by David S. Cloud
U.S. military officials Wednesday damped expectations for quick results from offensives in Afghanistan and played down a year-end review that the Obama administration had portrayed as a major evaluation of the U.S.-led war.
"I would not want to overplay the significance of this review," Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, who oversees U.S. forces in the Mideast and Afghanistan, told members of the House Armed Services Committee, referring to plans by the administration to evaluate progress in Afghanistan in December. "We would not make too much out of that."
Administration officials announced the review last year when President Obama ordered 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan. At the time, officials characterized it as an opportunity to evaluate whether it would be possible to begin handing off security responsibilities to Afghan forces in July 2011, the deadline set by Obama for beginning a U.S. drawdown.
"If it appears the strategy is not working, and we will not be able to transition to Afghan security forces by 2011, we will take a hard look at the strategy," Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said at the time.
But Petraeus emphasized Wednesday that December would be too soon to make a far-reaching evaluation, noting that all of the additional U.S. forces would have been there for only a few months.
A senior administration official said that showing progress by December remains important because of the need to reassure many wavering NATO allies that the U.S. strategy is working.
It was the second day of testimony for Petraeus, whose appearance before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday was cut short after he appeared to faint while answering questions.
Comments
Maybe, now the obstructionist Republicans in our Senate will allow the passage of a Supplemental Funding Bill for our Armed Forces. Just yesterday, Secretary Gates prodded the Senate on the passage of that much needed bill. Come, Republicans, you, of the flag-waving phoniness, pass that bill that will properly fund our women and men in uniform, especially those that are fighting in the two wars. The Republicans in our Senate have gone from the ridiculous to the pathetic, all in 15 months. The time since President Obama was elected our President. Coincidence, yeah, if that Oil Slick in The Gulf of Mexico, caused by British Petroleum, was coincidental !!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, IL | June 17, 2010 8:54 AM
Worst President Ever!!!!
Posted by: Libtard | June 17, 2010 10:17 AM
More backpedaling and lies from the incompetent administration.
"A senior administration official said that showing progress by December remains important because of the need to reassure many wavering NATO allies that the U.S. strategy is working."
Actually making progress, not so important, as long as the liars can convince a few allies we are golden. BTW, who are our allies now, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela and N. Korea? I'm sure the British are happy about the open ended asset raid on BP but hey, it worked with GM so why not?
Posted by: Hans | June 17, 2010 10:52 AM
BP is starting to look like England's IG Farben....
Anyway, Ray McGovern. Look him up.
His remarks about the "surge" and the calculated "projections" about "future success" in Iraq by Gates, the high command, are curiously applicable here.
It is about keeping the conflicts going on and on and on, and pushing the political responsibility on to the next Congress, the next Administration, the next Supreme Commander.
Absent: the input from the "intelligence agencies".
Curiously silent.
They were used by the Bush admin, and I guess are now a bit gun shy?
Posted by: ornery | June 17, 2010 11:50 AM
Good job Barry you snatched defeat from the mouth of victory.
Posted by: Libtard | June 17, 2010 3:53 PM
The only ones that are still defending this child president are brain dead liberals (and thank God they only make up less than 20% of the voters now) and Rosie O'Donnell.
Posted by: Crooks_In_ DC | June 17, 2010 8:22 PM