playing “world police” and bring our troops home? Why are we still in Germany, Japan, South Korea, and the rest? Couldn’t these troops be used to police our ports and borders?

I have serious doubts that increasing the troops by 45,000 will be the final answer…Considering Afghanistan is larger than Texas, with much more difficult terrain…With a little more than 100,000 troops…we couldn’t put one soldier on a square mile of land…We will have to include the more moderate Taliban into the solution, or there will never be a solution…

Oh Good Grief. George is looking to get a job back in the White House. Geesch!

To criticize Obama after the Bush-Cheney “experience” is moronic – at best! The biggest mistake in U.S. history was voting those two morons into power! It has been a disaster ever since! Obama is trying to fix all of the problems caused by Republican incompetence, corruption and stupidity!

The Bush-Cheney “Cowboy” diplomacy has killed more U.S. soldiers and civilians than would have occurred under an intelligent, well-planned Obama strategy!

That war was going on while Obama was running for office. It’s not like it came as a big surprise. He even said it was “the good war” so we know he was aware of it.
Now, eight months later, he’s still dithering.
How many professional soldiers are on this national security team? Gates and Jones will “play key roles.” That political-speak for “we might let them talk in the meetings.”
Many of us would be more confident a good strategy will result if the professionals were advising on this war, not the presidential “frat boys” Obama is surrounding himself with.

“President Obama is obviously inexperienced. With so many lives at risk, Obama might want to listen to his military leaders without question as soon as possible.”
Obama is demonstrating more maturity and poise in evaluating the strategy to be put in place, unlike his predecessor who knew nothing about what he was doing in military matters. Moreover, Obama IS listening to his military leaders-the JC represented by Mullen and Gates.

Military option is never the only option to bringing peace.

“Obama is demonstrating more maturity and poise in evaluating the strategy to be put in place, unlike his predecessor who knew nothing about what he was doing in military matters.”
LOL! Obama is doing everything Bush did and then some. Obama = Bush 3.

I think the public has forgotten that this is where the terrorist lived and plan the attacks on 9/11. Leaving now we allow them to claim victory, recruit more follows and plan thier next attacks on us. Can we just forget the 3K lives we lost that day in Sept. and return to the world as it was on 9/10?

No amount of troops can “win” the war on terrorism because its not a military conflict – its a political one.
Why do you think that terror groups thrive in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and now Iraq (when they didn’t under Saddam)? Because there is no effective government in those countries. The people live with little hope that a central authority can free them from terror. Having security forces in their town simply makes tham targets.
We still fail to learn from history. Half-a-million US troops couldn’t bring peace to Vietnam which is much smaller than the area we are trying to secure now. The mountains of Afghanistan/Pakistan are every bit as challenging as the jungle. The govt. every bit as corrupt. The insurgency every bit as rabid.
The American desire for instant solutions is going to be every bit as frustrated as it was in Vietnam. Instead of our troops trying to control hundreds of square miles of foreign soil we need to concentrate on bringing about the security plans which lie unfullfilled in our home ports and monitoring the enemy outside of their strong points.
Our desire to throw troops at any hot spot that has a whiff of Taliban/AlQuida has limited out response to terror because our troop strength is limited. We need a long-term, world-wide strategic plan to bring popular, effective government to all of the countries which now provide havens for terror groups of all stripes.
We need to combine limited special ops that weaken the enemy without thinking that we can stamp them out wholesale with bold military strokes. And we need a foreign policy that seeks to bring freedom from poverty, ignorance and oppression to the next generation of the third-world.
The roots of terrorism didn’t spring up overnight and we can’t destroy them overnight or by throwing US troops piece-meal into the fray.

I’ve forgot nothing. We needed to get bin Laden no later than a couple of years after he hit the World Trade Center, not wait 9 or 10 years.
By the way, how many military people have we lost, in the immediate sense, so far is this misbegotten war to avenge 3,000? Please keep in mind that I’m not asking you to count those who traditionally years later due to illnesses caused by their war time exposure and experiences. And at what point will you feel you have lost enough people and destroyed enough families here to declare yourself satisfied?

Old strategy, new strategy, its just the same old BS. To answer the questions above the answer is no!
- Can Afghan government be fixed? NO
- Is run-off necessary, or can Karzai achieve credibility by broadening his coalition? NO
- The Afghan government is far from perfect – can it be made “good enough?
- Are there ways to “work around” the Karzai government? NO
Must more resources be directed at Pakistan? NO
Can we still convince the people 911 is at stake here NO
Is this a War that can be won NO
Listen Mr. Texan, The terrorist according to Bush are the people who support them. The Taliban just happen to be are allies before 9 11 and Bid Laden and the 911 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia and since Bush gave Bin Laden a 2 month head start who knows where he may be? The war is just an excuse to murder more Americans for a pack of lies. Bush was and idiot and side-tracked Americans with the Iraq war and the same idiots who supported that war are coming out with the same old slogan, remember 911. If I could I’d ship every American who wants this war over to Afghanistan because there’re thick as 10 planks I would. If Afghanistan is 80 percent controlled by the Taliban then sending 4000 or over there or even 20,000 over there isn’t going to do it, not by a long shot. In one years time it well be the same old story with another Strategy, or Strategy number 147. When will all the stupid peoplle in America realize that were not after Bin Laden nor does 911 have anything to do with this war. I personally think Bid Laden may be hanging out with if friends family in Saudi, especially since we gave them all first class tickets back to their home country. Heck, Washington refused to freeze the hijackers assets. So to think were saving the world from the terrorist thats just a fantasy. In reality every politian who has you believe were going to win this war just knows he or she has another sucker.

The Generals want 40,000 plus more troops. Fine and good. Where does it say that these troops have to come from the USA? The NATO Secretary General and other international bigwings including our administration have been calling the war in Afgans an international fight againist terror. So be it. Let’s immediately draw down our troops (and resources) to equal the commitment of the next highest nation. For example, if France is now contributing 20,000 troops and $100 million annually, and they are the next highest after us, let’s just match France. What is wrong with that?

Al from nj posted: “President Obama is obviously inexperienced. With so many lives at risk, Obama might want to listen to his military leaders without question as soon as possible.” EXACTLY! Just like we listened to all those CONFIDENT GENERALS during the VIETNAM WAR, who were always telling us that they could WIN THE WAR with just A FEW MORE TROOPS. Finally, we had 525,000 troops in Vietnam, and we still COULDN’T CONTROL THE COUNTRYSIDE, in a country 1/3RD the size of Afghanistan. CONSERVATIVE brains seem to have such short memories!

Obama got into a job that is WAYYYYYY over his head. And just got granted a ridiculous Nobel Prize for peace which is pretty sickening. Why? Because there are thousands of people who have risked their very lives and survived torture who have been heavily committed to peace initiatives for decades. Obama’s category should have been Motivational Speaking. America is MORE divided and ANGRIER since Obama’s regime. He has totally alienated the Israelis who see him correctly as a threat to their very existence, coddled up to the most demonic Islamic regimes and emboldened both Iran and N. Korea to speed towards a nuclear arsenal. He is an IDEALOGUE divorced from pragmatics and though I may be a minority voice, I believe he is helping to shape a more dangerous world than we had before him. He gets lofty in rhetoric, speaking of vast plans that are delusional, and then backtracks to……virtually nothing. He is a BLANK SLATE and his handlers are blowing in the wind with no fixed agenda. Forgot about HOPE…Words…America is adrift with this administration.

The new strategy being considered is surrender and give the Taliban the state of California.

You do not win a war by going the middle route. The folks we are fighting against are out to destroy western civilization. When you have cockroaches in your house do you tell the pest control guy to do 1/2 the house?
If you believe you can control the fundamentalist terrorist movement with drones and special forces and make friends with the Taliban you are deluding yourself.
The oldest rule in warfare is you win by denying the enemy access, territory and resources. More boots on the ground are how that is done.

“Military option is never the only option to bring peace”?
Well, true…if you are willing to surrender and take whatever terms an agressor gives you.
There has never been world peace in the history of humanity. Humans are territorial predators with a veneer of civilization. That veneer is either very thin or nonexistent in some people.
Humans want what they want. Some are willing to kill as many as it takes to get it. Sometimes the military option IS the only option.
So while the president dithers, soldiers are dying because there are not enough of them to get the job done with minimal loss of life.

I take it that you’re ready to invade Pakistan since that’s where bin Laden is supposed to be hiding now? Meanwhile there is talk about attacking Iran… How many countries and how many fronts will that make for us? Do you see how crazy this will get?

im english and i have just watched loose change and zero and i defy any american to watch these films and then still back the official line on iraq and afghanistan.You should be demanding Bush cheney and rumsfeld be charged with treason and mass murder and your soldiers are dying for the oil supplies that are in Iraq.John Mcelhatton

Let’s get our military out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Korea, Japan, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, England and all other overseas locations. Bring all the troops home; let them live in on-base housing, shop at on-base commissaries and post/base exchanges; keep physical fit at the on-base fitness centers and eat in on-base out-sources dining facilities. And, let’s keeping calling them (the troops) the “military.” Let our troops only deploy to the other side of the post/base. But, above all, keep paying the salaries and providing all the benefits so the troops will stay happy.

MizFW posted “So while the president dithers, soldiers are dying because there are not enough of them to get the job done with minimal loss of life.”
And what is “the job”? In both wars that Bush started, there wasn’t and definition of what constitutes a win. Bush didn’t have an exit strategy.
Instead of blindly committing troops, Obama is looking at the entire picture and trying to decide what should be done. It is about time a President thinks before responding.

PotatoeGater22 posted “Obama is either clueless and is actively working to destroy us…either way it is very bad.”
You call Obama an idiot, what about the idiot who started these wars? Where was his exit plan?
I have never in my life seen this country so screwed up. I often think that McCain lost on purpose because of the mess we are in.
It always amazes me how idiots were willing to give Bush 8 years but cry if Obama hasn’t solved everything in a few months.

Everybody that is saying the President needs to hurry up is wrong. President Bush took 3 months to finally decide on the surge, and it was a good decision. Obama should not rush into anything of this importance, and is wise to take his time.

Vietnam all over again …. Democrats cannot win wars …. the are too concerned about their own political hides … the longer Obama takes to develop his so called strategy the worse it’s going to get in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq … very soon the body count will start increasing and all the leftwing politicians and the pacifists will demand a complete withdrawal … Obama is not a leader … he talks a lot but lacks the courage to make the right decision and follow the advice of General McChrystal the man he handpicked for Afghanistan … both the taliban and AlQaeda know Obama is very weak and they will maximize their effort on all fronts …. again keep track of the BODY COUNT ….

Not funny Obama send McCrystal to give recommendation on war then delays recieving recommendation not reddy ?? Then delays more for reevaluation. New strategy [delay]. Even Dems. are getting tired of delays.

It is tough when the entire White House cannot walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. Gen. McChrystal is a field commander requesting resources to achieve to mission goals. He is not interested in the polictics, nor any claim to glory from the WH on strategy. The WH seems to think that everything is all or nothing. Gen. McChrystal needs boots on the ground to counter actions by Iran in the combat area.

How can Obama have a new policy when he never had one in the first place? Obama needs to start his policy and he has had over 6 weeks since he received the General’s assessment. That’s a long time to read 66 pages. But, we have enacted a new law, declared an emergency and appointed Kennedy’s replacement in a week. Whew, almost lost that “supermajority” for a moment. That was close!

Outcome will be McCrystal resigns and the Afganistan policy Obama cooked up fails and therefore this will be the end of Obama. What a joke.

People of short memory US have other problems above of the Al- Kaeda.Why not bring the time they need to solve three other situations they have there? Please dont push! let him try to solve the problems politically and if not military. Us must prevail in this situation for the security of the Nationand others Nations, too