Small Change for a Worn-Out War
The President’s remodeling in our Cash for Clunkers struggle reaches the salesroom with all the dings and dents of a ten-year-old lemon that has exhausted the patience of buyers who have spent almost half a trillion dollars keeping it on the road.
“The goal that we seek is achievable,” he says, “and can be expressed simply: no safe-haven from which al Qaeda or its affiliates can launch attacks against our homeland, or our allies. We will not try to make Afghanistan a perfect place. We will not police its streets or patrol its mountains indefinitely.
“That is the responsibility of the Afghan government, which must step up its ability to protect its people; and move from an economy shaped by war to one that can sustain a lasting peace. What we can do, and will do, is build a partnership with the Afghan people that endures–one that ensures that we will be able to continue targeting terrorists and supporting a sovereign Afghan government.”
Does anyone really believe that is going to happen in 2012, 2014 or ever?
The vaunted Obama rationality once again fails him on a major issue, leading to a split-the-difference formula as self-defeating as his decision two years ago to ram through a misshapen version of health care reform when he might have backed off and concentrated on bolstering the economy instead.
Barack Obama, for all his idealism, has shown a tin ear for managing big Change.
MORE.
7 Responses to “Small Change for a Worn-Out War”
“One goal of the President’s almost everyone will support – that we concentrate on “nation-building here at home.” Why do we have to wait so long to start?” – RS
A fair question. The wait has been going on quite awhile now. Bush-lite isn’t going to cut the mustard.
Obama has chosen something between what his generals and the far right want on the one side, and the “get out now” contingent on the other. While normally moderate approaches and compromises are desirable, in the case of wars I think that is less true and often leads to long drawn-out conflicts. If a war is worth fighting then commit the resources and get it over with, if it isn’t then don’t fight it.
This decision seems to be based largely on what is politically desirable, but as Mr Stein has pointed out previously probably ends up satisfying no one.
So far on the radio, nobody seems to be satisfied. On the Left we have the All Out, TODAY! crowd, and the right is muddled. I have not (yet?) heard any cowardice charges (or more interestingly, any vote-buying-for-2012 charges), but I did hear the argument, “We are so close to real victory, it would be an especially great shame to leave now, when we’re right on the threshold of something great.”
Typical observers are concerned that the plans for withdrawal are not smart, that they may risk (more) failure in Afghanistan. (Not that everyone cares about that, but it is seen as risky and likely for political reasons: to look good before Nov. 2012, or, more silly, to “be an improvement of our policy and decisions regarding Vietnam.”
Here is the Economist’s view.
http://www.economist.com/node/18867057?story_id=18867057
* * *
A side note about the Dumbth in Obama’s speech — it’s a side note as it is separate from the real issue, Afghan withdrawal:
As far as Obama’s misuse of language and appealing to emotion instead of reason, who knows? (The Left is largely upset at failure to remove all troops immediately, and doesn’t care about the gratuitous sops Obama gave them.) “Investing” [sic] instead of “spending”? (standard liberal BS) “Clean energy”? (Aside from its being silly in its own right, what does it have to do with Afghanistan? We’re not dependent on Afghan oil.) And of course the clincher, “nation-building here at home.” [sigh] He and the Congressional Democrats were given their chance, their one (1) chance, by the rest of us who knew better, to try a huge stimulus. They took that chance we and everyone else gave them and ruined it. Is Obama out of touch again? We’re in bad financial shape, made notably worse by Obama (and Congressional Dems), and need to start undertaking reforms that primarily address the problem, which is undisciplined and excessive spending. (He isn’t going to try some flailing at “Stimulus II[, the Also-Likely-Awful Sequel]” with the collaboration of Congessional Dems between later this year and November 2012, is he? (Who’s fooled by that?)
The P.T. Barnum sucker-appealing campaign circus act rhetoric is here (below). It’s pathetic and a minor annoyance, rather than the disgusting “Peace Dividend” spending-frenzy poor motive as well as thought by some libs and Dems after the Cold War and first Gulf War ended. (That really was disgusting and more offensive.)
“[W]e must be as pragmatic as we are passionate; as strategic as we are resolute. “ Except he appeals only to the passionate and the unthinkingly resolute here:
If Maddow continues to be so sappingly enamored of the Hoover Dam bypass bridge, caught up in government megalomania, Big Toys (“Infrastructure!”), will she support the Bridge to Nowhere?
Big Toy lust and other Thinking Big (Government) material here (link below). For those of you who actually like or even want it, presumably this is stuff that will warm your hearts (emotional!).
(Ms. Maddow is at or near the top on MSNBC, a classic far-lefty.)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/42705352#42705156
How many Dems would once again seek pork-barrel projects?
I suppose plenty of fools will continue to be fooled at least through November 2012 and possibly until later, but it was poor Campaign Circus Lite material that was wholly unnecessary (and in fact, inappropriate). Informed people know there’s no freedom any more to spend without any serious controls or limits, and are put off by such material, since it’s irrelevant to Afghan strategy as well as reckless and silly. (It’s campaign circus stuff for suckers.)
DaGoat,
The ‘commit the resources and get it over with’ approach won’t work. It would require more years, more troops, and more money. The the public, as a whole, WILL NOT support this. They would have years ago, but instead, Afghanistan was only half finished by the time critical resources were diverted to Iraq. It is now far too late for that.
A speedy withdrawal isn’t going to work, either. It will completely destabilize the situation. All the gains will be completely reversed, the economy will collapse, and you can expect the country to promptly erupt into all out civil war. That isn’t a smart policy.
Obama’s middle way may not work, but at least there is a chance. There is NO chance the other two approaches would work.
Zzzzz my own opinion is that once Al Qaeda was essentially removed there was no reason to stay. The goal of a stable Afghanistan is unrealistic, and this is an unwinnable and futile war. Neither the gung ho approach of the far right nor the moderate Obama approach are going to work. It’s just a matter of how much pain you want to endure. I am with Kucinich and Paul on this one.
I listened to his speech too and agree that the time has come to bring our troops home starting on his (Obama,s timeline) because the key notes in the speech were clear to me at least, is this part:
What we can do, and will do, is build a partnership with the Afghan people that endures–one that ensures that we will be able to continue targeting terrorists and supporting a sovereign Afghan government.”
I noticed that in the future Obama made it clearly understood that, the Afghan people will have to governed their own government but we will be their for assistance in helping them rebuild and control their future by helping to target terroist, Key word there for all you liberals and susposedly center..was that Obama administration will Concentrate our powers on hunting down terroists and leave it there, without actually engaging in war..its a problem the Afgan people will have to step up to the plate and take charge of their government on how they want it to be… a place or haven for letting corruption prevail as is what lead to poppy growing trade, an easy cash flow to the black market worldwide, convenient play to religion preferably Islam or throwback to ancient brutality in extremism breeding in undercurrent reversed form of Islam and domination of its people by force. Its their choice. We need to get out of there and place war dollars spent on foreign soil that is more critically needed to build our own infrastructure and invest in our own future for our generation coming up after us.
Russia learned a lesson by a tired worn out war and now we should take a cue from their past mistake.. Really reality is there and the writing is on the wall now.
[...] Small Change for a Worn-Out WarThe Moderate VoiceThe President's remodeling in our Cash for Clunkers struggle reaches the salesroom with all the dings and dents of a ten-year-old lemon that has exhausted the patience of buyers who have spent almost half a trillion dollars keeping it on the road. … [...]