Michael Steele is right on Afghanistan.
The Republican National Committee Chairman, who is receiving a heap of scorn by war-hungry members of his party and by Democrats who want to puff up and act like the real defenders of the Pentagon faith, called the conflict in Afghanistan "a war of Obama's choosing."
Former George W. Bush administration national security official and current Council on Foreign Relations President Richard Haass wrote the same thing in August of 2009. And there are many more academics, Members of Congress, journalists, and average Americans who are discomfited by the deployment of military forces in Afghanistan at a cost of more than $100 billion/year in a country with a GDP of $14 billion.
Michael Steele has a habit of rounding corners in a way that gets him into trouble -- but on this issue, Steele reflects the views of a significant number of Americans in both political parties. While there is bipartisan support for the war, there is also bipartisan opposition to it.
The DNC needs to temper its "gotcha criticism" of Steele. Spokesman Brad Woodhouse said that Steele was "betting against our troops and rooting for failure in Afghanistan."
This is a distortion of what Steele was proffering. But what concerns me about the DNC comments is the exploitation of the complex and challenging Afghanistan War as a measure of one's patriotism, or support for the Pentagon -- in which the White House and Democrats desperately want to show they are better at than the Republicans.
That's not a smart national security posture. Embracing wars, deferring to generals, or giving the Pentagon everything it wants is the opposite of leadership.
Presidents and great leaders in the House and Senate sculpt the Pentagon and have made tough choices about what the U.S. military should be designed to do and what it should be held back from.
This knee-jerk criticism of Michael Steele is wrong-headed by the Dems -- and all too predictable from neoconservatives like Bill Kristol, who seem to thrive on escalating the number of US troops fighting abroad.
In many ways, Steele's comments were the more judicious because of the concern that the U.S. may be engaged in a war that breaks the military's back. The recklessness is Kristol's -- and the hubris the DNC's.
-- Steve Clemons publishes the popular political blog, The Washington Note. Clemons can be followed on Twitter @SCClemons
Follow Steve Clemons on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SCClemons
William Bradley: The Afghan War and the Spirit of Jefferson
On this 4th of July weekend, with General Petraeus taking command in Afghanistan, what would Thomas Jefferson do? Would he see the massive military and nation building mission in Afghanistan as a wise and necessary course of action?
Christine Pelosi: On July 4th, Avoid the Steele Trap: Separate the War from the Warriors
Imagine the impact we could create this 4th of July if we invested the same amount of energy spent snarking at Steele into fighting for the troops, veterans, and military families he slighted.
Jacob Heilbrunn: Steeled for Combat
Steele has repeatedly caused heartburn among Republicans for his own stubbornly independent streak. But this the chairman may have jumped the shark by labeling Afghanistan President Obama's war of "choice."
My prediction is that, if things continue in this vein, the next Republican candidate for President will be promising to get us out of war, a la Eisenhower and Nixon, and the Democrats will be scrambling to make their sh#tty policy look like chocolate ice cream.
IT'S ALL ABOUT KEEPING THE GRAVY TRAIN GOING TO CONTRACTORS!!!
None of the companies who enrich themselves at taxpayer expense want to get off that train.
We need to get out of Afghanistan and spend those 30billion in alottments on saving our own civilian population rather than killing theirs...
I'd like to know when the democrats decided they were wrong about Vietnam.
They've felt militarily dysfunctional since the 70's?
They should make the argument that wars weaken the US, and unnecessary wars are unpatriotic.
Declare victory and leave.
u expect me to buy that ?
then why the ground-hog duck and cover ?.......nice try but.......BS......!!!
But the fact that we're in a major war with a group as small as Alqeada,,, does seem to reflect the dishonesty in all the moral attachments applied to the reasons we're burning up all that American blood and treasure..
I believe this war is more of a jobs program that Obama can't end and if it's true we all individually are just refusing to face the facts,, choosing to accept any moral justification for the sake of our own sanity..
The truth might be that we're trying to make it a safe place so Industry capitalists can come in and reap all their recources just like every other conflict,, using the threat of terrorism as the propaganda to justify it..
Do you think we could just be honest about the motives for war and still understand why we fight..
World War 1 -- hundreds of thousands of previously rational
animals lined up facing one another and doggedly shot one another
to pieces, day after day, year after year. And no one could
confidently or clearly say why it was happening or what it was
all about. Unlike World War 2, the First World War did not end
because of any kind of invasion of Germany. It came to an end
because the Bolsheviks brought the capitalist leaders who were
fighting each other to their senses.
Gee, where have I heard that before?
Steele is a clown and tells so many lies and gaffes that he cannot separate fact from propaganda. We do need to have an honest and serious discussion about the costs of the war and the need to get out of Afghanistan but that isnot the point and you pegged it perfectly!
Thanks!
Mission Accomplished.
The writer thinks he's talking to people who don't see the game Republicans are playing. If Republicans agreed with the Pres. ocassionally then maybe I'd fall for Steele's comments. But he's such a lacky I wouldn't believe him if he told me he was a "Black Man".
However, Obama is the one who has "surged" in Afghanistan. Obama was the one who accepted mcchrystal's "we'll be the Afghan police department to win hearts and minds" disaster of a plan. And no matter what happens with the ore they know is in Afghanistan, every $ billion we spend there is money that does nothing for our safety or strength.
So if Obama pulled us out of Afghanistan tomorrow and Steele says that it makes us weak and less safe, then Steele would be "wrong." Period.
But that's not the case. The prospects of "stabilizing" a country that has never been stabilized are nil. Every wasted tax dollar weakens us and makes us less safe.
Maybe this is a simple case of Steele being the blind p1g finding an acorn. Since it happens so rarely, can't you let the poor man savor his accidental correctness?
Like the donkey that played the flute by mistake.