Skip to comments.The White House and Woodward (military opinions-Afghanistan)
Posted on 07/02/2009 9:10:56 PM PDT by STARWISE
The Obama administration has just been Woodwarded, as in Bob Woodwarded.
If his Washington Post report is accurate, General Jones, the National Security Advisor committed a serious civil-military relations mistake that could haunt the administration over the coming year.
Up until now the administration has been nearly pitch-perfect on the issue of how to talk to the military about securing military advice in high command decision making and how to talk about the military advice they get.
But this report, which seems authoritative because it reads like a verbatim transcript of the meeting (is Bob Woodward on the trip?), sounds a very discordant note.
(Excerpt) Read more at shadow.foreignpolicy.com ...
National security adviser James L. Jones told U.S. military commanders here last week that the Obama administration wants to hold troop levels here flat for now, and focus instead on carrying out the previously approved strategy of increased economic development, improved governance and participation by the Afghan military and civilians in the conflict.
The message seems designed to cap expectations that more troops might be coming, though the administration has not ruled out additional deployments in the future. Jones was carrying out directions from President Obama, who said recently, "My strong view is that we are not going to succeed simply by piling on more and more troops."
"This will not be won by the military alone," Jones said in an interview during his trip. "We tried that for six years." He also said: "The piece of the strategy that has to work in the next year is economic development. If that is not done right, there are not enough troops in the world to succeed."
Jones delivered his message after a 30-minute briefing by Marine Brig. Gen. Lawrence D. Nicholson, who commands 9,000 Marines here, nearly half the new deployments Obama has sent to Afghanistan.
Lord, put a hedge of protection and safety around our brave military.
By December, I see both Jones and Hillary gone. I don’t think either fit with this immature group in the White House. You will see a revolving door at the state department where no one stays more than twelve months.
I’ve recently entertained that thought about Hillary.
Jones ... he’s a surprise and big and alarming disappointment. I expected he’d demonstrate his years of military service with more of an allegiance and respect for the soundness of the judgments of the officers on the frontlines and the protection of the troops.
If true, his pathetic statements reflect a shocking concern about the temperament and reaction to reality from the 0, fergodssakes.
Sickening if the klieg lights and prestige went to his head so quickly like the Beltway can do, and he’s walking on eggshells to not offend the emperor. Or else he was always just a player and brown noser in uniform.
My ernest prayers are with the troops.
I can't believe what I just typed.
Obozo doesn't have a clue about anything that he's doing! It's laughable to read 'Let ME make the decisions'.
Pray for our troops!! May God watch over them.
A much better strategy is to use 2001-style tactics to destroy the center of gravity, and to use a mixture of politics, development and intelligence pressure to defang the rest of the Taliban and boost Afghan sovereignty. The challenge is *gulp* nation-building - creating a credible enough Afghan sovereign to keep this up on their own so groups like Taliban and Al-Qaeda don't fill the vacuum of a weak state.
Iraq is much easier to win because there's a credible political entity there (2, really, b/c of the independence of the kurds), and they want peace. Afghanistan is less of a country and more of a region. Pakistan and the ISI like it that because it gives them maximal influence in a strategic region, as well as “depth” in the event of a shooting war with India.
This issue is way too complex for the average idiot obamabot to understand or care about.