The most explosive controversy over President Obama's address at West Point is the deadline he has proposed for the beginning of withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan of July 2011 -- 18 months from now. Most of the media commentary after the speech has so far focused on this single point and most observers appear to assert that Obama's insistence on a deadline will help Al Qaeda and the Taliban who will, in their turn, wait until US forces depart and then step up their takeover efforts in the country.
However, this a simplistic and truly perverse reaction. It leaves out the main import of the deadline -- which is to impress on the Afghans that they must take responsibility for their own destiny over the next year and one half or else face the loss of international support. They must step up their often laggard efforts at military training and at rallying the Afghan population against the cruel insurgents who have helped destroy so much of a civilized society in that nation. Without a deadline, the Afghans, who have tarried and delayed for eight years at doing the work of defending themselves, will persist in their dilly-dallying and footdragging for another decade or so, figuring that the US and NATO troops will carry the fight for them. Obama took the only responsible route to assuring that the Afghans finally take custody of this fight.
Conn Hallinan: Why the Afghan Surge Will Fail
McChrystal argues that the current situation is "critical," and that an escalation "will be decisive." But as former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst A.J. Rossmiller says, the war is a stalemate.
Harry Shearer: Another Letter About Afghanistan the President May Not Be Reading
Following Matthew Hoh's resignation letter comes a missive from William Polk who, like Hoh, finds the only prudent course of action regarding Afghanistan to be a timely removal of troops.
Joseph A. Palermo: The "Goldilocks Principle" and Afghan War Options
General McChrystal's recommendation for more troops and material has a distinctly Westmorelandian flavor to it. If approved, it could create an additional $40 to$80 billion per annum in war costs.
Robert Scheer: Here We Go Again
To suggest that the Afghan government will be in seriously better shape 18 months after 30,000 additional U.S. are dispatched is bizarrely out of touch with the strategy of the McChrystal report.
It certainly was and about as right-wing as it could be. Presidents never see a war they don't like and never have the courage to stop them unless forced to if they think their hold on power is really at risk. Obama has taken his support among a lot of progresives for granted, just as he's taken for granted the Gay community while speaking as a "fierce advocate of Gay rights" and not even suspending DADT until it's overturned which he can do. So maybe the real lucky ones n this Afghan war will be Gay men and women who come out of the closet and get sent home.
It's a major hint to our enemies to cease fighting for a year &
a half to give US time to surge in to organize an orderly exit.
Some will be against the plan for exactly that reason. But let's
insist that it's a fiendishly clever strategem & leave it at that.
"Retreat, hell! We're not retreating, we're just advancing in a different direction", regarding certain Korean War tactics.
That may very well be true, but is still doesn't change the fact that the enemy, who have been nothing but patient for decades, will still hide in the mountains of Afghanistan and Pakistan, and wait out the time table. One of Al Qaeda's (and the Taliban's) greatest assets is their patience, which they know we do not have.
what an ungodly waste of money