You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Afghanistan
Pentagon worried about Obama's commitment to Afghanistan
2009-09-01
WASHINGTON -- The prospect that U.S. Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal may ask for as many as 45,000 additional American troops in Afghanistan is fueling growing tension within President Barack Obama's administration over the U.S. commitment to the war there.
Is that 'worried' in that they don't know what his commitment is, or 'worried' in that they know precisely what his commitment is?
On Monday, McChrystal sent his assessment of the situation in Afghanistan to the Pentagon, the U.S. Central Command, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and NATO. Although the assessment didn't include any request for more troops, senior military officials said they expect McChrystal later in September to seek between 21,000 and 45,000 more troops. There currently are 62,000 American troops in Afghanistan.

However, administration officials said that amid rising violence and casualties, polls show a majority of Americans now think the war in Afghanistan isn't worth fighting. With tough battles ahead on health care, the budget and other issues, Vice President Joe Biden and other officials are increasingly anxious about how the American public would respond to sending additional troops.

The officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to talk to the media, said Biden has argued that without sustained support from the American people, the U.S. can't make the long-term commitment that would be needed to stabilize Afghanistan and dismantle al-Qaida. Biden's office declined to comment.
Likely Obama strategy: Pull out the troops, blame the loss on GW, focus on Nation Building the U.S. into a Socialist State.
"I think they (the Obama administration) thought this would be more popular and easier," a senior Pentagon official said. "We are not getting a Bush-like commitment to this war."

Monday's assessment initially was to include troop recommendations, but political concerns prompted White House and Pentagon officials to agree that those recommendations would come later, advisers to McChrystal said. Although the White House took a hands-off approach toward Afghanistan earlier this summer, Pentagon officials said they're now getting more questions about how many troops might be needed and for how long.

Some White House officials said the administration feels it was pressured to send the additional 17,500 combat troops and 4,000 trainers earlier this year, before the administration was comfortable with its plan for Afghanistan, because of the country's election in August.

Obama now feels that McChrystal and his superior, Army Gen. David Petraeus, the head of the Central Command, are pressuring him to commit still more troops to Afghanistan, a senior military official said. The official said that retired Marine Gen. James Jones, Obama's national security adviser, told McChrystal last month not to ask for more troops, but that McChrystal still indicated in interviews that he may need more.

McChrystal's new assessment is the fifth one ordered since Obama's inauguration. Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said that no details of the assessment would be released. Other officials called it a "political hot potato."

Advisers to McChrystal, who spoke to McClatchy Newspapers on the condition of anonymity because of the matter's sensitivity, said the document is a little more than 10 pages long and broadly spells out McChrystal's assessment of conditions on the ground:

"It says that this could get much worse unless we invest ourselves in this now," one adviser said. "Then it says, 'This is what we propose to do.' "

On Monday, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said that the Obama administration inherited an under-resourced war in Afghanistan, but he stopped short of promising more troops.
Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC

#7  Keep in mind that the last 6-8 weeks has been focused on the needs of a (relatively) safe election and a possible runoff. Once that is done the strategy will be adjusted to suit. Of course the youngsters that don't remember the consequences of the retreat from Vietnam will be crying for full withdrawal yesterday (if not sooner). The death and destruction that would follow matters naught.
Posted by: tipover   2009-09-01 21:22  

#6  McChrystal's predecessor asked for 30,000 and essentially got fired for it.

Counterinsurgency may be the 'in thing', but it takes time. I highly doubt that there's any kind of national commitment to two-decades-plus of it.

And - the problem with the clear-hold-build is that it requires an increase in support personnel. That creates a whole new set of issues.
Posted by: Pappy   2009-09-01 21:12  

#5  The real problem is pakistan. That is the nexus of the disease. What to do about them? And a lot of their money comes from the Saudis. Everybody is either holding hands or kowtowing to the Saudi king. Too many of our leaders have been bought and sold by the saudis.
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2009-09-01 19:40  

#4  the new approach is counter insurgency, of which hearts and minds is only one component. Clear, hold, and build, while building local forces. A strategy needs to be more detailed than that, however.
Posted by: liberal hawk   2009-09-01 17:47  

#3  The prospect that U.S. Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal may ask for as many as 45,000 additional American troops in Afghanistan is fueling growing tension within President Barack Obama's administration over the U.S. commitment to the war there.

The nuus reports General McChrystal is soon to recommend a "new strategy" for Afghanistan. And all this time I thought his hearts and minds campaign was the new strategy.
Posted by: Besoeker   2009-09-01 16:01  

#2  Quite a few conservatives called for a pull out of Iraq (WFBuckley was one). Bush didn't take the bait.
Posted by: lord garth   2009-09-01 15:05  

#1  it sure doesnt help to have George Will calling for a pullout.
Posted by: liberal hawk   2009-09-01 14:56  

00:00