by Mark Silva
President Barack Obama, who has acknowledged that "the road ahead will be difficult'' in Afghanistan, is meeting again this morning with a war cabinet: Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Secretary of Defense Rpbert Gates, National Security Advisor Gen. James Jones and others -- another in a series of meetings the president has been holding about the way forward in the war.
The president plans to address Marines and sailors today at the Jacksonville (Fla.) Naval Air Station en route to a Democratic Party fundraiser tonight at the Fontainebleau Hotel on Miami Beach.
Yet the White House has signaled that a decision about the recommendation of Gen. Stanley McChrystal to deploy some 40,000 additional troops in Afghanistan, after the president authorized 21,000 new forces earlier this year, may still be weeks away -- Obama has suggested that even if they make that decision before the Nov. 7 runoff for presidential elections in Afghanistan, they may not announce it before that juncture in Kabul's demonstration of its ability to serve as a "partner'' with the U.S.
"The road ahead will be difficult,'' Obama said in early May, following a meeting with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, whose nation's electoral commission has concluded that election fraud deprived him of a majority in reelection, requiring another round of voting, and the president of Pakistan (see the video above.)
"There will be more violence, and there will be setbacks,'' Obama said then. "But let me be clear: The United States has made a lasting commitment to defeat al Qaeda, but also to support the democratically elected sovereign governments of both Pakistan and Afghanistan. That commitment will not waiver. And that support will be sustained..
"The United States has a stake in the future of these two countries,'' he said on May 6. "We have learned, time and again, that our security is shared. It is a lesson that we learned most painfully on 9/11, and it is a lesson that we will not forget.''
On March 27, following his decision to deploy 17,000 and then 4,000 additional troops in Afghanistan, and in defining the challenge in Afghanistan as "an attainable objective,'' the president said (see the video below): "I want the American people to understand that we have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future...To achieve our goals, we need a stronger, smarter and comprehensive strategy."
McChrystal has offered that strategy. After eight years of war, it comes with a more than half-again boost in U.S. forces in Afghanistan. The president is weighing it.
Former Vice President Dick Cheney has accused the administration of "dithering'' with the decision. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has responded: "What Vice President Cheney calls dithering, President Obama calls his solemn responsibility to the men and women in uniform and the American public. I think we've all seen what happens when somebody doesn't take that responsibility serious.''
Abdullah Abdullah, the challenger to Karzai's election who made rounds of Sunday talk shows over the weekend, said: "I do share General McChrystal's assessment. He's a military general, he's a professional person. He's known for his professional capabilities, and he knows Afghanistan also, very well.
"But at the same time, this is one part of the strategy,'' he said on CNN's State of the Union. "Additional troops -- we should have been in a position eight years down the road not to call for more troops, but for lesser troops. We are not there. Why? Because of the failures of the current administration in Afghanistan. Any success for the U.S. strategy in Afghanistan will depend on the credibility of your partner, on the legitimacy of your partner.
"So, hopefully, this runoff or the second round elections, whenever it takes place, will provide the United States and the international community with such a partner. There is no doubt that the partnership has not been working quite well in the past, in the past few months or few years. So, that one element missing, I don't see a successful strategy in Afghanistan.''
Comments
Wonder if he will take anyones advice or act as the Great Meiash, which he seems to believe he is.
Posted by: inky | October 26, 2009 9:51 AM
Yes, let's meet and talk some more and delay, delay, delay. This is what happens when an ignorant, incompetent boob becomes president.
Posted by: John D, still right, as usual | October 26, 2009 11:18 AM
A couple of shifts in the rhetoric coming from the WH on Afghan. First, they appear to be tying the long awaited decision re troops to the Afghan election. I'm not sure what the point of this is. The Afghan government is going to be corrupt regardless of who wins the run-off. Second, the WH has stopped the rhetoric about "destroying" or "eradicating" the Taliban. They are drawing a distinction between AQ and the Taliban. This Administration chooses its rhetoric carefully, and I have to believe the distinction is one of consequence. It may be the groundwork for pulling out of Afghan, as Jones said there are less than 100 AQ operatives in Afghan, and no bases. Lastly, for how many weeks has the Administration said a decision will be in a couple of weeks? BO needs to make a decision. No matter what he does, he is going to get criticized, so that shouldn't be a factor. But I have to believe it is. The man is very thin skinned. I don't mind him taking time to get it right, but I thought that is what he did in March. Did something change? Did the March strategy fail? Additionally, if he was holed up with his war council 24/7, I could understand the delay. But I don't understand plans to parade around in Virginia to campaign for a governors race, while this Afghan decision is still hanging out there.
Posted by: Herbie H. | October 26, 2009 11:40 AM
But I don't understand plans to parade around in Virginia to campaign for a governors race, while this Afghan decision is still hanging out there.
Posted by: Herbie H. | October 26, 2009 11:40 AM
SUGAR LAND, Tex., Oct. 30, 2006 — President Bush zigzagged from Georgia to his home state, Texas, on Monday, stumping for Republicans in Bush-friendly districts while looking ever more like the candidate himself.
Ps.... This was smack dab in the middle of Iraq study group and decision for surge.
Posted by: bill r. | October 26, 2009 12:38 PM
Obama thinks hes like the mesiah, but not it turned out to be something different
Posted by: tepoyglobal matrix | October 26, 2009 12:52 PM
little bill - you rascal!
Even after 10 months inoffice,you still think Bush is calling the shots? can't get rid of that Bush diaper rash yet?
President Bush zigzagged from Georgia to his home state, Texas, on Monday, stumping for Republicans in Bush-friendly districts while looking ever more like the candidate himself.
Ps.... This was smack dab in the middle of Iraq study group and decision for surge.
Posted by: bill r. | October 26, 2009 12:38 PM
Once more little guy, who is in charge?
Who is the President?
What did your mother tell you about holding a grudge that gets you absolutely nowhere but nutsville? Daily rants about anyone, everyone who is no longer responsible can't accomplish anything constructive.
Your hate for Bush aside, that bad diaper rash will only go away when you stop peeing your pants over Bush!
Posted by: springfield | October 26, 2009 3:54 PM
Why is it so many bible-thumping Republicans/Conservatives claim that we think Pres. Obama is the Messiah, but none of them can spell...Messiah? I'm not even a Christian and I can spell it.Now, if our Messiah wants to play golf, basketball or hopscotch, that's fine with me. I prefer that he get some time in to relax and clear his head than make historical decisions in a stressed-out state of mind. When each of you becomes president, I promise I will defend your right to play golf, as well. I never even complained when Bush kept taking time off. I just kept hoping it would do some good.
Posted by: WaitWut? | October 26, 2009 4:17 PM
Republicans, and in partucular Dick Cheney, have accused Barack Obama of "dithering" over Afghanistan. If Obama were to quickly invade a country on the basis of half-baked intelligence, would that demonstrate his courage and decisiveness to Republicans and Cheney?
In fact, it's not a bad idea for Obama to take his time, examine all options and watch how the post-election landscape in Afghanistan evolves.
Posted by: Fat, Drunk & Republican is no way to go through life | October 26, 2009 4:21 PM
bill r., what is your point? That BO is wise to follow Bush's example?
Posted by: Herbie H. | October 26, 2009 5:05 PM
The time is now! We need to win this thing and it can be won. Send the troops in and then send more. In fact send all we can. That is how wars are won! Not piecemeal style. During our Presidents campaign he said we needed to focus on Afghanistan, now it seems all that was to just discredit the surge in Iraq.
Posted by: Anderqual | October 26, 2009 9:31 PM