Posted on 11/26/2009 10:58:54 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
believe that Republicans are poised to cement their complete opposition to everything Obama and reap a huge political win by twisting their political principles to oppose further escalation of troops in Afghanistan. Unless, of course, Obama can be convinced not to send more troops.
Obama’s decision about whether to send more troops in Afghanistan is expected on December 1st, and he may well be going with an increase of around 30,000 towards a war we don’t have a way to win.
We’ve reached a crucial juncture. More troops to Afghanistan would be a disaster, both over there and politically over here. Can you sign the petition urging Obama to rethink Afghanistan strategy and not send more troops? For every signature we get, CREDO Mobile will generously donate $1 to the blog fellowship that supports Derrick Crowe and his anti-war work.
Politically, this issue is about to turn on its head. America has a strong anti-interventionist streak, which Republicans lost when George Bush invaded Iraq. A majority of Americans think we should stop sending more troops into Afghanistan. Republicans see an opportunity, a way back to this popular position by opposing Obama, and they’re ready to take it. The writing is on the wall.
In the past few months, more and more influential, movement conservatives have come out against Obama’s policy or future plans for Afghanistan. They hail from all parts of the party – moderate and neoconservative – and from all walks of political life – pundits to elected officials. What they have in common is a skepticism to the idea that the Afghanistan war is worth more troops.
Here’s the rundown:
* Senator Chuck Hagel: "Iraq and Afghanistan Aren’t Ours to Win or Lose"
* Former Presidential candidate Fred Thompson: "The war in Afghanistan ‘has been lost.’"
* Former talking head Lou Dobbs: "Bring our troops home."
* Conservative columnist George Will in the Washington Post: "Time to get out of Afghanistan"
* Republican Congressman Tim Johnson: "Take immediate steps to begin a responsible withdrawal from Afghanistan."
* Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher: "We owe [the troops] our best judgment, not just an easy answer of sending more military people into a conflict."
* Republican Congressman Peter Hoekstra and John Shadegg: "If the Obama administration’s priority isn’t providing our troops with the tools to do the job and win, we shouldn’t be there."
* Conservative columnist Tony Blankley in Humane (sic)Events: "The president has three choices: 1) Cut and run, 2) cut and walk or 3) stay and fight with enough troops. Either No. 1 or No. 3 may be justifiable based on hardheaded thinking. No. 2 is an evasion of reality and sinfully would sacrifice American troops for no good purpose."
* Richard N. Haass, Council on Foreign Relations president under Bush Sr. and Jr.: "Defining success down on Afghanistan."
* Conservative columnist Andrew C. McCarthy in the National Review: "Our troops are not in Afghanistan for a social experiment."
* Malou Innocent and Christopher Preble at the CATO Institute: "U.S. Must Narrow Objectives in Afghanistan"
Though the views represented in the list above are not yet mainstream conservative thought, the list is full of influential conservative thinkers who will have a say in how the party moves forward on the issue. And the list is by no means exhaustive.
If Obama isn’t careful, Republicans will shortly outflank him on the issue. They’ll grab the mantle of non-intervention – a populist position which has large numbers of supporters in both parties – and start appealing directly to the majority of Americans who think we should stop sending more troops into Afghanistan, or even start withdrawing.
That’s why it’s so important progressives stand up on the right side of this issue. Progressives are the anti-war people, and the Democrats should be the anti-war party. Republicans outflanking Democrats on this issue would be disastrous politically as more Americans sour on the war and its leader.
As you know, Derrick Crowe has been writing about getting out of Afghanistan for the last three months because of a blog fellowship The Seminal and Brave New Foundation awarded him. We’ve been fundraising to allow him to continue getting the message out to progressives for another year.
Thanks to blog readers here at Firedoglake/The Seminal, as well as our friends around the web, we’ve raised over $1,000 for Derrick. Now, CREDO Mobile has generously offered to give us $1 for every signature they get on their petition calling for President Obama to rethink Afghanistan strategy and not send more troops.
By signing this petition, you do two things: Make your voice heard to the administration and pressure them to do the right thing on the Afghanistan war, and help support a progressive anti-war voice in the blogosphere, Derrick Crowe.
Thank you for your support. Hopefully together, we can get Obama on the right side of this issue, if not by his announcement than shortly thereafter, before Republicans step up their opposition and grab back the populist, anti-interventionist mantel they lost when George Bush invaded Iraq.
The course in this war must be changed, for the world’s sake, our security’s sake, and for to sake of our continued majority in Congress and the Executive branch.
Wishful thinking by the anti-American left.
The Left is clever, but they are not thinking past the next attack into the United States, only how they can maintain their majority.
If Obama’s campaign is one of half-measures, then Republicans, especially Palin, Romney, and the Huckster, should as one denounce any half-measures and call for a plan that emphasizes not exit strategies, but victory over Al Qaeda.
If there is no plan for victory, we must bring our troops home.
Best,
Chris
There is no twisting of principles. There is a good case to be made Obama is intentionally trying to weaken America by dithering over Afghanistan and that he has no intention of fighting to win. The conservative principle has always been we fight to win. That was the conservative objection to how Vietnam and Korea were fought. It was the conservative objection to supporting and then losing China, the conservative objection to giving away Eastern Europe rather than take on the Soviets.
It's easier to get our troops out than to get them back in after a Taliban victory. I think our best bet is to help Ogabe muddle along until an adult a Republican wins the presidency.
Come out of the fog partner! Of course we can’t win over there with the tactics we are using now. “A war we can’t win” my ass. All we need is some leaders like Ronald Reagan that when he says, “step across that line and we will kick you ass” instead of the policy we go by now were if they step across that line we step backward one step. Here is my solution. Send over about one to two hundred thousand troops and all the materials they would need to actually win a war and we would win. Until Americans like some of you hang on to a defeatist attitude, don’t expect to be winning anything soon.
Was there EVER a war these libtards didn't say that about?
Jason Rosenbaum is a pussy!
The progressive dancing mice at firedoglake have raised nearly a thousand bucks for a blogger. The nation trembles.
Any plan that is not focussed on victory... is not a surge, regrettably, it’s a death march of our own Troops.
The side that compromises in a war... is the side that loses.
God bless our brave Troops......
Afghanistan was the “right” war according to the liberals, while Iraq was the “wrong” war.
Afghanistan was in direct response to 9/11. Even liberals were all in favor of us going in there.
So what has changed? It’s dragged on for years, but, have we put Al Qaeda out of business? Have we put other Muslim terrorists out of business? Are they still at war with us? Even the half baked 9/11 commission report concluded that they indeed are at war with us, whether we want to think of it as a war or not.
If we do pull out unconditionally, they will be singing praises to Allah, look to it as a miracle, as a sign from Allah about the rightness of their cause, etc. It will only embolden them for future attacks if we just pull out.
I’m sure the liberals/radicals in Obama’s base would like to pull out and say that we are now at peace, yadda, yadda, yadda. They may yet get their way with Obama’s actions.
Two things.
First, the Democrats are VERY LIKELY to couple the troop increase with a big tax increase. That will certainly present a problem for Republicans who might support the troop increase.
Second, if I were a Republican Senator, I might very well say, “NO more troops unless you change the rules of engagement. There are already too many American troops getting killed because they aren’t allowed to fight back. Either fight to win, or push the pause button until we get a decent commander in chief who knows what he’s doing.”
I don’t know if we can afford to wait around. But I certainly don’t want to expose MORE American troops to deliberate defeat.
SUMMARY
• Afghanistan is just one area of confrontation in our wider struggle against political Islam, a struggle which we must win.
• Afghanistan is no more important to Al Qaeda than half a dozen other countries. But it is strategically useful for AQ in generating propaganda footage of “infidels” fighting Muslims, and Muslims fighting back.
• NATO’s ill-conceived operation in Afghanistan is on the brink of failure. Support for UK and NATO forces is falling: only 45% of polled Afghans support a NATO presence in the South, down from 83% in the previous year.
• Much of what NATO is doing is aggravating the problem and is making attacks on the UK and other NATO countries more likely, not less.
• It is vital that Afghan territory is not used as a launch pad for future attacks; and that the Islamist minority cannot claim victory.
• This can be achieved with a much smaller allied force. There is always going to be some level of insurgency in Afghanistan.
• Attempts to impose central government on a country with hundreds of deeply divided and independent communities are over-ambitious and likely to fail.
• We should recognise that there is no perfect answer. Afghanistan can, however, be stabilised if a reasonably honest government is set up in Kabul; if local tribal structures are supported; if we deal with those who we are not prepared to deal with today; if the regional tensions between India and Pakistan are addressed; and if a spirit of reconciliation is fostered.
• These objectives are, given political will and realism, achievable. And they would bring a great saving of British lives and money.
He's right. Fighting the Nazis during WWII did lead to German air raids over British territory. If the Brits had stopped fighting the Nazis, the air raids over London and Coventry might have stopped.
The difference between liberals and conservatives is this - liberals believe in Santa Claus, and conservatives believe in God. The problem? As far as anyone knows, there is no Santa Claus. (It's certainly not St. Nick who puts presents under the Christmas tree).
Yes, the republicans have a track record of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. They pull this crap and you will see obamma reelected.
Yes and a key to the islands would have greased the skids. Wars over, wars over!
I’ve gone to the trouble of actually looking at the constitution of Afghanistan. Islam is its official policy. Islam is the real problem we face , with the left lying and intimidating anyone who says otherwise. Too many good Americans have already DIED because of this political correctness. We should leave Afghanistan unless it has a separation of Mosque and state.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.