A Few Thoughts on Obama’s Afghanistan Speech

First off let preface this by saying I didn’t watch President Obama’s speech last night, instead I read the transcript this morning. The first thing about his speech that struck me is no where in it did he mention victory… A fact noted by LA Times blogger Andrew Malcolm:

President Obama spoke 4,582 words in his prime-time Afghanistan war speech at West Point last night.

He said “Al Qaeda” 22 times.

He mentioned the “Taliban” 12 times.

And here’s how many times the Democratic chief executive used the word “victory” — 0.

That telling omission says more than anything about Obama’s 322nd day in office, when he gave his first major address as the United States’ commander in chief.

The sad truth is nothing in the President’s speech leads me to believe that he is fully committed to prosecuting this war to it’s end even though he made winning the war in Afghanistan a central part of his Presidential campaign.

Anyway, President Obama outlined three broad strategies last night, the first Denying al Qaeda a safe haven is counter-terrorism… It’s Joe Biden’s “magic ninjas” and drones strategy. Which I would assume is why he decided to commit far fewer troops than Gen. McChrystal asked for. The second and third, reversing the momentum of the Taliban and safeguarding the Afghan people are elements of counter-insurgency, even with the 30,000 additional troops we’re woefully undermanned.

I have no doubt Gen. McChrystal will the best he can with the resources he has, but counter-insurgency is labor intensive mission and given the troops available I’m not sure he’ll be able to do much more than secure urban centers.

Lastly the President set a time line for our mission in Afghanistan, a time line that ultimately undermines the counter-insurgency mission.  In order for COIN operations to work you troops have to “flood the zone” and work to build trust with locals so they’ll be willing to provide us with the intelligence information we need to flush out the bad guys. The only way to do this by convincing the locals you’re going to be sticking around, by setting a date for withdrawal the President is telling the very people whose trust we need we’re not in it for the long hall. No one is going to cooperating with us for the simple reason they know we’re going to leave and the bad guys will still be there… ready, willing and able take revenge on anyone who cooperates with us.

Bottom line Wars don’t end Mr. President, they are either won or lost.

Related

• Searching in Vain for the Obama Magic – Spiegel Online
• The Afghan-Pakistan Solution – Pervez Musharraf, Wall Street Journal
• White House: July 2011 Is Locked In for Afghanistan Withdrawal – CBS News
• Strikingly, Obama’s Afghan Strategy Manages to Repeat Almost Every Single Mistake Made in Iraq – Jeff Emanuel, Red State
• A few more thoughts on Obama’s Afghanistan speech – Ed Morrissey, Hot Air
• On AfPak, is Obama clever or stupid? – John Lewis, American Thinker

Fred Thompson: The War in Afghanistan Has Been Lost

Oh boy, I wish Fred hadn’t gone here but the said truth is someone had to say it out loud…

From the Politico:

Former Sen. Fred Thompson today intensified his party’s criticism of President Obama’s long deliberation over policy in Afghanistan, announcing that Obama’s delay signals that “the war has been lost” and that nothing the president now does will “make any difference.”

“It really doesn’t matter how President Obama divides the Afghan baby, how he splits the difference between McChrystal and Biden. Because the war has been lost,” Thompson said on his radio show today.  “I say this because of one sad and simple fact. The president does not have the will and determination to do what’s necessary to win it. His heart’s not in it, and never has been. The Taliban knows it. Al Qaeda knows it. Our allies know it. And the American people know it.

“Our enemies are now emboldened and our friends are discouraged. We cannot prevail if the American people are not willing to make the sacrifices necessary for an extended effort. The case has not been made to them to justify this effort. The case can only be made by the president. This president is unable or unwilling to make that case,” Thompson said.

Kathryn Jean Lopez has the audio here.

Ouch… Barack Obama made winning the war in Afghanistan a central part of his Presidential campaign and yet 10 months into term in office he’s still formulating a policy… Unfortunately, I think Sen. Thompson is right, President Obama lacks the temerity to prosecute the war in Afghanistan and is instead voting ‘present’ just as he has done with everything else.

Jim Hanson laid it out months ago Mr. President, wars do not end, they are either won or lost:

The buck stops with you Mr. President, it’s time to make a decision… Do we give our war fighters the resources they need to fight and win or do we cut and run?

Update (5:15 p.m.): Pete Hegseth has a good post over at The Corner that takes Sen. Thompson to task for his remarks:

Let’s go back to an interview Senator Thompson gave on Hannity and Colmes on May 1, 2007:

HANNITY: The biggest battle we have is this war on terror, this battle in Iraq. We have a really deep divide in the country. Senator Reid the war is lost. We still have to finish the job there. Where do you stand in general on the war on terror and, more specifically, in Iraq, and on the divide surrounding Iraq?

THOMPSON: Well, let’s talk about Senator Reid for a moment. Right before I came over here, I was sitting outside, getting a bite to eat, before we did our interview. A young woman [former Army captain] came up and asked if she could sit down and talk to me a minute. . . . I asked her what she thought about this. She said, “How in the world can anyone, any one of our leaders, declare war, declare that the war has been lost when we’ve got troops in the field? My friends are over there in the field. I know what they think about this.”

And, of course, it’s just like all other Americans think. The very idea that they would do this and undercut our efforts over there is unprecedented. And it’s not only unprecedented; it’s awful politics.

We should not be fearful of these people politically. We just need to concentrate on what’s right. What is right? We need to take advantage of any opportunity we’ve got down there. I’ve got a lot of faith in Petraeus. I knew him when he was at Fort Campbell when I was in the Senate. He tells me we’ve got a shot? We’ve got to take that shot.

I’m sure Senator Thompson made many similar comments in 2007, and he was right. Sen. Harry Reid’s statement was unprecedented, and it was awful politics. And if Petraeus says we have a shot, then we’ve got to take that shot.

In light of the above, what is Senator Thompson doing undercutting the mission in Afghanistan? Is the mission less justified? Is it less achievable? Or is McChrystal less capable? No. Senator Thompson’s issue with the Afghanistan mission is President Obama. And while I share many of his frustrations — indecisiveness, lack of will, unwillingness to articulate the need to win — none of them give him, or anyone, grounds to declare the war lost.

I have a lot of respect for Fred Thompson but the more I think about his remarks the less comfortable I am with them…  Pete Hegseth is right, regardless of our frustrations with the President Obama’s lack of action there are just some things that shouldn’t be said while men and women are in harms way.

Weekend Briefing – Saturday, October 10, 2009

I’m going to be tied up with family all weekend but here’s a collection of must read links:

• CBO: Budget deficit hit record $1.4T in 2009 – Associated Press
• Proposals to create jobs add up to second stimulus – Associated Press
• A Nobel for Obama – New York Sun
• Barack Obama’s peace prize starts a fight – Times Online
• McCain Vs. Palin For The GOP’s Soul – Investors Business Daily
• What I Heard in Honduras – Rep. Jim DeMint, Wall Street Journal
• California Budget Is Already in the Red 10 Weeks After Passage – Bloomberg
• Report: Reining in lawsuits would cut deficit – Washington Times
• CBO’s Analysis of the Effects of Proposals to Limit Costs Related to Medical Malpractice (“Tort Reform”) – CBO Director’s Blog
• Save the Greenback, Mr. President – Larry Kudlow, CNBC
• Paying the Health Tax in Massachusetts – Wendy Williams, Wall Street Journal
• CBO Stands for Cooked Books Office – Rep. John Shadegg, Red State
• What happened to global warming? – BBC News
• As Republicans Predict a 2010 Surge, Democrats Dig In – New York Times
• Taliban growth weighs on Obama strategy review – Reuters

Feel free to add your links in comments.

Michael Yon: Don’t Kid Yourselves; we’re in Serious Trouble in Afghanistan

Michael Yon has spent more time in Iraq and Afghanistan than any other journalist. His dispatches from the front lines are required reading for anyone who wants to know what’s happening at the pointy end of the war on terror so when  he say we’re in serious trouble you should pay attention:

The Greatest Afghanistan War has deteriorated so noticeably that one can now feel the enemy’s growing pulse. Each month it beats steadier, stronger, and in 2010 it will finally be born.

On Sept. 11 in Kandahar, a South African civilian working without security was visibly upset – not at the Taliban but at the police. The 16-year police veteran recounted seeing Afghan police speeding through crowded streets and hitting a bicycle. The rider gymnastically avoided impact while the bicycle was tossed down the road.

The South African, with whom I spent a week in Helmand and Kandahar provinces, said the police never slowed down. “That’s part of the reason the Taliban are gaining ground,” he said. “The police are out there recruiting Taliban.”

I have searched for answers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Along with the more strategic questions (for example, should war be pursued?) are those closer to the shop floor: Are we gaining or losing popular support? Is the enemy gaining or losing strength? Is the coalition gaining or losing strength?

The first answer is a common denominator for the rest.

We are losing popular support. Confidence in the Afghan and coalition governments is plummeting. Loss of human terrain is evident. Conditions are building for an avalanche. Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the military commander in Afghanistan, and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates are aware of the rumbling, and so today we are bound by rules of engagement that appear insensible.

If you haven’t already done so, read the whole thing.

Related

• Gates Doubts U.S.’s Afghan Strategy – Wall Street Journal
• David Miliband pushes US Administration to back Afghanistan plan – Times Online
• Catch-22 and the long war in Afghanistan – Reuters
• 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforcements – CNSNews.com

Marine Makes Insurgents Pay the Price

“The deadliest weapon in the world is a Marine and his rifle!”

- General ”Black Jack” Pershing, USA

I’ve seen this story on several blogs recently, it was first published on Marines.mil on November 16.

Marines’ heroic actions at Shewan leave more than 50 insurgents dead, several wounded

By Cpl. James M. Mercure USMC, 2nd Battalion (2/7) FARAH PROVINCE, Afghanistan, November 16, 2008

FARAH PROVINCE, Afghanistan  —In the city of Shewan, approximately 250 insurgents ambushed 30 Marines and paid a heavy price for it.

Shewan has historically been a safe haven for insurgents, who used to plan and stage attacks against Coalition Forces in the Bala Baluk district.

The city is home to several major insurgent leaders.  Reports indicate that more than 250 full time fighters reside in the city and in the surrounding villages.

Shewan had been a thorn in the side of Task Force 2d Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment, Special Purpose Marine Air Ground Task Force Afghanistan throughout the Marines’ deployment here in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, because it controls an important supply route into the Bala Baluk district. Opening the route was key to continuing combat operations in the area.

“The day started out with a 10-kilometer patrol with elements mounted and dismounted, so by the time we got to Shewan, we were pretty beat,” said a designated marksman who requested to remain unidentified. “Our vehicles came under a barrage of enemy RPGs (rocket propelled grenades) and machine gun fire. One of our ‘humvees’ was disabled from RPG fire, and the Marines inside dismounted and laid down suppression fire so they could evacuate a Marine who was knocked unconscious from the blast.”

The vicious attack that left the humvee destroyed and several of the Marines pinned down in the kill zone sparked an intense eight-hour battle as the platoon desperately fought to recover their comrades.  After recovering the Marines trapped in the kill zone, another platoon sergeant personally led numerous attacks on enemy fortified positions while the platoon fought house to house and trench to trench in order to clear through the enemy ambush site.

“The biggest thing to take from that day is what Marines can accomplish when they’re given the opportunity to fight,” the sniper said. “A small group of Marines met a numerically superior force and embarrassed them in their own backyard. The insurgents told the townspeople that they were stronger than the Americans, and that day we showed them they were wrong.”

During the battle, the designated marksman single handedly thwarted a company-sized enemy RPG and machinegun ambush by reportedly killing 20 enemy fighters with his devastatingly accurate precision fire.  He selflessly exposed himself time and again to intense enemy fire during a critical point in the eight-hour battle for Shewan in order to kill any enemy combatants who attempted to engage or maneuver on the Marines in the kill zone.  What made his actions even more impressive was the fact that he didn’t miss any shots, despite the enemies’ rounds impacting within a foot of his fighting position.

“I was in my own little world,” the young corporal said. “I wasn’t even aware of a lot of the rounds impacting near my position, because I was concentrating so hard on making sure my rounds were on target.”

After calling for close-air support, the small group of Marines pushed forward and broke the enemies’ spirit as many of them dropped their weapons and fled the battlefield. At the end of the battle, the Marines had reduced an enemy stronghold, killed more than 50 insurgents and wounded several more.

“I didn’t realize how many bad guys there were until we had broken through the enemies’ lines and forced them to retreat.  It was roughly 250 insurgents against 30 of us,” the corporal said.  “It was a good day for the Marine Corps.  We killed a lot of bad guys, and none of our guys were seriously injured.”

Damn fine shooting Marine! If anyone knows the Corporal buy him a beer for me.

The Perils of Talking

Ralph Peters has an interesting column on Afghanistan in today’s New York Post. Peters directly addresses the difficulties of negotiating with the Taliban.

THE TALKING TRAP: AFGHAN FOLLIES

By Ralph Peters, New York Post, November 13, 2008

NEGOTIATIONS are the heroin of the chattering classes, blinding them to every reality except the next fix they can inject into our foreign policy. The pushers – our delighted enemies – pile up strategic profits.

Certainly, there are situations in which negotiations make sense, such as structuring trade terms or defining alliance contributions. But the notion that, if only we can sit down with our enemies, we’ll inevitably persuade them to love us is a deadly self-delusion.

There’s a looming danger that President-elect Obama’s naive and profoundly anti-military cadres will misinterpret Gen. David Petraeus’ tactic of opening communications with Taliban elements and seek to make talks the centerpiece of the new administration’s Afghan policy. If so, we might as well pack up and leave now.

No American soldier should die just so diplomats can rack up frequent-flyer miles.

Negotiations during a conflict only work to our advantage when we’re in a position of strength that threatens the enemy’s existence or when bloodied opponents have wearied of the fight. Both conditions applied in Iraq.

They don’t apply in Afghanistan. In Iraq, al Qaeda had worn out its welcome. The Sunni Arabs wanted our help. In Afghanistan, Taliban-style Islamist fanaticism has a deep constituency. While most Afghans don’t want the Taliban back, a fierce minority does. And, unlike Iraq’s Sunni Arabs, the Taliban think they can win.

The equation is simple: We kill them, or we lose. Fighting fanatics is a zero-sum game.