Over one month ago, I wrote that Obama was wondering how he could pander (without appearing to be pandering) to the American voters before sending more troops to Afghanistan. He did as I predicted; he pandered - and then sent more!
He originally had four options, regarding the war: bring them home, statuesque, send more, or send none. What he stated, after committing 30 thousand more troops, is truly odd to say the least. He sent troops, and in the same breathe, he decided to bring them home, after 18 months. Wait, the WH (guarantee this) will retract the "18 month" as an oversight comment (monitor was on the blink perhaps!). Can't begin to imagine how Robert Gibbs will answer those questions!
He hasn't figured it out that you just can't please everyone in America or the World. He is still trying to please everyone and forgets to help those that needed an honest commitment most - the Warriors in Afghanistan! I would really like to know the thoughts of the boots now on the ground and those on the rolls preparing to deploy.
Bring them all home and FINISH the war or send the numbers needed and WIN the war, is what I say! He just put more lives on the line by not responding as a commander in chief who wants to win.
He, in fact, did what Johnson did in the first few years of Vietnam. As then, by way of procrastinating or pandering, Johnson gave the enemy a much deeper will to continue the battle. However, what Johnson didn't do that Obama did was tell the enemy, "if this don't work in 18 months, we come home!" Is this what they are referring to as a clear path to victory? Duh!
I can't wait to read the books by either SecDef Gates or Gen's. Petraus and/or McChrystal will write in their memoirs, once they retire. (There will be memoirs, also a guarantee) They can't talk now! All they can do at present is salute and do the best with what they have - or got! It's been said, "Victory requires breaking an adversary's will to fight or its capacity to wage war." Whoever loses the will or capacity to fight - loses!
Amazing how history continues to repeat itself - I hope not in this case. Compare Obama's approach to the Afgan. War and Johnson's waging of War in Vietnam. These words are taken from a book, published Dec 19, 2007, by Manfred Liebgott, entitled:
Can you just imagine the outcome of WWII had Gen. Eisenhower officially declared, just prior to the D-day invasion, "if this don't work, in 18 months, we're coming home". Deji Vu / haunting, ain't it!
He originally had four options, regarding the war: bring them home, statuesque, send more, or send none. What he stated, after committing 30 thousand more troops, is truly odd to say the least. He sent troops, and in the same breathe, he decided to bring them home, after 18 months. Wait, the WH (guarantee this) will retract the "18 month" as an oversight comment (monitor was on the blink perhaps!). Can't begin to imagine how Robert Gibbs will answer those questions!
He hasn't figured it out that you just can't please everyone in America or the World. He is still trying to please everyone and forgets to help those that needed an honest commitment most - the Warriors in Afghanistan! I would really like to know the thoughts of the boots now on the ground and those on the rolls preparing to deploy.
Bring them all home and FINISH the war or send the numbers needed and WIN the war, is what I say! He just put more lives on the line by not responding as a commander in chief who wants to win.
He, in fact, did what Johnson did in the first few years of Vietnam. As then, by way of procrastinating or pandering, Johnson gave the enemy a much deeper will to continue the battle. However, what Johnson didn't do that Obama did was tell the enemy, "if this don't work in 18 months, we come home!" Is this what they are referring to as a clear path to victory? Duh!
I can't wait to read the books by either SecDef Gates or Gen's. Petraus and/or McChrystal will write in their memoirs, once they retire. (There will be memoirs, also a guarantee) They can't talk now! All they can do at present is salute and do the best with what they have - or got! It's been said, "Victory requires breaking an adversary's will to fight or its capacity to wage war." Whoever loses the will or capacity to fight - loses!
Amazing how history continues to repeat itself - I hope not in this case. Compare Obama's approach to the Afgan. War and Johnson's waging of War in Vietnam. These words are taken from a book, published Dec 19, 2007, by Manfred Liebgott, entitled:
Vietnam: Why We Lost a Winnable War
"One of the most significant factors contributing to the American defeat was President Johnson himself. In the early years of the war he did not consider Vietnam to be of any great importance, but rather was more interested in creating an attractive image for the upcoming elections. Colonel H.R. McMaster wrote, "Consensus on Vietnam would help the President pursue his domestic priorities: to be elected in his own right in November 1964 and to pass his Great Society legislative program in 1965. He viewed Vietnam principally as a danger to those goals." [1] Johnson would not commit to a strong military strategy and preferred to leave plans ambiguous at best. With no clear plan of attack, the military situation could only deteriorate in the face of a motivated enemy."Can you just imagine the outcome of WWII had Gen. Eisenhower officially declared, just prior to the D-day invasion, "if this don't work, in 18 months, we're coming home". Deji Vu / haunting, ain't it!
Well worded blog that I agree with.
ReplyDelete