Commander in Chief: Yes He Is
It has long been lamented that national security no longer stops at the water's edge. This expression derives from a Cold War consensus that pitted democratic capitalism against communism. It bound elected leaders and most of the American public together in a common cause. It disappeared in 1991, and has yet to be replaced by a compelling new framework. Simplicity is no easy task in a world of blurred boundaries and rapid communication. Lacking clarity, "security" has become vulnerable to fear profiteers who depend on an "us versus them" mindset. A glance through recent attacks against President Obama for exercising his commander-in-chief prerogative bears proof: Today, national security doesn't even stop at the gutter's edge.
It's like a bad dream "Groundhog Day" repeat: the Cheneys, Frank Gaffney, Bill Kristol, Karl Rove. They have been all over the place lately, criticizing President Obama's decision making style, even starting a new organization to carry the cudgel, (get the critical scoop on it at National Security Network). They are suggesting that he doesn't respect the military, is too deferential, lacks resolve.
The biggest jaw-bender, however, is that he's taking too much time to review our policy in Afghanistan. WHAT?!! This from the very same people who scorned in-depth analysis in 2003--during the run up to the Iraq war. In fact, back then they ignored military advice. I remember the last briefing I went to in 2003, just before the US invasion. It was with Army strategists--who laid out 140 tasks that were obligations for any occupying nation. Ignored. Like the rest of the credible information that was based on experience and reflection. I don't think I'm alone in believing that a roomful of toddlers with a typewriter could have written better memos in 2003 than this same gang of hectoring neoconservatives.
Today, America has a commander-in-chief who shows respect for the military by understanding the accurate division of labor in security policy. He and his team (and an increasing number of voices on Capitol Hill) know that, in today's world, security problems are beyond the purview of the military acting alone. Afghanistan is emblematic of this new situation. The worst thing the neocons can do to the military is to ignore the message being sent about the dramatic shifts on the ground--and the full complement of resources needed. Or by framing our challenge and our major commitment to that country in military terms alone. Conservatives need to stop picking a bogus fight between General McChrystal and the Administration over troop levels. Troops are just one of many possible contributions. And any troops sent must fit into a comprehensive strategy.
Important context: Keep in mind that--lacking capacity in our other agencies--the Pentagon has by default become the institutional memory of American post Cold War foreign policy. General McChrystal is part of a generation of officers whose understanding of security is both broad and deep. If his comments in London touched a nerve, it is a sign of a much bigger American civics issue about how to inform and educate ourselves in today's world, and who we are equipping to be the messengers of change. The bright-lines of military participation in public policy discussions have blurred because it is the institution disproportionately burdened with this task today. It happens that the Army and Marines have some pretty compelling knowledge and lessons. Evening out this responsibility is a vital longterm task for all Americans.
It still kills me that so many neoconservatives claim to value the military, yet demonstrate so few military values. Like: looking after the general welfare, shared risk, sacrifice for common goals and longterm planning. And here's the kicker: public service. Here are some other reminders of how progressive the military can be:
- International human rights law: U.S. military lawyers have been human rights champions for Guantánamo prisoners and for the Geneva Conventions.
- International treaties: The U.S. Navy is one of the strongest advocates for the Law of the Sea.
- Nuclear arms control: The military generally finds nuclear weapons unusable.
- Conflict resolution: The Air Force has a prize-winning office of dispute resolution.
- Renewable energy: The U.S. military is the largest renewable consumer in the country.
- AIDS prevention: The Defense Department has an extensive program to help foreign militaries.
The American military's changing worldview has resulted in identity conflicts within the institution. This tension will likely continue until younger generations move into leadership and bring with them very different notions of national security. This should be encouraged as much as possible. It should also involve all of us.
The idea that power comes not from dominance, but from the ability to influence change, is a lesson learned from recent experience. Contrast the tea-drinking and negotiating experience of Afghanistan with the linear, engineering mindset of the Cold War--where a rigid worldview fit nicely with hardware-heavy solutions. Low-tech is our future. Afghanistan is the test. Finally, we have a President who hears what the military has been saying for nearly twenty years now: Security is about people.
Follow Lorelei Kelly on Twitter: www.twitter.com/loreleikelly
David Bromwich: America's Wars: How Serial War Became the American Way of Life
For two centuries, Americans were taught to think war itself an aberration. Younger generations of Americans, however, are now being taught to expect no end of war -- and no end of wars.
With Zero Credibility, Neocons Discover Afghanistan | National ...
YouTube - Conservative George Will Takes On Neocons On Afghanistan
Neocons Back Obama On Afghanistan | The New Republic
Now is the time for conservatives to leave Afghanistan and the ...
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Give me Cheney over Obama and his cronies any ol time. Obama is making us sitting ducks with our enemies. Today's reports are the other nations are waiting for Obama to make a decision on Afghanistan. This man doesn't know how to make decisions! All talk, no action. He is letting his cronies make all the decisions for him and they have never run a business in their lives! Scary situation. When we get hit again, and we will, you leftists will scream it is Bush's fault. No go on that one. Every president 'inherits' difficulties. Obama is no different. They just didn't whine about it like he does. What could be worse than a 9-11 hit that Bush got 8 months in? It could have destroyed our financial market but didn't. There were men in the White House then, not 'thinker' and not doers.
The financial policies created post-9-11 to prevent a hit on the economy then hit are the same ones that created the mess we're in today--not to mention the debt of the unfunded wars that followed. So I'm not sure it's such a credit to the Bush Administration that their quick decision-making was of such value. There's a big difference between solving a problem and putting off its impact until it's on another guy's desk. Maybe if the team takes their time this time, the next President won't be dealing with the same old crap.
How is it we fought communism all those years & now our mis-representatives can't hand this nation to communist China fast enough?
www.nextre
Our representation is so out of tune they weren't fighting communism even when they sent 58,000 to die & thousands more wounded, to Vietnam. Billion sif not trillion sof weapons were bought from communist countries, China included, to kill & wound these Americans.
Our mis-representatives playe dthe same games then as now, not patriotic if you don't support the troops? Then is was cowards & girls because thousandsof stoned hippies didn't want to go to war, kill, or be killed for the wrong reasons. Called cowards if they refused to go, baby killers if they lived & came home, heroes if they died for the wrong reasons.
POur mis-repres
I don't blame them for being mercs as your comic books call them. The most money I made in the military was 148.00 a month and you couldn't advance any. Now everybody can't say enough good about the servicemen but it hasn't always been that way. How about Kerry and the swift boat job. I hear the talk but the walk is a little swishy.
From the beginning of this country, Civilians controlled the military. It has always been this way. sometimes, it worked well and sometimes it was a disaster.
Why did Johnson and Nixon pick out targets for planes to bomb in viet Nam instead of setting a policy, guidelines and a goal for the military and then let the military exercise its expertise?
I agree with the (hated on this forum) Gaffney, Krystol, Rove, et al that Obama is being indecisive when a decision is clearly needed now. This falls in live with Obamas penchant for voting "present".
When he was reunning for the presidency, Obama said that we needed to have victory in Afghanistan. Now, he doesn't say that. Does he or doesn't he want victory? If he does, why isn;t he listening to his Generals? If he doesn;t want victory, what are we fighting for? Does he think we should allow the Taliban to regain control and torment Afghanis?
Its good to see that for once our commander in chief is thinking before he acts, a nice change from the last administration. However, its long overdue to bring our troops home and get the heck out of the Middle East
He has had plenty of time to act.
In the mean time our troops are dying.
The central premise of the article; that we need a military more inclined to peaceful influence, is mostly only valid if we intend to continue to conquer and occupy other nations. I believe there is a vast repugnance towards this and which encompasses segments of both the left and right wings. To the extent that it comes at the expense of the ability conquer in the first place, it can be completely pointless. The dichotomy is that that capacity is parallel to our basic ability to defend ourselves. The military needs to be careful not to be pulled too far away from its core capacity.
I think the core message is more that we need to bulk up the non-military tools so that the military ISN'T the one who has to do everything. But it seems Congress likes giving money to DoD more than anyone else.
Lorelei shows once again why the left has more intellect and reasoning power than the single-minded, solipsistic and maniacal rants from the right.
Obama got our votes because he promised to bring home our troops. Now bring home our troops! So far it's been all talk!
I wish that could happen soon but because of our attitude of "fire first and then talk ",we went into a country and completely tried to re-organize it without an ounce of common sense..now if we leave then what it going to happen to the mess we made..yeah we willingly jumped in sticky mud hoping not to get dirty..we'
He promised to bring the troops out of Iraq.
He promiseed Victory in Afghanistan. He promised to defeat the Taliban and al Qaeda.
So give McCrystal the forces to do the job. It will save lives: american and Afghani.
It would be nice to just walk away. Unfortunately we are responsible for the mess.
Another example for you on the progressiveness of the Military, don't forget they were the first to desegregate (at least a decade before the rest of the US and the Civil Rights movement). I bet they drop the "don't ask, don't tell" policy soon and will again be ahead of the curve and the rest of the US.
Why are we spending hundreds of billions of dollars chasing down several hundred Kalashnikov-toting zealots living in tents on the Afghan-Pakistan frontier? Follow the money. Over 60% (yes 60%) of our armed forces in Afghanistan are contract soldiers employed by the likes of Blackwater, Titan, Khaki and Haliburton. These companies are making tens of billions of dollars a year off this war, and they run a lobbying machine that has purchased the national Republican party with generous political donations. By the way, casualty reports from these private contractors are not included in the statistics from the Pentagon.
Check out http://www
What has happened to the Left?
"Let's have a war - but not really fight it"?
How about this - let's get the troops the hell out of that sandtrap!
cj
Has it occurd to anyone to do one of those famous think tank studies on the possibility of insulating the country (this one the U.S., ) against any kind of attack ? One of the issues pro staying in Afghanistan is that it could become a base for future attacks on us. But that seems bogus to me : at least not in any real sense in the near or even far away future. It could put a few thousand people back to work here by hiring them for homeland security and eliminate one more reason to be there. What are the terrorists going to do sail over here on the Afghan navy ? Any sign of them building a neuclear weapon we give them 3 minutes to evacuate all non military personnel before we bomb h*ll out of them. There are other ways to protect the shipping lanes besides occupying a country. When you take the common sense reasons out all you have left is idealistic arguments that don't hold water. It's not true we would leave in humiliation and defeat if we leave now: But it would be disaterous to keep pumping $ into a nonconsequential, poor, non strategice country w/ nothing to gain : and then get defeated.
See Lorelei Kelly's Profile
I think the answer most compelling to this argument is that a spiraling downward Afghanistan would be a destabilization vacuum for the region...r
It keeps coming back to the fact that Obama is asking us to be patient while our children are dying in a faraway land.
"....It keeps coming back to the fact that Obama is asking us to be patient while our children are dying in a faraway land..."
Did it come back to you that bush did not ask you to be patient? No, gwb TOLD you better be patient, and he told you this for 8 long years. Did you think about "our children" dying then? And did you think about all the children Bush "Killed" in Iraq ,too? Just shut up and wait!
I would understand if Obama was being slow and deliberate on Afghanistan in order to make sure he had his ducks in a row before making a decision. But he only met with McChrystal once after being elected! Once! But in the mean time he managed to (1) bring a professor and cop together for beer (2) do the talk show circuit and (3) personally plead with the Olympic committee for 2016.
And apparently the guy really likes to have parties at the WH. We're talking ALL THE TIME.
But at least he passed the stimulus. You know, the one that had to be passed as soon as possible to keep us from going into a depression? How many states have higher unemployment since this bill? 49 out of 50! All hail the community organizer!
See Lorelei Kelly's Profile
"Meeting only once with McChrystal" is an accusation that falls into the fallacy that I'm trying to point out with this article. Military options are by far the most present and best represented in our system of government--its the civilian capacity building side, including how to help prod a legitimate sense of governance that requires a good deal of time...its not something that we've paid enough attention to for years now...
What are you saying?
War doesn't wait for the enemy politics to be settled.
Where would we be now, if Bush/Cheney had actually taken a few weeks to what if the Iraq situation?
Where would we be now, if Bush/Cheney had actually taken a couple of days to reflect on "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques"?
Where would we be now, if Bush/Cheney had actually developed a plan for the execution of the War on Terror?
All of this is behind us now. The wars are over, the green shoots of the economy are now forests of productivity, health care is no longer a concern, and our fiscal worries are behind us.
Folks, listen up. The most important item on our plate is to eliminate Fox News. Fox News needs to be OUT OF BUSINESS by next year. Elections are at stake.
Put down your signs, stop wasting time at town halls. Turn your channels to anything but Fox.
Get the word out.
let's see indefinite detention ,not releasing torture photos to the public ,giving the okee doke for missile bombings in Pakistani ,sending 13000 troops to protect the crops. "W" could not have said it better "Brownie , your doing a heck of a job "
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
