Skip to comments.Obama Considering Scaled-Down Afghan War [‘McChrystal Light’]
Posted on 10/29/2009 9:23:38 PM PDT by Steelfish
Obama Considering Scaled-Down Afghan War
McChrystal Light plan would send fewer troops than sought by commander
Oct . 29, 2009 WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama is considering sending large numbers of additional U.S. forces to Afghanistan next year but fewer than preferred by his war commander, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, U.S. officials said.
Such a narrowed military mission would escalate American forces to accomplish the commander's broadest goals, protecting Afghan cities and key infrastructure. But the option's scaled-down troop numbers likely would cut back on McChrystal's most ambitious objectives, amounting to what one official described as "McChrystal Light."
Under the pared-down option, McChrystal would be given fewer forces than the 40,000 additional troops he has asked for atop the current U.S. force of 68,000, officials told The Associated Press on Wednesday.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Clinton waited until he lost congress to start triangulating. It’s amazing how afraid of the leftist kook base this guy is.
Get out or commit. Would take gonads to make either happen.
Ever since the adults explained world things to him his bozo feet got really bigger.
You can't fight war on the cheap. If Obama was thinking to keep American casualties low, this is absolutely the worst policy imaginable -- with the possible exception of what he is already doing.
Halfway in, halfway out... this is still dithering.
If he wants to win -- or even just minimize the casualties -- he would be sending MORE than the general asked for, not less.
In my mind's eye I can just see all the soldiers in Afghanistan groaning and burying their faces in their hands. What did THEY do to deserve this nightmare?
McChrystal Light = Lose Slowly = Continuing deaths with no honor or meaning for anyone!
Good Morning Vietnam!!
Please stop by the FReepathon thread and give it a bump. If you haven’t donated yet, please give it some thought.
The Russians are very seriously examining the Obama “retreat “ and will happily assist Afghanistan as the USA begins to retract its commitment under Obama.NATO allies
are already preparing to leave.
Rather than have the US military ground down by a war of attrition, we should simply leave rather than stay in Afghanistan. The Russians will become the new Afghanistan ally, and Karzai is prepared to work with them.
Obama’s policies in Afghanistan are ludicrous, and dangerous.Putin is taking Obama to the wood shed in all areas of the Afghanistan question, Iran, and the general ME strategic situation.
Kinda like his Illinois voting record....voting present :(
". . .pared-down approach would reflect a shift in [Oval Office "generals'"] thinking about what parts of the war mission are most important and the intense political domestic debate over Afghan policy . . . Any expansion of the war will displease some congressional Democrats.
Obama won't do anything for the troops that hurts his domestic agenda.
YO-BAMA! Make up your freakin’ mind already!
Zero leads and heros bleed.
Like, the entire length of the border maybe! About 50 feet deep or so should do!
I feel deeply saddened for McChrystal.
It’s like sending a carpenter to build a house...with no hammer.
Does Patraus have any say?
Please, Lord, protect our troops.
Watch him try to do both. I can see him coming out and saying after much deliberation, blah blah blah...he’s decided Gen. McChrystal is right, and he’s sending more troops in. But - after all his blah blah blah - he’s determined that 40,000 isn’t the right number, we can achieve desired results with (pick a number)...say, 4,000 troops.
They don’t call him Liar in Chief for nothing.
Balless in Chief in charge would be more descriptive.
“. . .pared-down approach would reflect a shift in [Oval Office “generals’”] thinking about what parts of the war mission are most important and the intense political domestic debate over Afghan policy . . . Any expansion of the war will displease some congressional Democrats.”
We fight “parts” of wars now. And as far as angering “some” Congressional Democrats, the HELL with them. They’re not the ones getting shot at on a daily basis and they are not the parents of these kids.
As do I for him and all our troops. But if McChrystal assess this as a recipe for disaster; then it's his patriotic duty to resign his command IMHO. A good commander will not waste men on a causeless fool's errand. The welfare of his men must always come first, regardless of the consequences to himself. A soldier, sailor, or Marine deserve nothing less from their commander(s).
Semper Fi; it means a helluva lot more then Hope and Change does Mr. President!!
“You can’t cross a Chasm in two small steps”.
Your idea is like wanting us to back out of fighting Hitler and let the Russian do the job,
ONLY they aren’t our friends and they take over the Middle East, they control the oil.
I always assumed that if he did anything, he’d do it half-a$$ed, and when it failed, whine that the Generals didn’t handle it right.
In terms of national defense, at least Clinton had the so-called 'peace dividend' working in his favor (ie: fall of the Soviet Union). Obama doesn't have that luxury with the current WOT ... and unfortunately it might take another 9/11 or worse before he and his minions wake up to the fact that this is a dangerous world and always has been, and that we've been living in relative peace for so long *only* because of a strong national defense.
This is Obama’s cup of tea: send more of those inbred, redneck, bitter clingers from the flyover states to be blown up and shot—but keep the numbers low enough to ensure that the Taliban can win.
I am going to assume for the moment that McC has no political agenda of his own.
By stepping down..his commitment to the safety of his troops would be highlighted.
But would that be interpreted by his troops as abandonment?
I put myself in his place (assuming he is genuine). If I stay, I put many troops at risk. But that will happen if I am replaced. We have a weak CIC. Am I smart enough to fight a war under these circumstances with the limitations imposed on me?
If I go..my limited troops are really vulnerable. I have made a statement..but what about the boots on the ground that are having to fight a war with a change in the ROE? If I go...there is no hope that I will be able to perhaps help my troops with my expertise.
Talk about a rock and a hard spot!
Interesting how the Binomial Distribution applies in this case.
However, the problem is estimating the associated probabilities...a difficult task.
If he does, then our Marxist Media will not stop until they destroy him. The Justice Department will hunt him down and find some uncrossed t's and destroy him. And the Republicans will run for cover.
He is an idiot. Give the general what he says he needs...it is the only right thing to do.
Your idea is like wanting us to back out of fighting Hitler and let the Russian do the job,>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Its not my idea. Its what I can see happening, and I wish to preserve our all volunteer military, while Obama wishes to destroy it in a war of attrition in Afghanistan, simply so he can remake the US military into his community organizinng “national service” and civilian military police force “a la Nazi SS.” Obama can’t accomplish that with out destroying our current military. My guess is that he will use Afghanistan to do it, while creating a false image of patriotism by doing photo ops with military caskets at Dover AFB.
I would support a Bush Dictrine Surge to win the war in AFghanistan, which we had already done once BTW, but we failed to secure the victory by sealing the Afghanistan South East frontier.The chances of such a surge under Obama are less than nil.
I say we need to get our military out of Afghanistan if we have no leadership from Obama to win it. We have the capability of winning it, but Obama doesn’t want it won.Vietnam II in the making.