By JONATHAN WEISMAN and YOCHI DREAZEN
A day after President Barack Obama laid out his plan to send at least 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan, his promise to begin withdrawing them as soon as July 2011 had become as divisive as the surge.
Republican critics said setting a firm date for starting a troop withdrawal encourages the enemy to simply wait out the U.S. efforts, and many officials in Afghanistan agreed, calling the timeline unrealistic. Some Democrats, meanwhile, were concerned the deadline wasn't firm enough and that a sizable force would be left in Afghanistan indefinitely.
In Pakistan -- a key ally in the fight against al Qaeda -- officials said the timeline raises fears that the U.S. would only drive insurgents across the border into their country, and then withdraw. And it emerged Wednesday that Defense Secretary Robert Gates initially resisted the timetable; administration officials said he agreed only after securing flexibility to adjust it to the situation on the ground.
.In all, the exit strategy, which Mr. Obama pushed to make the troop plan more palatable, threatened to become the biggest obstacle to gaining broad support for escalating the war. "The announcement just gives good news to the Taliban and others," said prominent Afghan lawmaker Shukria Barakzai in Kabul.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Why didn't you post Karl Rove's article praising Obama's decision?
Ironically hilarious post. I'll bet Karl Rove - and most everyone else - spells the word "amateur".
What does one call an individual that labels our nation's leaders a derogatory term, but is unable to actually spell the insult?
What you talking about?
Damn spell check, much have a anti-conservative bias.
:),
OK here it is, not spell checked Rich(ie).
By KARL ROVE
President Barack Obama's speech on Tuesday night deserves to be cheered. Over the objections of his vice president and despite opposition from his political base, the president is sending an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan to fight terrorists.
But praise for Mr. Obama's decision needs to be qualified. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, had said he could use as many as 40,000 troops, a figure he arrived at after carefully evaluating what would be needed to accomplish the mission Mr. Obama assigned him in June.
Mr. Obama hopes NATO can make up the difference between troops he's sending and the top number Gen. McChrystal asked for. So far, NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen has rounded up 5,000 additional forces that can be sent to Afghanistan, but they may not have the combat capabilities Gen. McChrystal needs.
Mr. Obama also announced he would begin withdrawing the surge troops in 18 months. While he didn't specify the pace and end date of that drawdown and made it conditional on where things stand at the time, setting an arbitrary date will likely embolden our enemies and raise questions about our commitment to the war.
The president's tone was defensive as he implausibly argued that his lengthy review hadn't delayed anything, because all the options he considered included sending new troops next year. But because of the inaction over the past three months the military will now be put under extra stress in order to deploy troops before the spring fighting season.
Praise?
Praise yes, albeit faint. Not bad coming from such a heavy hitter of the right.
Apparently, I am not only your voice of reason and moderation, but your spell check too!
Post a Comment