When former President George W. Bush launched the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan merely four weeks after the terrorist attacks against America on September 11, 2001, the Taliban had a stranglehold on the country of Afghanistan, and al-Qaeda was using the region as a base for their terrorist activities. The Taliban was dispatched, and al-Qaeda vanished into the hills, as American troops took root. The goal was for Afghanistan to no longer be a safe haven for Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida terrorists. As the war on terror broadened into Iraq, Osama bin Laden is believed to have retreated to the countryside along the Afghanistan border with Pakistan. Osama was never caught, and remains to this day at large. Some even suggest that Osama bin Laden is dead, though no such report has ever been confirmed.
Eight years later Afghanistan is Barack Obama's war, and despite tough talk during his presidential campaign, the Democrat is not sure what to do with the increasingly unpopular conflict. His military advisers recommend increasing troop numbers, and a year ago Obama pledged to listen to his generals, as well as ensure an adequate number of personnel is in the "right war." However, now Obama questions whether or not to add troops, though he has readily indicated that U.S. troops will remain in Afghanistan with no pull out date on the table in the near future.
Robert Gibbs, Obama's Press Secretary, recently told reporters that the White House is taking care to make the decisions regarding Afghanistan carefully. Defense Secretary Robert Gates echoed Gibbs', saying, "It is important that we take our time to do all we can to get this right. In this process, it is imperative that all of us taking part in these deliberations - civilians and military alike - provide our best advice to the president candidly but privately."
A recent Taliban assault on a remote U.S. outpost where troop numbers are stretched thin, killing eight American soldiers over the weekend, added to the pressure, and served as fuel for renewed cries by some anti-war voices. General McChrystal, the top Afghanistan commander, is asking for up to 40,000 additional personnel.
A number of American media outlets are reporting that the Taliban regime is a shell of what it once was, and that al-Qaeda is scattered and weakened. Nonetheless, with a weak Afghan government in place, the insurgents still believe they can retake control over Afghanistan with continued attacks.
Interestingly enough, only a year ago the Democrats were proclaiming that our very presence in the Middle East was encouraging terrorism, and was stimulating the breeding of anti-American hatred, while increasing terrorist activity. Suddenly, with a Democratic president in the White House, the press now wishes us to believe that though we still remain in Iraq, and are considering increasing the number of troops in Afghanistan, suddenly the terrorists are weak and dwindling in number. Do the terrorists pay that close of attention to American politics? Is the presidency of Obama magically making them suddenly weaken and drop in numbers, while their anger at Bush made them strengthen and increase in numbers only a year ago with a Republican President?
I would suggest that Islamists don't care who the President of the United States is. They hate the "Great Satan" regardless of the leadership, and will not set aside their desire to topple and dominate America until the day comes that they succeed (not that I am suggesting such success by the Islamic Jihad is in the cards).
One thing is for sure, this war has lasted longer than originally envisioned, and the 800 lives lost is more than imagined possible. Clearly, the conditions of the war have not changed, with little progress evident. The United States may be falling into the same trap that Russia fell into. The terrain is unmanageable, and the scenario is very different than Iraq's, meaning that an increase in troop levels may not be the cure-all for the difficulties in the conflict.
If the reports by the press are true about the Taliban's increasing inability to be a danger to the world, and al-Qaeda's rapidly weakening position, one wonders if remaining in Afghanistan should be considered at all. Obama has made it clear that he is not looking for victory in the region, and that his only intent is to keep al-Qaeda from using the region as a safe haven. If al-Qaeda is so weak, and they are on the run, then why continue such a strong presence in the region? Why not follow al-Qaeda to where they've run to?
The answer brings Pakistan into the picture, and though Obama talked tough about Pakistan during his presidential campaign, a move into that country at this juncture could prove disastrous considering Pakistan's nuclear capabilities in play, Iran's defiance, and the delicate state of Iraq.
In the end, I don't think Obama is taking his time to make these decisions because he is trying to be careful to make the right decision. I believe Obama simply does not know what to do, and is trying to buy time in the hopes that the answer will reveal itself to him through a yet unrevealed international event.
Remember, this leadership thing is something new to Mr. Obama. He's a campaigner and a community organizer, not a commander in chief.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Obama, advisers weigh Afghanistan shift, Pakistan - SFGate, Jennifer Loven
8 years in, Obama weighs Afghanistan options - Breitbart, Ben Feller
White House: US won't pull out of Afghanistan - Forbes, Anne Gearan and Lara Jakes
Afghanistan - 8 Years Too Long! - Washington Peace Center
Afghan Taliban say they pose no threat to the West - Reuters/Yahoo News, Sayed Salahuddin
No comments:
Post a Comment