Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Tomorrow is the eighth anniversary of the Afghanistan war. Washington, DC. President Obama is being besieged with advice and warnings. At a bipartisan meeting on Tuesday at the White House with Congressional leaders, Obama seemed to indicate that he’s punting on whether or not to send another 40,000 troops that General Stanley McChrystal is demanding .... in addition to the 60,000 already based in Afghanistan.

Even if some Democrats want to bail out of Afghanistan and some Republicans think success can be earned with crushing force, the sad fact is that there will likely be many more anniversaries of the Afghanistan war before America can extricate itself.

Jacob Heilbrunn, senior editor at The National Interest.

Obama is in a damned if he do, damned if he don't, conundrum on whether to escalate the Afghanistan War. Know what's incredible, without even a single fighter jet or attack helicopter, the Taliban has managed to gain ground against the world's most well trained army. Like most people, I'm confused over "Taliban" and "al Queda" as far as who the enemy is that the US military is trying to eliminate in Afghanistan. Last I heard, al Queda has a different zip code. Still, you would think that half of the 40,000 more troops the General McChrystal requested would come from US allies. But I suspect that other nations won't contribute more troops to the Afghanistan War under a similar rationale that was used to promote the Iraqi War. "We fight terrorists in Iraq, so that we won't have to fight them at home." Instead, if the US is left to fight the "terrorists" alone in Afghanistan, then in the future, terrorists will plan retaliatory attacks against the US homeland, instead of launching terrorist attacks in Europe. And who would want that.

No comments: