Afghanistan: Victory or Expediency?
Tags: Afghan Campaign.
Click here to get Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority by Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan.
The word came down on Tuesday that President Barack “Hamlet” Obama will finally let us know his views on Afghanistan – some months after he assured us that we knew his views. It seems we can expect a pronouncement on Monday after Thanksgiving.
To be sure, anything is better than the drift we currently have. By refusing to immediately provide the miltary’s request for additional forces, President Obama discouraged our troops and allies and encouraged our enemies. Being unschooled in military history, having never served in any capacity, President Obama failed to understand how much perception rules the battlefield. History is replete with examples of victorious armies being routed at the last moment because the troops, for one reason or another, perceived they were beaten. Hopefully, President Obama has now learned this lesson and will make his announcement with an understanding that it isn’t just the nuts and bolts of what he proposes, but how his proposal will be viewed by friend and foe which will matter.
The largest worry is that Obama will decide not to decide – that he’ll punt, hoping that something will turn up allowing him to get off the hook. It is known that his allies in the political left were only using Afghanistan as a “good war” in order to flog President Bush – now that Bush is gone, the left has reverted to type and figures that any war America fights is a bad war. The pressure is already building for a withdrawal from Afghanistan. On the other hand, losing in Afghanistan would cost Obama dearly in the center – people who might not like the war, but who like defeat even less. Obama, trying to straddle this fence, might try to come down on both sides with some sort of send-some-troops-but-don’t-send-enough non-decision.
President Obama can count on the ardent support of the non-isolationist right – yours, truly, included. No truer statement was ever made by a mere man than MacArthur’s “in war, there is no subsitute for victory”. Regardless of how one feels about the motivations which brought us to Afghanistan; regardless of how one feels about the conduct of the war to date; regardless of how one feels about the long, difficult task ahead – all who have any understanding of war know that we must fight for victory regardless of how long it takes or how much it costs. The costs of losing are always higher than the costs of winning.
We can prevail in Afghanistan. Our troops are the best America has ever put in the field and they will do whatever we ask of them. The Afghans, being normal people, simply want to be left alone to live their own lives – they will come down on our side if we show them that no matter what, we will not abandon them to the Taliban (the great fear is that if they join us now that we might quit on them – and the Afghans know that for certain the Taliban will kill them if they help America and then America leaves). By a combination of raw, military force, skilled diplomacy, cultural sensitivity and, at times, bribery (it does work in those parts of the world – and it isn’t considered bribery in the sense that we view it…sure, money changes hands, but that is just how business gets done, at times, in Afghanistan) we can set up a system in Afghanistan which, while not being up to American standards of liberty, will be far superior to what they have now and have ever had before. And by doing this we will have struck another very deadly blow at the very concept of Islamo-fascism.
I hope Obama does the right thing.
Cross Posted at OpinionEditorial
Thank you for visiting Blogs For Victory. If you enjoy our content, please consider making a donation to help us cover the costs of our servers.Mark Noonan is co-author (with Matt Margolis) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at Nevada News and Views. Follow Mark on Twitter.
10 Responses to “Afghanistan: Victory or Expediency?”
Caucus of Corruption
recent polling shows the majority dont support afghanistan not just the left.
You just keep letting others think for you, orrie.
You just keep letting others think for you, orrie.
LMAO! Wasn’t the Afghanistan war the “real” war according to the left AND orrie? Now, it’s just an inconvenience. Can they be anymore pathetic?
Cluster, that was then. Don’t forget, all debates get redefined and all definitions get tweaked, depending on the agenda. There is no objective reality on the far Left, just expediency, made possible by a historically illiterate base and no respect for truth.
You are right—back in the day, Bush was a fool for not fighting in Afghanistan, where the battles REALLY needed to be fought. And he was a moron for not taking the advice of the generals he had already set aside as not being credible.
Now Barry is supposed to be fighting that real war, and he is ignoring the general he set up as his premier advisor.
No spine, no man-parts, just a posturing wannabe who campaigned like hell for the job of Commander in Chief and now is like the dog who actually caught the car he was chasing.
The majority of Americans don’t support our presence in Afghanistan. When it comes to the actual Afghans themselves, though, the reverse seems to be true. Only 18% of the respondents to the Oxfam poll thought that the presence of international troops was a major contributing factor to the conflict. I have not yet crunched the numbers, but I strongly suspect that they would indicate that the national average is even less than that.
I will respond to Mark’s post later today when I have the time.
whoa, slow down. I know u lil wingnuts like to foam-up at the drop of a health insurance policy.
I noted the polling correctly which means it aint just the marxist brownshirts against the war. some of ur own party are also.
as a vet, I regard Afghanistan as a righteous war (unlike u know where).
and I support “victory” there & pakistan.
but I dont think the failed soviet model which mccrystal advocates is the path to victory. and I dont feel the pashtun taliban defending their homelands are necessarily our enemies just like the awakening in iraq.
happy thanksgiving everyone!
he’s waiting on the British to take the reigns in Afghanistan or possibly the Germans. God help America. We have no leadership and actually the truth is we do not have a Commander-In-chief that knows anything about Commanding. Maybe he wants to sit down with our Muslim Enemies and chit-chat with them over this war and then everything will be Rosy-Rosy on the front-lines while our men and women are facing death and loneliness during this time of the year. What a travesty of military diverseness by those who know nothing about commanding. I am very surprised that our Commanders in the field are not speaking out against this government in declaring the monumental troops to win the battle or turn tails and run back to America. Hmmmm or is it a Muslim thing that Obama is so concerned about? It makes a person wonder about his tactics in dealing with our enemies that cause Jihad and death and destruction upon us.
Thank God for our troops and those who bravely fight the battle but they cannot do it alone and the American people know that and the Americans are standing in awe at our supposedly leadership. I wonder what will happen if and when the enemy does strike at the heart of America. Like Glen Beck says, its not going to be a good picture. God have mercy on America because we need to take a stand and support our troops and write letters, phone call our Senators and Congressmen, (those that have spines) but it seems that most democrats are too busy winning money that Pelosi is throwing from the sky. They care nothing about our Nation because they do not see the threat before us. ‘the truth shall set you free’
OO,
The recent slump in public support for Afghanistan is directly related to Obama’s dithering…no one wants to send troops to a fight we don’t intend to win. If Obama pledges himself to victory, you’ll see a majority backing it.
amazona
Now Barry is supposed to be fighting that real war, and he is ignoring the general he set up as his premier advisor.
No spine, no man-parts, just a posturing wannabe who campaigned like hell for the job of Commander in Chief and now is like the dog who actually caught the car he was chasing.
SAD isnt it?
This empty suited little “gay boy” ask (larry sinclair) is now the commander in chief of the most powerful military force on the earth, and he is acting more like he is driving miss Daisey than leading a country in war he is …..PATHETIC!!!
………………….
Chef = 00
Happy thanksgiving back at ya!!