GOP Hawks Wants Romney to Take Tougher Line on Afghanistan: Extended Presence of U.S. Troops
President Barack Obama has long had a problem with his Democratic Party base because rather than immediately start pulling out of Afghanistan when he came into office he continued the American commitment to ending the conflict in what he argued was a more orderly way. Now, The Hill reports, some in the GOP are pressing for Republican nominee Mitt Romney to take a more hawkish position — a position that would advocate keeping the war going on longer:
Republican defense hawks are urging Mitt Romney to separate himself from President Obama on Afghanistan and back an extended presence for U.S. troops in the country.
The advice comes as the White House hits the halfway point in its timeline to withdraw all U.S. troops and after Romney faced criticism for not mentioning the Afghan conflict in his acceptance speech for the Republican nomination.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told The Hill on Wednesday the Romney camp needed to distance itself from the Obama administration’s goal of pulling all American forces from Afghanistan by 2014.
They should, instead, pursue a war plan focused on “what we leave behind” in the country, not just ending the war as soon as possible, according to Graham.
“It’s about getting it right,” the South Carolina Republican said. Getting it right, he added, almost certainly means keeping U.S. forces in country past the administration’s deadline.
“On the first day of a Romney administration,” the presumed president-elect needed to call a meeting of the top U.S. commanders in Afghanistan and chart a different strategic course for the country, Graham said.
“And if [they] need to change the timetable in Afghanistan, that is what we will do,” Graham said.
The Romney camp has been hammered in recent months by Democrats and by some within the GOP for not clearly defining the candidate’s position on Afghanistan.
On the campaign trail, Romney has publicly agreed with the 2014 deadline, but chastised the administration for giving insurgents a date certain for a U.S. pullout.
Obama campaign officials claim the 2014 deadline represents the president’s commitment to ending the Afghan war in the same way then-candidate Obama promised to end the Iraq war in 2008.
Four things to ponder:
1. All polls have shown Americans want the Iraq and Afghanistan wars ended. So would this position sell?
2. If Romney does come out with a more hawkish position on Afghanistan, would this symbolize the strong influence of hawks and/or neocons on him — and would this mean you could essentially track what they advocate and it would accurately predict Romney administration policy?
3. How would this position play with the party’s Tea Party wing?
4. This piece notes how one reason for doing this would be to separate Romney from Obama on this issue. Hasn’t this been the story about how Republicans have undercut the advantages they’ve had in this economy? Haven’t too many in the party thought that just being the “anti-Obama” — even taking positions Republicans once advocated that oppose these positions if Obama advocates a position Republicans once held — is enough?
An April poll found GOPErs are increasingly less smitten with the war in Afghanistan:
A majority of Republicans say for the first time that the war in Afghanistan has not been worth fighting, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll that comes as the continuing U.S. presence in that country is emerging as a key point of contention in the presidential race.
The poll findings are likely to present a challenge for Republican front-runner Mitt Romney, who has said that the goal in Afghanistan should be to defeat the Taliban on the battlefield.
President Obama stepped back from that goal during his 2009 strategy review and has set the end of 2014 as the departure date for all U.S. combat forces.
Overall, the Post-ABC News poll reflects a country bone-weary of war after more than a decade of fighting in Afghanistan and, until late last year, an almost nine-year engagement in Iraq.
Public support for the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan has fallen to an all-time low, with only 30 percent of respondents saying it has been worth fighting.
Since the 2001 invasion, almost 2,000 U.S. troops have been killed and more than 15,000 have been wounded in Afghanistan. According to the poll, two-thirds of Americans think the war has not been worth fighting, equaling the most negative public assessments of the U.S. war effort in Iraq.
Although foreign policy has been a peripheral issue in the presidential campaign, the poll’s findings highlight the difficulty Obama and Romney face in explaining U.S. policy to an increasingly war-weary electorate.
If Romney comes out suggesting he’s going to toss the administration’s timetable would it be one more example of today’s Republican Party in effect saying damn the opinion polls full speed ahead because this fits in with our ideology?
PREDICTION: If it’s announced that Romney’s making a major foreign policy speech, it will include a call for an extended American presence in Afghanistan and the tossing of the administration’s pull-out timetable.
Share This
Related Posts
-
People in Pakistan Live in Constant Fear of a Boston Bombing
Posted on Apr 25, 2013
-
Is This Democracy?
Posted on Apr 24, 2013
-
Tail-gunner Ted (Guest Voice)
Posted on Apr 21, 2013
-
John McCain Defends President’s Speech After Gun Vote
Posted on Apr 19, 2013
Lets get this straight… Reps want Romney to promise to keep troops there longer because it separates him from Obama???? Risk the lives of American soldiers for political points?
How many Americans are the Republican party willing to let die so Romney can be President?
getting out of Afghanistan is not a partisan issue…we all want our soldiers out of there.
I think it’s another example of the echo chamber effect and it shows that there’s not enough room in the echo chamber for all Republicans either.
Obama was foolish enough to double down on Afghanistan and drag out a costly and unwinnable war, now to continue the blackjack reference Romney wants to split his fives. The choice between Obama and Romney becomes between dumb and dumber.
I suspect Romney may make some vague proclamation about leaving the current overall plan in place without a firm end date. That would be in keeping with his wimpy strategy so far.
Even if Romney makes a position statement about it, he’s likely to flip-flop within days anyway.
Who in the room thinks Mitt is a masochist? Why bring up Afg/Pak anymore than is necessary if it will cost you votes?
Should either Mitt or Obama bring up gun/magazine control?
Should Obama bring up the drought, price of corn or the ethanol mandate.
Will Obama bring up the subject of the security levels at consulates and embassies or whether it was only a film that caused the killings in Libya.
Of course not, these are politicians squeezing every dollar and every vote they can. You get the idea, don’t lead with your chin.
“Why bring up Afg/Pak anymore than is necessary if it will cost you votes?”
Because he has to say something. Its a war, he’s running for president, and we don’t really know what his position is on it these days. He can’t just sweep it under the rug and hope no one asks about it between now and election day.
And I couldn’t agree more with SL, they are literally making policy from political necessity. They are basing a decision with what to do with our soldiers not on realty or facts on the ground, but because they need to differentiate themselves from Obama on this issue. If Obama was for our troops staying indefinitely, I have ZERO doubt the GOP would be advocating for immediate withdrawal. They are disgusting. The second Lindsey “We don’t have enough angry white guys” Graham’s name came up anyone who has a brain should be running the opposite direction of whatever he said to do.
So…. Republicans want American citizens to die so Romney can become president. I had hoped America would have learned from the Bush administration and its war advisors… but oh…. the Bush neocon war advisors are also Romney’s advisors. I’m sure if Romney wins he and his advisors will be able to justify the killing of thousands of more American troops.
Yes, I think that what Romney’s advisors advise in this situation will be his policy. If it helps Romney win the presidency he’ll do it. After all the people who are fighting and dying are part of the 47%, who will never vote for Romney. (According to Romney.)
Slam, I guess my second paragraph points aren’t important to the candidates, even though they are to voters.
And did you ever think Mitt might agree with Obama on the war(s) so why focus on it.
Right you are StockBoy, not much in the way of actual “learning” seems to go on in the GOP anymore It seems their approach when confronted with learning moments is to ignore them and proceed with failed and/or debunked plans. As has been mentioned, this usually amounts to playing politics with peoples lives. Standard operating procedure for the craven and devoid of conscience.
“Learning?” How can one learn when one does not believe in facts and truth?
“Standard operating procedure for the craven and devoid of conscience.”
Who specifically, Z?
“How can one learn when one does not believe in facts and truth?
Who exactly, Rc?
Nice.
Afghanistan will never be what we want it to be. It will revert back to Taliban rule. It is inevitable, I believe “pushing a rope” is the right euphemism here.
The best we can do is teach them a big lesson to never let anyone who’s taken refuge in that country attack us again.
The only vague victory we’ve really had is we now understand that terrain and their culture and can get to the right target next time something happens. There is no other “victory” to be had there.
Withdrawal is perfectly acceptable at this point.
I find it odd that the GOP didn’t decide to differentiate Romney by saying lets get out of there sooner rather than later. I can only assume they didn’t because that would sooner or later connect with the point that the reason we can pull out before reaching the figment of “victory” over there is that OBL is dead and they really don’t want to bring that up if they can help it.