The President made an address to the nation from West Point tonight, in which he laid out elements of his plan to ratchet-up the war effort in Afghanistan. A couple of quick thoughts, and then I welcome yours.
1. I think it was the right place to make this speech. A good, serious venue.
2. It was a listless performance.
3. There was little or no "strategy" in this speech. There were troop levels, timetables, and the like.
4. There was however, the decision of a President to persevere--though in a bounded/limited sense (18 months, resource constrained). This alone is something we have to treat seriously, especially given the almost certain lack of support he'll get from his own side. Conservatives should support the President on this effort--we should give his strategy a chance to succeed. We should watch closely though, for signs of progress.
5. Ultimately, I think the great weakness of this approach is the 18 month timetable. We gain NOTHING strategically by putting this out there, and we lose a lot. This is a domestic political ploy and it hamstrings what could be a successful approach from the get-go.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
Listless? I would offer that he was appropriately serious. The issues called for a calm, sober, and realistic assessment of the circumstances which led to his decision. I think his demeanor suited the gravity of the subject.
WP IV sends...
Chris Matthews called the West Point venue, "The Enemy Camp." What an idiot.
It's only "The Enemy Camp" if you're a Navy guy this week.
I agree with WP IV, it was a sober delivery. No earthshaking changes in overall policy or strategy as you said. I was disappointed that he chose to rail on Bush's choice to go into Iraq, but pleasantly surprised to hear how much he recalled 9/11 to try and stir some national fervor again.
botts 21 sends...
We're out in 18 months? Can you people fathom how stupid that is? Wars with timetables are lost before they start.
Obama is scared. He's scared of his hard left, otherwise know as his base, and he's scared to lose Afghanistan. In poker you never bet with "scared" money, money you can't afford to lose. Obama just made a scared money bet. He's a pussy and the world knows it.
To quote Tom Friedman, "What makes me wary about this plan is how many moving parts there are — Afghans, Pakistanis and NATO allies all have to behave forever differently for this to work."
He's often wrong, but his concerns here are right on. We have the best fighting forces in world, no doubt. However, we are further committing them to a task the outcome of which is based on too many variables out of their control. Having said that, now that we have committed them, I agree with CW and GHD, a timeline was probably the worst thing we could have done. Following the president's speech, General McChrystal said that U.S. forces will work toward "the transfer of responsibility to Afghan security forces as rapidly as conditions allow." Chief among those conditions being the expiration of the 18 months?
Post a Comment