Thursday, September 24, 2009

Afghanistan = Vietnam in the Obama White House

The Times: Reports that the ghost of LBJ and Vietnam is hanging over President Obama and the White House over its strategy in Afghanistan. This blog for years has been against a heavy troop presence in Afghanistan, when Obama was checking in and out of the Senate to run for the Presidency this blog was opposed to an Afghan War with Western troops. As with all things there have been changes, Obama at the start had the chance to scale down Afghanistan, not make Afghanistan the main battle area for the War on Terror, but it had been the Just War in his Campaign for the Presidency, also the Bush surge had worked in Iraq, thus it had fallen from the headlines. In March of this year President Obama stated that he had a new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, what the President said about the importance of Afghanistan is now causing him problems, the President states the following, " Many people in the United States -- and many in partner countries that have sacrificed so much -- have a simple question: What is our purpose in Afghanistan? After so many years, they ask, why do our men and women still fight and die there? And they deserve a straightforward answer. So let me be clear: Al Qaeda and its allies -- the terrorists who planned and supported the 9/11 attacks -- are in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Multiple intelligence estimates have warned that al Qaeda is actively planning attacks on the United States homeland from its safe haven in Pakistan. And if the Afghan government falls to the Taliban -- or allows al Qaeda to go unchallenged -- that country will again be a base for terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as they possibly can....The future of Afghanistan is inextricably linked to the future of its neighbor, Pakistan.......For the Afghan people, a return to Taliban rule would condemn their country to brutal governance, international isolation, a paralyzed economy, and the denial of basic human rights to the Afghan people -- especially women and girls. The return in force of al Qaeda terrorists who would accompany the core Taliban leadership would cast Afghanistan under the shadow of perpetual violence. " Thus the President is up a creek without a paddle, as stated this blog, what ever decision the President takes it will cost lives, this blog has changed its view, from wanting a small footprint in Afghanistan to the support of more troops. If the President had scaled back at the start of his Administration then we might not be her now, the Taliban within 12 months of winning and the UK not having lost some heroic soldiers. But we here, the USA and the UK have taken heavy losses. Is Obama really going to turn around and say it was pointless. The political hacks in the West Wing might think Obama could sell a broken down second hand car but this would be a bridge to far, Obama might as well back his books to go back to Chicago in 2012 if the think he would win. An act of treachery of selling the people of Afghanistan down the river would make Jimmy Carter look like Ronald Reagan. A holding strategy in Afghanistan would be Vietnam all over again, Obama sooner or later would be forced to send more troops, by then in political terms it would be to late, also Obama would have to face the fact that his decision will have cost more US and UK lives, also it would allow the Taliban to hit Western Forces and wait them out, NATO would be finished, Russia might think this was the chance to retake his past satellite countries, Ukraine, Poland and the Czech Republic. The Obama decision is more important that the political fate of Obama, this is about Western security, if Obama wobbles Iran will go nuclear and Israel will have no choice but to hit Iran. Lets hope Obama has more Steele than wind.

No comments: