Obama's plan... by Niki2

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Obama's plan...

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Thursday, December 3, 2009 11:02
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 540
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, December 3, 2009 8:35 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

I find it interesting. This has been a time which has brought dissent among the left, and shown the fact that the left isn't willing to just blindly follow their leaders, which I'm told has surprised the right.

It surprised me to find that, tho' I don't take her at face value and use her mostly to give me things to explore on my own, I almost invariably agree with Rachel Maddow's VIEWS, now I am at odds with her. I found Olbermann, who I think of as far more liberal in his commentary, to be much more willing to give both sides a platform, whereas last night Maddow kept trying to get our UN Ambassador to admit that, because Al Qaeda isn't big in Afghanistan, we shouldn't be there. It's a valid argument, but she was so stuck on it that I found myself resenting it.

Now, my view is obviously kind of unique; I'm stuck between not wanting our guys to die, being unsure how much success our being there or his plan can work, and not wanting to see Afghanistn summarily vacated and left to its own misery--partly because I believe we've screwed it up so badly for eight years that we have a responsibility to try and help. But not forever, on that I am also adamant.

The old saying is that if you're displeasing both sides, you're doing something right. The right likes the troop surge, hates the timeline for withdrawal; the left likes the deadline, hates the troop surge. It's almost amusingi in it's predictability. Some say he's "compromising" again, trying to give fodder to both sides, and maybe that's true to a degree. But I don't think that's all of it.

For all the right's complaints that he "dithered", personally I'm glad to have a Prez who has been willing to give time, thought, and attention to his commanders in deciding how to proceed in a very serious situation. I wish to hell Dumbya and Co. had done the same, but I fully understand the reasons for NOT doing so--they wanted us to buy into Iraq and get in there as quick as possible before we thought about it much. Playing on the fear card, as usual, when it was at its height.

So I kinda like Obama's decision. I didn't hear the speech partly because I knew it would be hashed over by the pundits left and right, and I'd get more information and views on the content from them. And I have.

What I've heard is that there's a big shift in our goals. That the idea is to make it clear to the Karzai government that our presence is finite, to hopefully spur them into preparing to deal with things after we're gone. Good. I also hear there's a plan to deal with the not-so-corrupt elements of his government, to support them even where it means going around Karzai. I like this as well; it's got parameters I don't like, such as getting our fingers in a sovereign government, but I'm not sure what else we do. We can't take Karzai down publicly, we're stuck dealing with him. But if we can encourage those within his government who are NOT so corrupt to do the right thing, I think it's a good thing to try.

I also hear the thrust is to train the Afghan army, which brings up a good question I heard last night. The COST of the kind of army proposed is more than the entire budget of the country, so do we end up picking up the tab? I haven't heard many talk about this, and I think it's worth talking about.

Supposedly the focus of a lot of the new troops is to secure more of the rural areas, beef up our presence there and, while "defeating" the Taliban seems impossible, weaken their influence. As someone who cares about the country, I appreciate that.

When we talked deadlines in Iraq, it seemed to me that the insurgents could simply back off, wait us out and then come in hard when we leave. I'm not sure that's not true in Afghanistan, so we'll just have to see. Actually, I'm not sure it's not still true of Iraq; after all, despite it not being in the news, we're still THERE so if they're waiting us out, we won't know until our numbers are few enough for it to happen.

One thing I disagreed with the Ambassador on was her insistence that if we left, it might become a home base for Al Qaeda again. I don't believe that's true. The Taliban and Al Qaeda's goals are diametrically opposed in one respect; the Taliban is about Afghanistan (whether they have their sights on Pakistan too or other areas outside the borders I don't know, but certainly not GLOBALLY). Al Qaeda is a global jihad. I don't think the Taliban would welcome them back at ALL...remember they fought one another, and I don't think the Taliban would like having a faction they can't control in country. That's just my take on that issue.

There's also an aspect of trying to work with those Taliban willing to deal with us. IF we could buy back those who've been "bought" by the Taliban and cease bombing the hell out of civilians, I see that as potentially more effective than trying to deal with the Taliban itself. Given my knowledge of the Afghan ability to play both sides against the middle, and their willingness to, as the quote cited elsewhere suggested, say to the current overlord "I will bow to you if you'll leave me alone, them go back to my way when you're gone", I don't see dealing with "The Taliban" as working.

Maddow kept bringing up Somalia and Yemen, where Al Qaeda is active currently, as where we should be focusing to chase them. I think that's a red herring; we can't go after them everywhere; we can't even go after them officially (ergo effectively) in Pakistan. Given I don't think the "aim" of the troop surge is actually going after Al Qaeda anyway, I find that a specious argument to begin with.

I also saw a clip of a soldier saying he approves of the troop "surge" since, if they didn't have to expend so much time and energy into security, they'd have a better chance of getting close to the people, both enhancing their ability to work with them, giving them a chance to get to know "us" as individuals, and lessening the generalized hatred of "the occupiers". I liked what that soldier had to say.

So what do others think? I know I'm not addressing geopolitics here, just looking at the issues as they pertain to Afghanistan alone and Obama's plan, so I'm sure there's more to it than what I see. But for the most part I like what Obama has decided, I like the multi-pronged intent of it, and to ME it appears to be something long thought-out and well-intentioned; whether it can succeed or not, nobody knows, but I like it better than just throwing 30,000 more troops in willy nilly, as I think Dumbya did MORE in Iraq.

I also wish/hope our guys can do some rebuilding while there, but that's just a personal prayer.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 3, 2009 9:11 AM

PIZMOBEACH

... fully loaded, safety off...

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
The right likes the troop surge, hates the timeline for withdrawal; the left likes the deadline, hates the troop surge. It's almost amusingi in it's predictability. Some say he's "compromising" again, trying to give fodder to both sides, and maybe that's true to a degree. But I don't think that's all of it.

I don't believe any "political analysis" on TV as a rule - they have $$$ motivations no matter what side they seem to be on. Maddow wants to make a name for herself every bit as much as Beck or Rush. I find her tone rather smug and pretentious "it's so obvious" personally.

The Right hates the timeline because they can't find fault with anything else - they have to knock him with something.

Dexter Filkins was on Charlie Rose the other night after O's speech (you have to read his book). He said time is different in Afghanistan - nothing will happen in 18 months, no way they train anyone in that time. Another journo said that army officials told her there wasn't enough time to even deploy 30,000 more soldiers in 18 months.

So what happens in 18 months? Obama stick to his guns and get
heat from the right? Can he be resolute?

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 3, 2009 9:27 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Christ, we've been there longer than 8 years already. Now we're in for AT LEAST another two, guaranteed, and more like 5 to 7, minimum. All to "train up" some soldiers and police. I'm sorry, but are you fucking KIDDING me?! I could go to college, get a bachelor's, go to grad school and get a master's, THEN go to law school, and THEN go to med school in the time it seems to take us to train an Afghan soldier who's already a better fighter than anyone we're sending in to train him. Really? Is this "The Plan"?

Pardon me if I don't snap to attention and salute this idiotic move.

And yes, the irony IS rich - here's Obama, keeping the ONE campaign promise I hoped he wouldn't.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 3, 2009 9:45 AM

BYTEMITE

@Kwicko: Mmm hmm, yup. Fact is if we haven't made any progress yet (even seems almost like we're going backwards at times), then we probably aren't GOING to affect any meaningful change.

I'd say more, but this day is just REALLY depressing.

I like the timetable. Wish it wasn't 18 months from now.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 3, 2009 10:10 AM

PIZMOBEACH

... fully loaded, safety off...

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Fact is if we haven't made any progress yet (even seems almost like we're going backwards at times), then we probably aren't GOING to affect any meaningful change.

Filkins agrees with you Byte - he said the Taliban are stronger now than they ever have been, and respect for America's plans are almost nil with the Afghan people.
Fwiw, he's been covering that area of the world for a long time and as they introduced the panel of 6 journalists when they got around to him my wife and I gasped. He looked so haggered and depressed.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 3, 2009 11:02 AM

FREMDFIRMA

I'm all for the idea of arming a radical womens faction and helping them slaughter the Taliban, Al Qeada and the goddamn "northern" alliance mercilessly.

See, the problem of factionalism, is of course, the factions.

No Factions, No Problem.

And that's just how it goes, in Afghanistan.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE