McCain: Obama Putting "Lives In More Danger" Without Bump In U.S. Afghan Forces

Sen. John McCain, (R-Ariz.) warned President Barack Obama on Tuesday that he will be risking American lives if he decides not to follow recommendations to put 40,000 additional troops into Afghanistan.

"Every day that goes by, if you do not pursue a strategy of success and end the war as quickly as possible it puts more Americans lives in more danger," said the Arizona Republican, Obama's 2008 election opponent.

Speaking before a crowd made up predominantly of neoconservatives, McCain urged the president to follow the recommendations of his chief military adviser in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, who has warned that without additional troops the war could be lost. The senator conceded that presidents should have the chance to deliberate about such foreign policy matters. But he insisted that Obama has already had more than ample time to consider the best course of action in the eight-year-long war.

The senator, who has been an ally of the White House on Afghan policy to this point, said that anything less than McChrystal's approach would be doomed-to-fail incrementalism. In particular, he derided an alternate policy proposal put forth by Senator Carl Levin, (D-Mich) to grow Afghanistan's police force rather than expand U.S. troop presence in the country.

"In response to my friend Sen. Levin... We have seen the movie before," said McCain. "We have tried it once before, in Iraq. And they were wrong about Iraq."

While the general tone of McCain's remarks during his appearance at the Foreign Policy Initiative conference was tough on Obama, he did engage in a little commiseration. "I have some sympathy for the president," he said, "because a lot of his political base, a lot of the Democratic Party.... is obviously opposed to further engagement in Afghanistan."

But the sympathy was short-lived. From there, McCain contrasted the president's current predicament with that which he himself faced when he argued for a surge of forces in Iraq during the early stages of the Republican presidential primary. In the end, the senator insisted, the responsible path forward was to side with the advice of the military commanders and not to heed electoral or political demands.

"To do less than that wouldn't be fair to the 68,000 men and women who are already there," McCain said. "We don't want a strategy that wouldn't give them a maximum [chance at success]."

Comments

[FatBoysComedyClubs]

10:10 PM on 09/27/2009

Clueless conservatives. Why do people still humor them?

[yogandclimber]

03:28 PM on 09/25/2009

sorry to upset most of you who are against John, but Obama will likely repeat what John just said next week when he decides to send more troops over to Afhganistan. Obama promoted this war and said he would go into Afghanistan to kill Osama during the debates... Not McCain.

[justoverit333]

11:48 AM on 09/24/2009

Grandpa, he hasn't made the decision yet. Back off.
You lost, remember?

[Gnrshrtd]

03:32 PM on 09/23/2009

"We don't want a strategy that wouldn't give them a maximum [chance at success]."
________________________________________________________________

I have yet to see a cogent, consistent definition of how 'success' is defined. Or, for that matter, failure.

The original mission - the search for OBL - has been creeping toward nation building, in a country that in many ways barely resembles a nation.

This poor country is a failed state, sparsely inhabited and with no infrastructure to support a national security force. Yet this mouse has been roaring at the great military powers of the world for thousands of years - and prevailing. Someone has to ask: How will the policy of American Exceptionalism make the outcome for the US truly different?

If we decide to 'save' Afghanistan, we might want to ask them if they desire that, and if they do, how they define it.

And if we do decide 'nation building' is required, we will be there for a generation - with unpredictable outcomes.

I am reassured to see the President giving this issue careful consideration - even willing to change policy if new facts indicate it's required. I much prefer this approach to the uninhibited bellicosity of the last administration.

[RexOzone]

02:30 PM on 09/23/2009

John, you are not even as clever as your daughter and less adept at reading the writing on the wall...you lost "my friend" and continuing to rain on Obama's parade won't make that change. Nor will advocating more war.

[cilcsster]

01:55 PM on 09/23/2009

McCain is wrong (again!). The armies can stay in Afghanistan and bleed to death, or they can get out and loose everything.

[OlHippie]

12:49 PM on 09/23/2009

A. In the history of the world, has there ever been a general who said, "We can't win, we should get out?"

B. Isn't this the reason we have civilians in charge of the military? Military commanders want to command, and never will admit their way won't work.

C. Why is al Qaeda in Afghanistan more dangerous than al Qaeda from any one of the other forty or fifty nations that have al Qaeda cells?

D. John, you lost; you lost the presidency, crashed every plane the Navy gave you, and selected Sarah Palin to the second most powerful person on earth. Whey should we care what you think about anything?

[alwqb]

12:39 PM on 09/23/2009

The war could be lost? This is not a war on a nation, terrorism is a tactic by random people. Mr Lifelong Military Man needs to get a life. War is the only thing McCain knows and thinks it is the answer to everything. Thank God he is not our President. Could you imagine? Talk about the end of the world.

[redsongia]

12:16 PM on 09/23/2009

Hmmmm. Didn't this guy lose?

[OldTart]

11:48 AM on 09/23/2009

Thank god this man did not become president! There is no "winning" of a war in Afghanistan - or elsewhere. Really, when was the last time American "won" a war? It's not black and white, win or lose. This is a far more sophisticated age than the WWII era. The world is smaller in so many ways. There are so many more people. And winning a war in Afghanistan? Get real! America is already broke from it's so-called wars and its financial meltdown. It wasn't a good decision then and it's not a good decision now. There are better ways to use the resources and we are very fortunate to have a president who has the intelligence to explore the options, look at the Big Picture and all is complexities, and not resort to knee-jerk caveman tactics. We desperately need a new paradigm. And it involves cooperation with other nations in juxtaposition to the cowboy, go-it-alone mentality that is frivolous at best in this time.

[jazabelz]

11:42 AM on 09/23/2009

Just shut the f up!

[Rapier]

11:21 AM on 09/23/2009

We need objectives that meet tests of validity and a coherent strategy. Interesting and pithy comments on http://ofthisandthat.org/LettertoPresident.html including Afghanistan.

[sueno]

11:03 AM on 09/23/2009

After what Beck said about him,
McSame should just go away-

[ydnas639]

11:00 AM on 09/23/2009

Poor Johnny, his memory is almost gone. He's forgotten that the reason he is not President now is that the country did not want him to be in charge and making decisions about anything important.

[Okieborn]

10:48 AM on 09/23/2009

Come On Sen Mccain Tell Us How to capture bin laden !!
Come On You can do it !!
This makes me more assured that bringing our troops home is the thing to do !!
When the Repubs. start hollering add more troops, and we need to stay in Afghanistan that is the proof I need !!!