Barack Obama on Afghanistan: Dithering or Deliberate?

Posted 2009/11/12 14:08:12
Read all 115 opinions

Washington - President Barack Obama won't accept any of the Afghanistan war options before him without changes, administration officials say, amid an argument by his own ambassador in Kabul that a significant U.S. troop increase would only prop up a weak, corruption-tainted government.

Karl Eikenberry, who is also a former commander of U.S. troops in Afghanistan, is voicing strong dissent against sending more troops, according to an administration official. This puts him at odds with the current war commander, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who wants thousands more troops.

Read the rest of the Associated Press story

Questions View Results

Edward Croy 2009/11/12 14:33:23

+10
One thing that sets military leaders apart from political leaders is the ability to make a decision based on the information they have, and act up on it.

As Commander-in-Chief, Obama is has consistently shown a complete inability to make decisions in a timely manner. He has had the information he needs concerning Afghanistan since August, and the constant flow of information from his 'War Council' during this period. He is dithering, for reasons known only to him, and while he does so, American troops are dying and their morale is suffering.

Make a decision, Mr. Obama, one way or the other. Or, in more earthy terms, "Shit or get off the pot!"
>> See Replies

swannydude 2009/11/18 00:51:21

His decision will affect young Americans for a generation... or more...
Perhaps some contemplation is in order

reply
Javimendo 2009/11/17 22:02:21

+5
Obumbler is deliberately dithering.

reply
danaslc 2009/11/16 02:01:29 (edited)

+2
If we leave Afghanistan then we will have to close our borders because those freaks are going to coming over to get us here. I believe that some are already here waiting for I don't know what. Obama can't close the borders. He needs to keep on the internal nafta bandwagon. Those that have already shipped our jobs overseas and to Mexico are the External Nafta. McDonalds, Walmart, WinCo, Burger King ect.... are internal Nafta. SEIU is a big player in Internal Nafta.

Obama wants to grant amnesty and he wants to keep the illegals coming in. He would not be able to do that if he pulled out of Afghanistan. He would have to lock those borders down damn fast and go for a search for all terrorists and drug cartel and that would really piss off Walmart.

He is really stuck between a rock and hard spot. So instead he just keeps letting our boys get killed over there. You see, all Americans are disposable for the almighty weak dollar.

He promised to get our boys out of there but he didn't realize he has the open border situation.

reply
Dinah to danaslc 2009/11/22 20:13:38

Why don't you realize that well over 4,000 troops lost their lives under Bush Administrations war time.That's over 4,00 men and women and their greiving families.Do those deaths not count because Bush was in a war-like stance at the time? Since Obama has been President...there have been a much smaller number killed..in a war that he opposed while in the Senate. He didn't start the d___ war and now he has to finish what he did not start and everyone's freaking out... because he's trying to act with deliberation. Just wait and see what occurs...have a little patience.The man didn't start the war in the first place.If they'd listened to him on Capital Hill maybe we wouldn't have gotten in so deep into terrorist territoryand the terrorists wouldn't have reacted by just ramping up their side of the game.>>War stinks with a capital S...

reply
SABLE 2009/11/15 17:04:34

+2
I don't believe he is dithering. I've lived through the Vietnam era and watched Bush put us through Iraq and I'd rather be safe than sorry and if he is taking his time to get it right this time, more power to him.

reply
Daline 2009/11/15 05:09:30 (edited)

+4
The deliberate dithering is disgraceful . Are the generals being punished for going public with their pleas for urgent help? Step it up or ship them home (I prefer the latter), but to ignore our troops in harms way is inexcusable and bizarre.

reply
Brainfart " Bane of the Col... 2009/11/14 18:06:46 (edited)

+3
Look..The OBumbling One and his Chicago Thugettes HAVE to Check hourly on ALL the POLLS across the entire Universe..

And when those Polls are favorable for some Political advantage..

Then He will do Something..NOT until then..

reply
Lanikai to Brainfa... 2009/11/19 19:14:39

+1
Sad but true. Makes you wonder why he doesn;t keep his promise to end both wars though, doesn't it?

I want to know why Cindy Sheehan is not parked out at his place like she was for pres Bush/

reply
Christopher 2009/11/14 15:52:54

+1
Obama, get us OUT now. that's why I voted for you.

reply
Lanikai to Christo... 2009/11/19 19:17:03

Fat chance of that, he hasn't kept any of his promises so far. you KNOW he only said that to get elected and then he figured out how much extra power that war gives him. No way is he going to end it.

reply
Christo... to Lanikai 2009/11/20 05:20:30

He's kept more promises than broken:
http://www.politifact.com/tru...

FYI, he never said we were going to take troops out of afghanistan either. It's not like the voters has a choice anyways.

But there's nothing stopping us from putting pressure on him NOW, instead of complaining about it. We need to organize and get our ass in gear and rally to get our troops home. Things aren't meant to change only every 4 years on election, it's a continual process that takes persistence.

reply
AL 2009/11/12 21:43:17 (edited)

+4
x

reply
Billyk75 2009/11/12 20:50:24 (edited)

+4
I don't think that Obama even knows what is going on.

reply
jay to Billyk75 2009/11/13 15:57:08

+4
Or cares.

reply
Lanikai to jay 2009/11/19 19:17:27

true enough, that might take attention off his golf game.

reply
Mick 2009/11/12 20:43:16

+2
The general is recommending what is needed to win a war. He's focused on military tactics. Obama must focus on all the aspects of this engagement. If it were only military, he would have no question about McChrystal's military views. But, there's more to it. This has been highly debated and there are many options and "what ifs". He must look down the road to spot conclusions for any decision he makes. Are we in a hurry? UN Sec Gen Rasmussan, who is for the increase of troops, said a decision is needed in a matter of weeks, not immediately. There are a certain group of people in this country who are saying, "hurry up", to make it look like Obama is, "dithering". When the decision is made, it will be the right one.

reply
CalKnight to Mick 2009/11/14 20:54:39

+4
He was asked in August...how patient should we be? If we have a terrorist attack, will he be as contemplative in his response to the attack? If North Korea launches an attack on South Korea, will he study and seek council for weeks/months before responding? If Iran launches a nuclear weapon at Israel, will we have to wait for the Jews to be pushed into the ocean for our President to react?

A lot of us Americans see this issue of troops in Afganistan as a part of the bigger problem regarding this President's lack of experience in leadership and maturity.

reply
Mick to CalKnight 2009/12/03 20:59:14

He'll respond as the threat warrants. I have confidence in him.

reply
CalKnight to Mick 2009/12/05 09:18:20

Well, okay...and what is it about his actions so far as Commander in Chief that is the basis for your confidence? Just askin'

reply
Mick to CalKnight 2009/12/15 20:28:05

Personally, I think the more informed 'heads' that are involved, the better chance of a successful outcome. I heard there were many arguments of which way to go, which in itself, says this is very complicated. Thinkinig of all the variables and dynamics here, there could be many outcomes. I commend him for trying to achieve the best results possible. And this can save lives. I think he, to an extent, listens to his leaders. This is not 'his' plan, but a culmination of inputs.

reply

«« First « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next » Last »

About Me

SodaHead Politics

United States

SodaHead since 2008/02/14 18:20:49

View complete profile

PUBLIC OPINION > Rand Paul Is the Future of the Republican Party

Ever since President Obama's re-election back in November, the media hasn't stopped reporting about the ruffled course of the Republican party. So who's the future face of the GOP? Find out how the public voted.
PUBLIC OPINION > Chris Christie Should Stay a Republican

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has been at the center of media coverage for a while now. But more recently, the buzz has been about his proclaimed political party -- and whether or not he should change it.