In HinzSight, Afghan address just another Dem cut-and-run

Will we look back on the President’s first address to the nation as Commander-in-Chief as just another Democratic party cut-and-run?


*[“HinzSight” reference is a tribute to the loss of a great journalist, athlete and friend of DeVine Law Gamecock, David Hinz, who was killed in a traffic accident this past Thanksgiving weekend. Our obituary is here, with other tributes at The Minority Report (which company merged with Dave’s original HinzSight Report) and Many Faces of Barack). Dave’s journalistic love was of foreign affairs and the war on terror, and so we will use the HinzSight nomenclature from time to time to categorize some of our writing and as a tribute to our dear friend.]

Since JFK’s death in 1963, no Democratic Party president has been feared by enemies of the United States and the party seems to go out of its way to lose wars and betray allies.

From the 1975 congressional Democrat majority betrayal of the Hmong, thru Carter’s 1979 betrayal of the Shah of Iran; thru John Kerry’s open collusion with Nicaraguan communists and Ted Kennedy’s secret alliance with Gorbachev against U.S. missiles in Europe and for the nuclear freeze in the 1980s; thru Clinton’s cut and run in Somalia, law enforcement approach to the 1993 WTC bombing thru the feckless bombing of night watchman after the African embassy act of war bombings in the late 90s; and thru the “Bushlied Era” of the mid-2000 decade, the Democratic Party has been all about exuding aggression inviting weakness to enemies abroad.

Now comes Barack Obama after:

  1. A campaign echoing the Democratic Party (fake warmongering) mantra that Afghanistan is the “good war” of necessity (as opposed to that war of “choice” in Iraq, that most all the Dems voted for with the same intel Clinton and Bush had, but I digress);
  2. A March 2009 declaration that the Afghan War had to be won with a directive to General McChrystal to come up with a strategy; and finally,
  3. After retreating from the strategy presented by his generals and a scare from his left on health care and the 2009 election disaster, with a Tuesday evening prime time speech to the nation now wanting to “finish the job” in Afghanistan.

For the record, neither DeVine Law Gamecock, nor Cockstradamus ever believed any of the Elected to serve in D.C. Democrats not named Lieberman, ever were all in for victory in Afghanistan after the first 72 hours, but only used the mantra to separate themselves from Bush and the Iraq War. Bob Shrum admitted this.

We didn’t need an admission to know that Democrats haven’t the stomach nor the smarts to win wars.

President Obama has left the troops hanging for a year as he has continued to blame Bush for “drift”, despite the fact that they adopted the Bush strategy and yet have not implemented it during their 11 months in office.

Now we are told that since Obama will request and deploy 39,000 troops that he is “essentially” meeting McChrystal’s request? Huh?

General McChrystal requested 80,000 troops and “no less than 40,000”.

It looks like what Obama has “essentially” done is slap this fine warrior down in public again (40K-1K=39K), much as his administration has been doing since the 80,000 request was made public weeks ago. Or has it been months ago!

Afghanistan is not Iraq

I have said since soon after 911 and even more so after the invasion of Iraq, that I favored the Rumsfeld small footprint strategies, especially in Afghanistan given its tribal nature, geography and history of large footprint failures by the UK and USSR. The only defeat of the Russian army in history was in Afghanistan.

Yes, let us kill all the Taliban and al Qaida that we can; remove the safe nation-state haven; keep troops enough to prevent all but deadly havens for al Qaida and the Taliban; give the Afghans (90% of whom loathe the Taliban and al Qaida) a chance at a republic; and keep watch over Iran and Pakistan.

This is not Iraq sitting on vast oil reserves in Persian Gulf. I was for the surge after the necessary stay the course so we could get intel for a surge. I was for making Iraq into Connecticut, which it essentially is now. Pray God don’t let Democrat Obama snatch defeat from victory in Iraq like his counterparts did in Vietnam.

But Afghanistan is not Iraq, and so I am receptive to a lesser surge strategy that mainly keeps the country from becoming a safe haven for launching attacks on the US and keeps troops close to Iran and Pakistan for deterrence and rapid response reasons.

Dems like to end, not win wars

But when I hear a Democrat President that has never acknowledged the great victory in Iraq, speak of “ending” the war in Afghanistan; and of not wanting to “hand off” Afghanistan to a successor, I hear that familiar limp-wristed Democrat loser refrain that sounds like fingernails scratching a chalkboard. Specifically, this statement:

“My preference would be not to hand off anything to the next president.”

Kind of like Clinton didn’t “hand off” anything on Somalia and Afghanistan? Usually when Democrats speak of no handoff, they mean that they have already lost the last war, with no mention of the ones they make inevitable.

These people giggled when Ronaldus Magnus called the Soviet empire, evil.

This is what we are dealing with, but, I am an American and Barack Obama is my President and the ONLY Commander-in-Chief we have. If a strategy is to succeed in foreign affairs, it will be Obama’s and no other.

And, like I said, I am receptive to a less than Connecticut strategy there. But it is essential that we not betray our freedom loving allies and that we are not SEEN as cutting and running.

Obama’s apology tours give me no solace that he doesn’t WANT us to be seen as cowardly losers, but maybe Election Day 2009 concentrated his mind to understand that at least for the next 3 years, HE IS AMERICA and maybe his manhood will insist that he be feared.

I just hope that a few years down the road, we can say in HinzSight* that Obama did right by our troops and this nation’s national security.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer, Atlanta Journal-Constitution and Minority Report columns

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

Originally published @ Examiner.com, where all verification links may be accessed.