iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Obama's Afghanistan Plan: 30,000 Troops, No Endless Committment

DARLENE SUPERVILLE and STEVEN R. HURST   12/ 1/09 11:22 PM ET   AP

Obama

WEST POINT, N.Y. — Declaring "our security is at stake," President Barack Obama ordered an additional 30,000 U.S. troops into the long war in Afghanistan Tuesday night, nearly tripling the force he inherited as commander in chief. He promised an impatient public he would begin bringing units home in 18 months.

The buildup to about 100,000 troops will begin almost immediately – the first Marines will be in place by Christmas – and will cost $30 billion for the first year alone.

In a prime-time speech at the U.S. Military Academy, the president told the nation his new policy was designed to "bring this war to a successful conclusion," though he made no mention of defeating Taliban insurgents or capturing al-Qaida terrorist leader Osama bin Laden.

"We must deny al-Qaida a safe haven," Obama said in spelling out U.S. military goals for a war that has dragged on for eight years. "We must reverse the Taliban's momentum. ... And we must strengthen the capacity of Afghanistan's security forces and government."

The president said the additional forces would be deployed at "the fastest pace possible so that they can target the insurgency and secure key population centers."

Their destination: "the epicenter of the violent extremism practiced by al-Qaida."

"It is from here that we were attacked on 9/11, and it is from here that new attacks are being plotted as I speak," the president said.

It marked the second time in his young presidency that Obama has added to the American force in Afghanistan, where the Taliban has recently made significant advances. When he became president last January, there were roughly 34,000 troops on the ground; there now are 71,000.

After the speech, cadets in the audience – some of whom could end up in combat because of Obama's decision – climbed over chairs to shake hands with their commander in chief and take his picture.

Obama's announcement drew less-wholehearted support from congressional Democrats. Many of them favor a quick withdrawal, but others have already proposed higher taxes to pay for the fighting.

Republicans reacted warily, as well. Officials said Sen. John McCain, who was Obama's Republican opponent in last year's presidential campaign, told Obama at an early evening meeting attended by numerous lawmakers that declaring a timetable for a withdrawal would merely send the Taliban underground until the Americans began to leave.

As a candidate, Obama called Afghanistan a war worth fighting, as opposed to Iraq, a conflict he opposed and has since begun easing out of.

A new survey by the Gallup organization, released Tuesday, showed only 35 percent of Americans now approve of Obama's handling of the war; 55 percent disapprove.

He made no direct reference to public opinion Tuesday night, although he seemed to touch on it when he said, "The American people are understandably focused on rebuilding our economy and putting people to work here at home."

"After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home," he said flatly.

In eight years of war, 849 Americans have been killed in Afghanistan, Pakistan and neighboring Uzbekistan, according to the Pentagon.

In addition to beefing up the U.S. presence, Obama has asked NATO allies to commit between 5,000 and 10,000 additional troops. The war has even less support in Europe than in the United States, and the NATO allies and other countries currently have about 40,000 troops on the ground.

He said he was counting on Afghanistan eventually taking over its own security, and he warned, "The days of providing a blank check are over." He said the United States would support Afghan ministries that combat corruption and "deliver for the people. We expect those who are ineffective or corrupt to be held accountable."

As for neighboring Pakistan, the president said that country and the United States "share a common enemy" in Islamic terrorists. "We are in Afghanistan to prevent a cancer from once again spreading through that country. But this same cancer has also taken root in the border region of Pakistan. That is why we need a strategy that works on both sides of the border."

The speech before an audience of cadets at the military academy ended a three-month review of the war, triggered by a request from the commanding general, Stanley McChrystal, for as many as 40,000 more troops. Without them, he warned, the U.S. risked failure.

The speech was still under way when the general issued a statement from Kabul. "The Afghanistan-Pakistan review led by the president has provided me with a clear military mission and the resources to accomplish our task," it said. McChrystal is expected to testify before congressional committees in the next several days.

Obama referred to a deteriorating military environment, but said, "Afghanistan is not lost."

The length of the presidential review drew mild rebukes from normally amiable NATO allies. There was sharper criticism from Republicans led by former Vice President Dick Cheney, who said the president was dithering rather than deciding.

Obama rebutted forcefully.

"Let me be clear: There has never been an option before me that called for troop deployments before 2010, so there has been no delay or denial of resources necessary for the conduct of the war," he told his audience of more than 4,000 cadets seated in Eisenhower Hall.

Most of the new forces will be combat troops. Military officials said the Army brigades were most likely to be sent from Fort Drum in New York and Fort Campbell in Kentucky; and Marines primarily from Camp Lejeune in North Carolina.

Officials said the additional 30,000 troops included about 5,000 dedicated trainers, underscoring the president's emphasis on preparing Afghans to take over their own security.

These aides said that by announcing a date for beginning a withdrawal, the president was not setting an end date for the war.

But that was a point on which McCain chose to engage the president at a pre-speech meeting with lawmakers before Obama departed for West Point. "The way that you win wars is to break the enemy's will, not to announce dates that you are leaving," McCain said later.

Obama's address represents the beginning of a sales job to restore support for the war effort among an American public grown increasingly pessimistic about success – and among some fellow Democrats in Congress wary of or even opposed to spending billions more dollars and putting tens of thousands more U.S. soldiers and Marines in harm's way.

Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., and liberal House Democrats threatened to try to block funding for the troop increase.

Sen. Carl Levin, the Michigan Democrat who chairs a military oversight panel, said he didn't think Democrats would yank funding for the troops or try to force Obama's hand to pull them out faster. But Democrats will be looking for ways to pay for the additional troops, he said, including a tax increase on the wealthy although that hike is already being eyed to pay for health care costs. Another possibility is imposing a small gasoline tax that would be phased out if gas prices go up, he said.

The United States went to war in Afghanistan shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, al-Qaida terrorist attacks on the United States.

Bin Laden and key members of the terrorist organization were headquartered in Afghanistan at the time, taking advantage of sanctuary afforded by the Taliban government that ran the mountainous and isolated country.

Taliban forces were quickly driven from power, while bin Laden and his top deputies were believed to have fled through towering mountains into neighboring Pakistan. While the al-Qaida leadership appears to be bottled up in Pakistan's largely ungoverned tribal regions, the U.S. military strategy of targeted missile attacks from unmanned drone aircraft has yet to flush bin Laden and his cohorts from hiding.

___

Steven R. Hurst reported from Washington. AP White House Correspondent Jennifer Loven and National Security Writer Anne Gearan contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

WEST POINT, N.Y. — Declaring "our security is at stake," President Barack Obama ordered an additional 30,000 U.S. troops into the long war in Afghanistan Tuesday night, nearly tripling the force...
WEST POINT, N.Y. — Declaring "our security is at stake," President Barack Obama ordered an additional 30,000 U.S. troops into the long war in Afghanistan Tuesday night, nearly tripling the force...
Filed by Rachel Weiner  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 11,541
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (178 total)
09:07 PM on 12/30/2009
Maybe Chairman Obama can use 'Just Words' speech to make everything magically better?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
N Rock D
Undergrad, UofT.
03:19 PM on 12/04/2009
"To ravage, to slaughter, to usurp under false titles, they call empire; and where they make a desert, they call it peace." -Tacitus
07:32 PM on 12/03/2009
Looks like Mr. Obama is finally going to earn that Nobel Prize of his. In one of the more devious moves in recent presidential history, the big O has sent out nearly the entire US army to lamely wander the deserts in Afghanistan.

http://www.mepreport.com/2009/12/afghanistan-the-armys-last-hurrah/
01:15 PM on 12/03/2009
lonemoderate I'm a Fan of lonemoderate 2 fans permalink
Why are you people always stuck in the past. It's like desperate clutching at straws to avoid facing up to the FUTURE problems. So much easier to just point out oh but Bush did worse.

I get it. Bush neglected Afghanistan. He has no bearing on the future anymore.

And if you really believe that a "missile hit the Pentagon" or that America planned 9/11 you are a wackjob beyond help.

And just for the record Judicial Watch requested the tapes to silence the tin foil brigade not enable them.
01:16 PM on 12/03/2009
I am interested in the past because that is when the crimes were committed. The past.

Stop spreading disinformation against Judicial Watch. Why don't you comment on the quality of the tape rather than people's supposed intentions?

Who do you work for that would keep you from looking at actual evidence and deny to your eyes that the sky is blue?

Why did Jerome Hauer tell the WH to take medicine for and tracks a week before it happened? Why was it government issue? Why did those letters go to only enemies of the Bush administration who were investigating the event? Are you aware that most of the paperwork of evidence had to be thrown away because of contamination?

If they could lie about the reasons to go war to cause fear to enable their war machine to take a million and more lives, what is a small crime like a few thousand people in NY? We can trace the politiciansroyalists whose testimony has been highly questionable. You must realize that there is a class of people who call normal people serfs and there are people who directly profited from these actions unbelievably. 9-11 is tiny compared to IranContra. Prosecute IranContra and you get all the same people who ignored fifty nine impossible to ignore warnings and let OBL get away in Torabora. I don't need to claim anybody did anything. Let new investigations answer the questions.
04:25 PM on 12/02/2009
'Emergency' Rally In DC To Protest Afghanistan Escalation. Please on Dec 12, go to to the White House and show your massive support for all progressive causes. It will be lots of fun.

http://www.gp.org/index.php

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/48015

http://polizeros.com/2009/11/30/afghanistan-war-emergency-anti-escalation-rally/

http://www.unitedforpeace.org/calendar.php?calid=25044
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:44 PM on 12/02/2009
Analysis of President Obama's address on Afghanistan with Al Hunt of Bloomberg News, David Brooks of 'The New York Times', Dexter Filkins of 'The New York Times' , Martha Raddatz of ABC News, Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Rachel Maddow of MSNBC and Jeff Greenfield of CBS News http://www.charlierose.com/#schedule_lower
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:05 PM on 12/02/2009
This was no easy decision for our president. If you look beyond the words, you know that this weighs heavily on his heart. Republicans are so quick to latch on to something to criticize because their main goal is to obstruct and discredit our president. They are not working for the best interests of the American people. On the other hand, liberals are so quick to jump ship. As many many many people have already posted, this decision was in keeping with what President Obama said during the campaign. On health care, Obama said that if he were starting from scratch, he would prefer single payer. Since we are not starting from scratch, he prefers to reform our current system and allow those who want to keep their employment-based plans keep them. There are many organizations and economists coming out in support of the Senate plan. Read what they have to say.
As far as his decisions on the economy, I believe that he did what he thought was the quickest solution to prevent a more serious downturn. There are new reports coming out about the effectiveness of the stimulus. Without the stimulus things would have been worse than they are now. He is looking for ideas on how to create jobs. Let's support him on that.
Host a job forum in your community and send your ideas to the President.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/webform/jobs-forum-form
02:13 PM on 12/02/2009
And there you have it. The U.S. is going to surrender in July 2011. Great news for the Afgan civilians, your on your own baby so you better cuddle up to that local thug because we are cutting you lose. Taliban the field is yours, you were right wait long enough and the U.S. will just quit and go away.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
OLJW00
right is right
03:31 PM on 12/02/2009
Yup - were committed to cutting and running on (fill in the blank day). What a joke.

At least the international press can call it for what it is.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,664753,00.html
06:29 PM on 12/02/2009
AND WE HAVE A DATE!

Awesome work.
photo
24hourrifle
A time comes when silence is betrayal
03:37 PM on 12/02/2009
the president as well as gen petraius have both clearly stated that the withdrawal is "based on conditions on the ground"...

as in...the troops have a job to do.they will do it.and we expect that job to be done by 2011.at that time we will re-evaluate to what extent we can begin withdrawal.

btw...why is it that every time anyone on the left criticized pres bush on war strategy,they were immediately deemed "unpatriotic"...

yet vp cheney suggesting that the pres of the united states doesnt really care about our troops,and essentially calling him weak is completely appropriate as far as the right is concerned.

please explain...

oh and please explain why pres obama coming up w/ a thorough,comprehensive strategy with his generals and advisers is "dithering"...yet bush taking three months to approve the surge in iraq,and actually denying gen mckiernans request for 30,000 troops in afghanistan(after essentially ignoring the war altogether for seven yrs) is..what?...brave?

seriously...i have yet to hear an explanation as to why cheney is not an historical hypocrite
02:09 PM on 12/02/2009
Let's clarify: The plan calls to have a look at withdrawal options beginning July 2011 - it does not by any means say that the withdrawal will actually begin then. What happens when the war-mongering generals declare they need five more years and thousands of new troops?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Smurfaveli
"Riding his horse thru tooooown." *Palin voice*
12:50 PM on 12/02/2009
So many people complaining about his decision and saying it won't work. What if it does work? He spent 92 days developing this plan with everybody from generals to his security council to goat farmers. It better work. It has to work.

I'll place my bet with the President and his cabinet than with the blogosphere's "experts" with hurt feelings. In 18 months, if the strategy does not work and soldiers aren't coming home, then I'll complain with the rest of you.

Relative quietness for 8 years and now uprisings in the streets over 18 months? I have family and friends who are deployed and will be deployed and I pray for their safety as the President implements some actual strategy with an endgame.
12:24 PM on 12/02/2009
The NATO Secretary General, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, refutes that this in an exit strategy.

"Our mission in Afghanistan does not end until the Afghans can take over".

Obama says he wants to have withdrawn most of the troops in 3 years. Intriguing.
12:22 PM on 12/02/2009
The consensus in the media is that sending troops to Afghanistan is a bad move! Afghanistan is a "meat grinder"! http://bit.ly/7sYQmR
11:50 AM on 12/02/2009
Everyone wondering about Iraq and when we're getting out? Well I'm over here right now and trust me, we are drawing down. They are moving stuff out of here like crazy and we may not even make it to the end of our scheduled redeployment.
10:52 AM on 12/02/2009
Good luck brother and sister Marines Semper Fi USMC Viet Nam
10:40 AM on 12/02/2009
blueskybigstar 230 fans permalink

They are very poor. We are spending money that is causing violence. Where are the schools? Where is the hiring? Where is the buying back of weapons? Where are the loans? Where is the promise of help from us if they swear an oath to tolerance and respecting of women's rights?

No, only war.

lonemoderate I'm a Fan of lonemoderate 2 fans permalink

You can't build a school if someone comes and b lows it up 10 minutes after you cut the ribbon.

DEVELOPMENT NEEDS SECURITY.

I am tired of shouting it.

Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:26 AM on 12/02/2009

- blueskybigstar 230 fans permalink

You only take one part of my argument. Under Bush there was never any intention to build schools. Even the people say themselves that more military will just unite the people against us. Are you aware of the Judicial Watch lawsuit to get the tapes of the Pentagon? How did AQ get that missile?

http://www.judicialwatch.org/flight77
03:56 AM on 12/03/2009
Why are you people always stuck in the past. It's like desperate clutching at straws to avoid facing up to the FUTURE problems. So much easier to just point out oh but Bush did worse.

I get it. Bush neglected Afghanistan. He has no bearing on the future anymore.

And if you really believe that a "missile hit the Pentagon" or that America planned 9/11 you are a wackjob beyond help.

And just for the record Judicial Watch requested the tapes to silence the tin foil brigade not enable them.
01:02 PM on 12/03/2009
If they could lie about the reasons to go war to cause fear to enable their war machine to take a million and more lives, what is a small crime like a few thousand people in NY? We can trace the economic royalists whose testimony has been highly questionable. You must realize that there is a class of people who call normal people serfs and there are people who directly profited from these actions unbelievably. 9-11 is tiny compared to IranContra. Prosecute IranContra and you get all the same people who ignored fifty nine impossible to ignore warnings and let OBL get away in Torabora. I don't need to claim anybody did anything. Let new investigations answer the questions.