Comments on: The Failure of Obama’s Afghanistan Strategy

By: Marcus_Traianus

Marcus_Traianus — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 12:24:13 +0000

NATO and UN structures always portend disastrous consequences. It did for SFOR and UNOSCOM II, why would it be any different for ISAF? Combined with Obama’s frail support and inept CinC abilities that’s what really keeps me up at night worrying about friends.

I think Karzai’s comments about killing civilians, et al are not helpful either and politically they are not very astute (see the latest election).

Iraq was a success because mistakes were made early and Bush was adept enough to trust OUR military commanders and make the political situation work. The primary pressing issue for Iraq therefore became how quickly we could exit.

By: mbecker908

mbecker908 — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 03:27:54 +0000

that if I have to rely on a lawyer’s statement before I do something I’m either not doing it or I’m buying longer range firearms.

By: Achance

Achance — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:19:31 +0000

I’m reasonably sure those CIA interrogators were comfortable with the legal advice they got, too.

By: nessa

nessa — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:17:16 +0000

And I can’t fault you in your judgement. At the start of the GWOT there were a lot of promises about the lessons learned from vietnam and allowing the military to run the war. Of course that didn’t last after Iraq starrted and the libs found a political advantage in allowing their surrender monkey natures to shine forth. The left has long been looking for an excuse to turn some of ours over to international courts, all the better to become one with the rest of the world, throw a few servicemen to the wolves (vultures?) at the UN or another human rights organization. I was skirting the edges of it when I recommended the leadership, they can be trusted, you’re absolutely right about the pols who are currently in power, and their appointees. That makes the future a very dangerous possibility, they may not be looking over their shoulders yet, but the need to watch their backs could be closer than any of us fear.

You and Art both please thank your son’s for me, and thank you for raising the kind of son’s who are willing to serve.

By: Section9

Section9 — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:03:06 +0000

The eerie similarity between Johnson’s eagerness to tackle the Great Society and Obama’s almost canine devotion to socialism in one country health care is astounding.

Combine this with the sense that we are reliving 1965-1966 and that the same mistakes are being made as were made by Johnson, MacNamara, Bundy, and Westmoreland. Especially in regard to allowing the enemy to operate from sanctuaries.

The only salutary difference is that in Petraeus and McChrystal we have a marked improvement over Westmoreland and the crowd around him in Saigon.

By: bk

bk — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 17:29:38 +0000

No, not the “failure” part – you have “strategy” when it should be “strategies du jour”. I recently summed up the ones I could find, and what Obama calls “strategies” for Afghanistan are tossed out every month or two. I guess to him a “tactical plan” must mean “what am I going to do in the next five minutes?”

By: mbecker908

mbecker908 — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 17:16:59 +0000

to trust the current CinC with our sons. I’m really glad my Marine is out.

Without regard to the “current” state of RoE, they can turn on a dime. These are essentially the same group of guys who snatched defeat from the jaws of victory 40 years ago.

By: nessa

nessa — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 16:08:23 +0000

…it sounds to me more like less US and foreign fire-fights and more Afghan National Army, especially in situations with a higher risk of collateral damage. Yes there have been more casualties lately, especially in the south, Kandahar and Helmand provinces especially. They used to be the Brits and Canadians but with the increase in troop strength we have units there as well. too few troops was the issue there, we could kill taliban and take ground there but didn’t have enough boots on the ground to hold it, or more accurately to keep them from coming back.

You are right about your son’s deployment if he goes back in, it’s only a matter of time, units are still lucky if they get their one year of dwell time. I can’t fault you for not wanting him to go, that’s why I retired. Been there and done that, a couple times. It’s too hard on families, I wouldn’t ask my wife to deal with another deployment, even if it was only a year as opposed to the 15 months of my last one.

I’m waiting to hear the ground truth about the implementation of the “new ROE” from some buddies who are there now but I’m confident the Command there will not put allow political pressure to over-ride a Soldiers ability to protect himself. LTG Rodriguez commanded the 82nd there in 07-08, they don’t come any better than him.

By: Section9

Section9 — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 16:07:10 +0000

What the armed services are seeing out of this White House is hesitation and doubt, plus restrictive rules of engagement that give too much of the initiative to the enemy. You can’t fool the noncoms and the line troops: Obama doesn’t really want to engage in this struggle: his words about Afghanistan were a complete lie.

You are going to see more and more experienced NCO’s and young officers take retirement because of this leftist fool and the popinjays who surround him.

By: Achance

Achance — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:45:53 +0000

even though going back in the Army is what he really needs. If he goes back in, I don’t have any doubt about where they’ll put an experienced infantryman with service in Afghanistan. But now he’ll have ROE more appropriate for a cop back in the States, officers and NCO’s looking over their shoulders constantly, and the ghouls from the ACLU et al. just dying to try an American soldier for war crimes or, better yet, turn some American solders over to some International tribunal as war criminals. Bad, bad time to be a soldier!