previous post next post  

President Obama on Afghanistan...

Below are the American Forces Press Service article on the President's announcement last night, and a blurb on Secretary Gate's comments.  Of course they are supportive of the official position, it's not the place of the AFPS to be anything but.  At the bottom of the article is a link to the text of the President's full remarks.  What I'm interested in is your thoughts on the laydown of the way forward.

Mind you, I'm *not* interested in comments about "He's a tool!" or, "Hey, the man is a brilliant politician who will lead us to the light!"  If that's all you've got in your quiver, don't bother.  I'm looking for opinions on the substance, not snarks on the man.  I pretty much know how you feel about the man, let's keep this focused on the policy.  If you can't do that... mebbe you need to roll out your mat and take a nap after you've had your milk and cookies. 

Okay, let that last comment be the last personal attack...  8^ )
Obama Announces Troop Reductions, Way Forward in Afghanistan

American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, June 22, 2011 - Thanks to the tremendous progress U.S., coalition and Afghan troops have made, the United States will draw down the number of troops in Afghanistan by 10,000 this year and 33,000 by the end of summer 2012, President Barack Obama said here tonight.

"The tide of war is receding," the president said during an address to the nation from the White House. "Fewer of our sons and daughters are serving in harm's way."

In a statement released by the Pentagon following the presiden'ts announcement, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said the president's decision capitalizes on the security successes.

"Over the past 18 months our troops have made tremendous progress degrading the capability of the Taliban while enhancing the Afghan security forces," Gates said. "It is critical that we continue to aggressively prosecute that strategy. I support the President's decision because it provides our commanders with enough resources, time and, perhaps most importantly, flexibility to bring the surge to a successful conclusion."

When completed in September 2012, the drawdown will remove the last of the plus-up of forces in Afghanistan that Obama ordered in December 2009 during a speech at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y.

In that same speech, the president announced the new Afghan strategy, which was to focus on al-Qaida, reverse the Taliban's momentum and to train Afghan security forces. He also announced that the drawdown would begin in July 2011.

Obama said his announcement tonight is proof that the strategy is working. "Thanks to our men and women in uniform, our civilian personnel, and our many coalition partners, we are meeting our goals," he said. When the first stage of the drawdown is complete in September 2012, the surge will be over.

U.S. troops will continue to drawdown as Afghan security forces take the lead for protecting their own country. As this continues, the U.S. mission will switch from combat to support.

"By 2014, this process of transition will be complete, and the Afghan people will be responsible for their own security," Obama said.

The United States ended its combat role in Iraq last year and there are now about 45,000 U.S. troops in Iraq providing training and support to Iraqi security forces. The reduction of 33,000 troops by the end of summer 2012 will mean about 65,000 Americans in Afghanistan.

"Even as there will be dark days ahead in Afghanistan, the light of a secure peace can be seen in the distance," Obama said. "These long wars will come to a responsible end."

Obama said the past 10 years have been difficult for America. "We have learned anew the profound cost of war -- a cost that has been paid by the nearly 4,500 Americans who have given their lives in Iraq, and the over 1,500 who have done so in Afghanistan – men and women who will not live to enjoy the freedom that they defended," he said. "Thousands more have been wounded. Some have lost limbs on the field of battle, and others still battle the demons that have followed them home."

The president pledged that America will honor the sacrifices of so many and keep the sacred trust to provide the families of the fallen, those wounded and the veterans of the conflict "the care, and benefits, and opportunity that you deserve."

In a background briefing before the speech, senior administration officials said the president's decision had the full support of the national security team. Army Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of NATO's International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, presented the president with a range of options and the risks associated with each.

"I think there's a broad understanding among the national security team that there's an imperative to both consolidate the gains that have been made and continue our efforts to train Afghan security forces and partner with them in going after the Taliban, while also being very serious about the process of transition and the drawdown of our forces," the official said.

The drawdown begins from a position of strength, Obama said. Al-Qaida and its Taliban allies are under tremendous pressure. Navy SEALs killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan and more than half of al-Qaida's leadership has been killed or captured.

"In Afghanistan, we've inflicted serious losses on the Taliban and taken a number of its strongholds," the president said. "Along with our surge, our allies also increased their commitments, which helped stabilize more of the country. Afghan security forces have grown by over 100,000 troops, and in some provinces and municipalities we have already begun to transition responsibility for security to the Afghan people."

Everything is not rosy, the president said, and the United States remains committed to preserving the gains made and expanding on them. "We do know that peace cannot come to a land that has known so much war without a political settlement," he said. "So as we strengthen the Afghan government and security forces, America will join initiatives that reconcile the Afghan people, including the Taliban." Any reconciliation will be done with Afghans in the lead.

"The goal that we seek is achievable, and can be expressed simply: no safe-haven from which al-Qaida or its affiliates can launch attacks against our homeland, or our allies," the president said.

"We will not try to make Afghanistan a perfect place. We will not police its streets or patrol its mountains indefinitely. That is the responsibility of the Afghan government, which must step up its ability to protect its people; and move from an economy shaped by war to one that can sustain a lasting peace," Obama said. "What we can do, and will do, is build a partnership with the Afghan people that endures – one that ensures that we will be able to continue targeting terrorists and supporting a sovereign Afghan government."

The president also addressed the terrorist threat that resides in Pakistan. "No country is more endangered by the presence of violent extremists, which is why we will continue to press Pakistan to expand its participation in securing a more peaceful future for this war-torn region," he said.

The United States will continue to work with Pakistani leaders to go after terrorists. "We will insist that it keep its commitments," he said. "For there should be no doubt that so long as I am president, the United States will never tolerate a safe-haven for those who aim to kill us: they cannot elude us, nor escape the justice they deserve."

The president stressed that America's strength overseas is anchored by prosperity and opportunity at home. "Over the last decade, we have spent a trillion dollars on war, at a time of rising debt and hard economic times," he said. "Now, we must invest in America's greatest resource – our people. We must unleash innovation that creates new jobs and industry, while living within our means."

He said the nation needs to rebuild its infrastructure and find new and clean sources of energy. "Most of all, after a decade of passionate debate, we must recapture the common purpose that we shared at the beginning of this time of war," he said. "For our nation draws strength from our differences, and when our union is strong no hill is too steep and no horizon is beyond our reach.

"America, it is time to focus on nation building here at home," he said.

 

The Gates blurb:
Gates Says Afghanistan Withdrawal Capitalizes on Success

American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, June 22, 2011 - U.S. troops have made tremendous progress in degrading the capability of the Taliban while enhancing Afghan security forces, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said following the president's announcement tonight regarding withdrawal of U.S. forces.

Below is the secretary's full statement:

"Over the past 18 months our troops have made tremendous progress degrading the capability of the Taliban while enhancing the Afghan security forces. It is critical that we continue to aggressively prosecute that strategy. I support the President's decision because it provides our commanders with enough resources


Related Sites:
Obama's Remarks

9 Comments

1. Obama ignores the fact that the surge only enjoys success due to it's size, and withdrawing all those forces puts us at an immediate numerical and in-depth disadvantage to the enemy.
2. Obama has tossed his C-I-C hat into the dustbin, and is focussed only on getting re-elected now.
3. With 4 active wars in progress, Obama is no pacifist, but he feels he must at least look like one, so he will lose the war in the 'Stan for us.
 
Greetings:

I don't know much about socio-political strategy, but the Bronx part of my brain detected a "tiptoeing past the graveyard" aspect to the actual Afghanistan part of his Afghanistan speech. It was almost like he was trying to tell the Talibanis lay low militarily for the next couple of years, make a little nice at the Table of Talk, and we will be mostly out of your turbaned hair.  "Can't we all get along?" as Rodney King said during one of his periods of non-incarceration. 
 
Frankly, in the log run there is no way forward. AFG is logistically isolated and we need the support of our good frenemies, the Paks, to get anything done there. The Paks, OTOH, have no real incentive to help us, even though the taliban is a threat to their regime. Beyond making sure the AFG doesn't harbor any of our enemies, We have no real interest there and the botched opportunities to nail Osama in the early going put us in a real sticky situation.

I think our withdrawal will leave a serious power vacuum that the Paks will have to fill somehow, or teh Taliban will, which will strengthen their already bad position. Short of paving the place with radioactive glass, I know of no safe way forward.
 
Last time we made such pronouncements from the White House, 2-Million perished in SE Asia.  I just hope that we are not repeating history here.  Ooops, too late for that now.
 
Unless we're willing to take the fight completely into PK, the Taliban and company will just play the waiting game. This withdrawal will probably lose us a lot of the gains we've made, but we aren't willing to take the steps to win, so there's no point in throwing more money into this mess.


 
 Well, we have heard Obama's speech on Afghanistan and its future. Everybody has a right to their opinion in the debate. If we decide to share it, we must comply with the rulez.

What do we really know? In reference to Afghanistan, we actually know nothing more than we already knew. We knew he could stand up and read a script. Does that mean it will happen as projected by POTUS  in this speech? If not, why not? I think part of the problem is the visible cooperation of both the Afghans and the Paks, they need to get their tail in gear and get engaged.

When I think of history, I go on move it further  back in history, join  me. Let's go back in time to the preparation for the Normandy Invasion with Dwight Eisenhower's  role. The biggest part of the problem is people don't understand everything that was going on at the time. As I look at Eisenhower and Obama, there are, surprisingly, some very strong comparisons were things that are alike. If you look at Normandy, it was not just one attack. It was all whole series that were coordinated that made the attack on Normandy a success, which was expensive on many different levels. Normandy had about a dozen different components. Obama's speech targeted many different audiences including Al–Qaida, Taliban, Afghans and Pakistanis. On the other hand, Eisenhower's actions spoke to Erwin Rommel and Adolf Hitler with their troops.  Both men needed to tell their audiences what they wanted to hear. This is exactly what Eisenhower did and Rommel believed him. In fact, Rommel figured, if there was going to be an attack, George Patton would lead it. He  would cross at Calais. Eisenhower set up a complete fake command that would produce all of the chatter to help support this lie. They had done so well, at first, Patton believed it. But what was more important was this,  Rommel believed it.

Again, I don't believe anything that I heard last night.  I'll believe it, when I see it. Be careful of your perceptions.   
 
Sorry, John: 0 has just thrown victory and Afghanstan under the bus, to feed his hopes of being re-elected.

Been here, had this done to my sisters-and-brothers-in-arms.  "Peace with Honor" Nixon called it, getting neither.
 
I don't know what edition of Sun Tsu teh Man read, but it had to be the one published in the Huffington Post. The enemy is now warned, our plans are in the open for everyone to see, and our intentions are very clear. All the good done in the last year is going for naught, and the blood of our troops was spilled for politics. It was a good idea to send them, but now they are a political liability. Our friends will wonder and our enemy will smile and wait.

My worry now is for the 65,000 left behind to carry on. War is an all of nothing deal. We just gave the enemy the break they needed.
 
During his remarks to troops at Fort Drum today, the President was reminiscing about the times he has spent with the US Army's 10th Mountain Division,

"First time I saw 10th Mountain Division, you guys were in southern Iraq. When I went back to visit Afghanistan, you guys were the first ones there. I had the great honor of seeing some of you because a comrade of yours, Jared Monti, was the first person who I was able to award the Medal of Honor to who actually came back and wasn’t receiving it posthumously."

The problem is, Jared Monti was killed in action in Afghanistan, on June 21, 2006. He was awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously, September 17, 2009. President Obama handed the framed medal to his parents, Paul and Janet Monti.


Just. Plain. Word.