by Mark Silva
The chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the general in command of military forces in Afghanistan met half way today, flying to Ramstein Air Base in Germany to talk about Gen. Stanley McChrystal's reported desire for tens of thousands of additional U.S. troops in Afghanistan.
Back home, however, there is little apparent public support for the boost in forces that commanders on the ground apparently believe will be necessary to sustain the mission there.
Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman, already has told Congress that McChrystal's assessment of the challenge there, stepping up an anti-insurgency campaign against the Taliban and al Qaeda, will require more troops, while the president maintains that he has not put the troop "cart'' before the "horse'' of a successful strategy yet.
Fewer than one in three Americans believe the U.S. troop deployment in Afghanistan should be increased, according to the findings of a new CBS News/New York Times poll. The Gallup Poll also finds that "Americans more likely to say they would oppose - 50 percent -- than favor - 41 percent - a possible decision by Obama to boost the force.
In the CBS/Times survey, only 29 percent said troop levels should be increased, with 32 percent saying they should be cut, and 27 percent saying hold them as they are.
Obama, who already has ordered an additional 21,000 troops to Afghanistan by the end of the year, raising the U.S. total to 68,000, has maintained that a full assessment of the strategy is necessary before any additional forces are deployed.
Americans are divided over "whether the United States is doing the right thing'' fighting the war in Afghanistan, the CBS/Times poll found 47 percent yes, 42 percent no.
Nearly eight years after the U.S. invaded Afghanistan and ousted the Taliban from power, public support for the war launched in retaliation of the Sept. 11 attacks against the U.S. appears to be running out of steam.
This will put Obama, who already has pledged to withdraw U.S. combat forces from Iraq by next year and all forces by 2011, in a precarious position: Potentially ramping up an increasingly unpopular war, while he rolls up the ramps of another unpopular war which he pledged to end during his campaign for the White House..
Comments
We'd probably already be finished with Afghanistan if Bush and Cheney hadn't decided that it would be a great idea to blow it off and invade Iraq for no reason.
Afghanistan is a lost cause, the people who attacked us on 9/11 have already left (thanks again Bu$hco). By staying there we are doing nothing but wasting more blood and treasure.
Posted by: Paul Blart | September 25, 2009 4:48 PM
Remember in 2008 how the Left tried to "man up" by at least pretending to support the war in Afghanistan, while at the same time denouncing action in Iraq?
Turns out the whole Leftist posture was just a political gambit, to fool a credulous American public. They never really meant it.
The poll numbers show that the public supports the Afghan War by a 47-42% margin. The partisan breakdown is Reps 67-25% in favor, Independents 45-41% in favor, Dems 36-55% opposed.
Posted by: Bruce | September 25, 2009 5:39 PM
Mall Cop,
Would the reason Preesident Bush invaded Iraq be the same reason these people thought there s/b an invasion?
http://www.davidstuff.com/political/wmdquotes.htm
Perhaps the American people want a commander-in-chief whose goal is to pursue victory
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/27/no-substitute-for-victory/
Posted by: Terry | September 25, 2009 5:48 PM
Perhaps the American people want a commander-in-chief whose goal is to pursue victoryWould the reason Preesident Bush invaded Iraq be the same reason these people thought there s/b an invasion?
Posted by: Terry | September 25, 2009 5:48 PM
*********************************************
.
.
Really? Who won?
And exactly what reasons did your chickenhawk neocon heroes (Bu$hco) invade Iraq for again?.....other than to enrich their Military Industrial Complex pals like KBR, Halliburton and Blackwater...
If I wanted to know what the right wing lunatic fringe (you) thinks about anything I would care what the Washington Times says.....I don't.
Posted by: anti terry | September 25, 2009 8:05 PM
It is a mistake to stay in Afghanistan. There is nothing there. . .
We are spending 68,000 troops to find a few handful of terrorists. My goodness that is like burning the house down to kill the flees. We need a smarter policy: Limited strike! When the gopher shows his head, you pop it!
Of course, the General is going to ask for more troops! Who wouldn't! It means more authority and power to him!
Posted by: HmongRodneyKing | September 25, 2009 8:05 PM
It would take 750K at least to pacify and protect the country of Afg.
It's absurd to think 100k US a few k Brits and a few k more NATO's can pacify and actually protect the people of Afg.
Can you imagine being a Afg village leader and some earnest US or UK Lt. comes up to you and tells you that his people will protect you if you turn against the war lord or Taliban leader in the area?
I would fall over dying of laughter.
'Yeah right 'chief', until next Friday?!' hahahahaha!!
The whole Afg. effort is 'insanity, shrouded in neglect, wrapped in denial.'
Posted by: C.Morrisā§ | September 25, 2009 9:02 PM
Trickled On,
I guess you can't open links and see all the democrats that believed Saddam had WMDs.
maybe we need to lower the tee for you so you quit striking out
Posted by: Terry | September 25, 2009 10:11 PM
Right wing pundents often repeat Obama's campaign line that Afghanistan was the war in which he wanted to invest more resources. The right holds Obama to that promise or position as though it was a deposition given before a trial. Obama is weak in allowing the right to hold him to that. New developments have occured in Afghanistan. The "government" there has shown itself to be a sham with their 'creative' election recently. Also, it has been reported that the more our troops veer off a military course--in order to protect more civilians and act more like NGOs--as American military brass wants--the more American troops have been killed--big time. Obama needs to say "too bad" to the right wingers. It should be "allowable" for a nation, its people and a president to leave a war if the majority wish to leave. There should only be barriers TO war--not getting OUT of war. The Big American War Boys need to ask NGOs for what they want our troops to do. Our troops were not trained to be social workers and community organizers. This is what's getting so many killed right now. Seems like the Big War Boys want to send the double message again--like in Iraq--"we want to be warm fuzzy helpers, but damn it, we are in uniform and have guns." Get the UN and NGOs in there for this "new phase" in Afghanistan. Get us out of both of the Cheney/Bush BS "wars".
Too bad Cheney and Bush don't clean up after themselves. With their wars, Cheney and Bush pooped in the country pool, then walked away leaving everyone else in the pool with the Cheney/Bush poop. Wow, what men they are.
Posted by: Vivian | September 25, 2009 10:52 PM
guess you can't open links and see all the democrats that believed Saddam had WMDs.maybe we need to lower the tee for you so you quit striking out
Posted by: Terry | September 25, 2009 10:11 PM
*************************************************
.
.
Trickledown Boy,
I don't need to. The fact that Bush and Cheney were able to trick some Democrats with trumped up intelligence and lies doesn't surprise anyone other than low IQ goobers like yourself.
I don't blame Democrats for supporting Bush at that time. They knew Bush was dumb but they didn't think he would be dumb enough to lie us into a war. They were wrong and we're all still paying for it.
Your Repug heroes own Iraq and Afghanistan Terri. You've already lost two straight elections because of it.
Posted by: anti terry | September 25, 2009 11:12 PM
"pundent" = pundit.
Posted by: Vivian | September 26, 2009 12:07 AM
No country has ever gone in there and "won". I don't know what you would call a "win" in Afghanistan...the same with Iraq. Many of the people are hooked on drugs and do anything for their warlords to get more. The farmers need to make money so they grow poppies to sell to the warlords. The areas we cleared before the side trip to Iraq are again being run by the warlords. It is like playing whack-a-mole right now. How do you end it?
Posted by: lochnesssmonster | September 26, 2009 7:22 AM
Trickled On,
So President Bush and Vice-President Cheney were tricking the democrats in 1998 & 1999 with made up intellgence?
Were you droppped on your head at birth?.
Posted by: Terry | September 26, 2009 8:43 AM
Bruce, are you going to enlist?
Posted by: Milton Friedman | September 26, 2009 9:11 AM