That’s Just Great
Wednesday, I wrote this post questioning whether President Obama was committed to winning. I didn’t have to wait long for the answer:
The President may announce he’s sending tens of thousands more troops to Afghanistan, but in doing so, he’ll emphasize how he’ll eventually bring them home.
“The president does not see this as an open ended engagement,” White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters. “Our time there will be limited. And I think that is important for people to understand.”
Simply put, President Obama isn’t giving us proof that he’s in it to win it. More importantly, he’s telling the Afghani people that they’ll be sticking their necks out for an ally that won’t be there when they’re needed.
I’m betting that this decision won’t sit well with British Defence Minister Bob Ainsworth, either. The British are looking for a realiable ally. Having this administration as an ally will make for a difficult sell to the British, especially with skepticism running high in Britain.
It’s time President Obama stopped making decisions like his title is Triangulator-In-Chief. He’s supposedly the Commander-In-Chief, though there’s no proof that he fits that description. Mr. President, it’s time you did the right thing for our troops and the right thing for our national security. It’s time you took a page from President Bush’s surge playbook and went on the offensive militarily.
Under President Bush, the terrorists lived in fear every day. Under President Bush, the military put pressure on the terrorists in the tiny villages in Afghanistan. Under President Obama, not so much.
Mr. President, it’s time you divorced your national security decisions from political considerations. The maxim of “good policy makes for good politics” is still valid. Who cares if part of your base has a problem with you preventing another terrorist attack? The American people will appreciate it.
Do the right thing. Forget the timetables. WIN THE DAMN WAR!!! That’s the only right way of dealing with this challenge.
Technorati Tags: Military, Afghanistan, President Obama, Timetables, Defeat, Democrats, President Bush, Surge, National Security, Victory, Terrorists
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog
November 26th, 2009 at 9:36 am
I agree he needs to have his rhetoric match his actions. If he does indeed send more troops, I believe it shows his commitment to winning this war. I just hope he doesn’t spin DOWN his commitment in his speech Tuesday, just to win support. If it’s what he believes in, he should be upfront with it, it’d be good for the morale of the troops.
If he doesn’t believe in it, then he should be upfront with that too. I believe he campaigned supporting the war in Afghanistan but not in Iraq.
November 26th, 2009 at 10:49 am
Committed to placating…Yes
Committed to winning…Not so much
November 26th, 2009 at 11:39 am
The leaks from the “war room” have already informed al Qaeda, the Taliban, George Soros, Communist Party USA, and all other international terrorist that He’s not serious about Afghanistan. Just look at the June, 2010 “off ramp” option they’re spreading. Why do we care what he says in a formal speech?
November 26th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
And just think of the wonderful message all this will send to every other tin-horn dictator in the world: “Hi, my name is Waldo and I’m fixing to screw another set of people because I’ve got more important things to do with my country’s money, like take over all heavy industry and the health care system.
“You can believe me when I say I can guarantee I’ll talk a good talk until after elections, then leave you holding the bag.”
November 26th, 2009 at 7:58 pm
I know, his liberal mind wants a timetable for withdrawal.
Ill give you a timetable Mr. Quibbler-in-Chief - when the enemy is dead.
November 27th, 2009 at 9:01 am
USN - that last line should be the headline of a campaign to force Duh-1 to follow his campaign rhetoric. It’s great!
November 29th, 2009 at 3:35 am
I tried to contact you privately, but couldn’t find a direct e-mail. Just a friendly correction: The people of Afghanistan are Afghans, their money is “Afghani”.
November 29th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
Carlos, I should have said when the enemy has lost his desire and ability to make war. That is called victory, sadly, a word no longer found in the political vocabulary.