Will a Soldier’s Letter Change the Course of the Afghanistan War?
After being stung by criticism over their presidential nominee’s and their National Convention speakers’ lack of mention of the Afghanistan War and of the U.S. military, GOP hawks are now “urging Mitt Romney to separate himself from President Obama on Afghanistan and back an extended presence for U.S. troops in the country.”
While president Obama continues to deliver on his promise to end the Afghanistan War, while an overwhelming number of Americans support such a course and while even Mitt Romney has publicly, albeit reluctantly and “evolvingly”, agreed with the withdrawal plans, the GOP defense hawks apparently see a winning campaign strategy in prolonging a war — our nation’s longest already — that continues to cost our nation dearly in lives and treasure. A war where, if present trends continue, one American soldier will die every day we stay — many at the hands of the very Afghan troops and police we are trying to help — and a war on which we will continue to spend $65 billion a month.
Nonetheless, GOP hawks such as Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) apparently believe that “getting it right” in Afghanistan — whatever that means — is more important than the lives we are losing and the treasure we are squandering over there, and they are telling Romney that he needs to distance himself from “the Obama administration’s goal of pulling all American forces from Afghanistan by 2014.”
My personal belief is that such a war strategy — shamefully, at this point in time, more a campaign strategy — will backfire badly on Republicans and will be just one more nail in the coffin that is presently the Romney campaign.
But those are just my words.
Some words, however, can have tremendous impact.
Take the words in a letter written by U.S. Army Staff Sergeant Matthew Sitton, an Army Ranger who served with the 82nd Airborne Division, in Afghanistan.
Those words are having a significant impact for several reasons.
First, Sergeant Sitton, 26, while on his third tour of duty in Afghanistan was killed there by an IED on Aug. 2, less than two months after writing the letter.
Second, the e-mail letter was sent to U.S. Rep. C.W. Bill Young, (R-Fl), the senior Republican in the House of Representatives and the chairman of the influential House Appropriations Committee Defense Subcommittee.
Finally, Sitton’s letter pointing out the dangers and mistake of sending troops on foot patrols in fields that were known to be full of IEDs, where “every time they went into this field, someone lost a leg or an arm or their life,” pretty much predicted his own death.
In his letter to Young, Sitton said:
I feel myself and my soldiers are being put into unnecessary positions where harm and danger are imminent. There is no end state or purpose for the patrols given to us from our higher chain of command, only that we will be out for a certain time standard….We are walking around aimlessly through grape rows and compounds that are littered with explosives.
Sitton’s letter has contributed to a change of heart and a change in policy on the part of an 81-year-old Congressman who has consistently voted against troop withdrawals from Afghanistan “or even for setting a timetable for troop withdrawal.”
Last Monday, Young said during an interview with the Tampa Bay Times, “I think we should remove ourselves from Afghanistan as quickly as we can. I just think we’re killing kids that don’t need to die.”
As the longest serving Republican member of Congress and as chairman of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, Young’s change of heart should say something to the Romney campaign as it will carry some weight in Congress.
Last Wednesday Young said, “I have been very careful not to substitute my judgment for that of military leaders in the field managing the mission. I really believe that. But I also believe that we are not carrying out our commitment to protect our troops the best we can.”
“I don’t think we should put our soldiers at risk any longer,” he said. “The president wants to bring them out piecemeal by 2014. Logistically, I am not sure how long it would take, but I think we should start moving them out quickly and safely and leave a combat force that has authority to use whatever force they need.”
In addition to reversing his views on Afghanistan, Young is also looking into the IED danger. He has called for a hearing next week to “ask the agency in charge of protecting troops against IEDs to explain why so many are still dying and suffering horrific injuries despite an annual budget of nearly $3 billion.”
While Sitton’s letter has certainly been a catalyst in changing Young’s heart on Afghanistan, Young has always been an advocate for our wounded warriors and he frequently visits them at Veterans Administration hospitals to check on their care.
But Young is not the only Republican having second thoughts on Afghanistan.
Young told the Times that he has talked with his Republican colleagues in Congress about his new position on Afghanistan and he believes they feel the same way he does, “but they tend not to want to go public” about it.
According to the Stars and Stripes, Republican Congressman Tom Rooney said that after learning that the training of Afghans by coalition forces has been suspended, “I no longer know what our mission is anymore … right now I am on Bill Young’s side of this issue. I have never been before.”
It may thus be that the words of a fallen Army Ranger — a hero who leaves behind his wife, Sarah, and their 9-month-old son, Brodey — may have a greater impact on the course of a war than the words of a presidential candidate, of generals and, hopefully, of Senator Lindsey Graham.
Photo: U.S. Army
Share This
Related Posts
-
Military Working Dogs
Posted on Apr 18, 2013
-
NRA Liars and Congressional Cowards
Posted on Apr 18, 2013
-
The Invasion of Our Nation Goes Unpunished (Al-Iraq News, Iraq)
Posted on Apr 15, 2013
-
The Medal of Honor for a Soldier Who ‘Didn’t Fire a Gun…’ – Part II
Posted on Apr 13, 2013
Thank you Dorian.
Let’s all hope that more and more reasoned / reasonable minds start speaking out on this… And that the American People and voting public start listening and putting two and two together.
Lindsey Graham, John McCain and Joe Lieberman will go down in history along with all the other war mongers that had nothing at risk but their egos.
So there are a number of republicans that think we should be out of Afghanistan, but they won’t speak up about it because that’s not the party line? Am I reading that correct?
That’s exactly what Republican Young says, slamfu.
Why does this look more and more like Viet Nam? Johnson knew in 1965 that the war in Viet Nam could not be won but for political reasons he could not end it and thousands died for nothing including several of my friends and family.
(from Sgt Sitton)
I feel myself and my soldiers are being put into unnecessary positions where harm and danger are imminent.
Instead of spinning it as a positive for Obama, this statement ought to harm the president who is putting the troops in these situations right now and actually made things worse by escalating the war. While true, saying Romney will be even worse in this regard is faint praise.
Good question, Ron, and I think you answered it yourself: Politics.
Except, in my opinion, this particular war started apolitically, but is now 90 percent so.
.
I do not believe that the soldier who wrote this had any “positive spin” for Obama in mind.
I can not speak for all who have quoted this soldier’s words, including the Republican chairman of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee,but I doubt that they were using his words for “positive spin” for Obama.
As far as this author is concerned, I can assure you that I would not use a dead soldier’s words for such.
There is no “positive spin” whatsoever in this tragic war. But thanks for reading.
I read your comment “While president Obama continues to deliver on his promise to end the Afghanistan War” as positive spin, DDW. Sitton’s letter is an indictment of the CIC that put him in Afghanistan for the third time. I don’t share the view that Obama taking six years to get us out of Afghanistan after escalating the war is something to brag about.
Dorian, it is politics but what I don’t understand is why. Two thirds of Americans want us out of Afghanistan last year not in 2014. There was never that much opposition to the war in Vietnam. And yes I’m old enough to remember.
DG:
I am not “spinning,” I am not bragging.
If you would take the time to go back to as long as I have been writing at TMV, you may notice that while I supported our initial involvement in Afghanistan — under a Republican president, mind you — I have consistently been for a safe, honorable and speedy withdrawal from that war, especially after the killing of OBL.
Faced with the choice of Republicans wanting to continue that war indefinitely and an Obama withdrawal date of 2014, I favor the latter.
If you call that spinning and bragging, then so be it.
Ron:
I also did not favor the “surge,” I also would like for our troops to start leaving Afghanistan in an orderly manner starting yesterday.
BTW, I am also old enough to remember the Vietnam War. I served during that era, volunteered for Vietnam and naively supported that war. But that is another story for another day.
Have to go now.
It seems the Republican beltway promoters (liars?) and their uninformed sycophants can’t remember why President Obama accepted such a distant final withdrawal date:
… Fast forward a year plus and the same people are now pretending that they always wanted the troops out of Afghanistan ASAP, and they would be dammit if it wasn’t for President Obama forcing them to stay longer than they should.
These Republicans Pundits really believe that in the ‘Internet Age’ people won’t remember who said what a year ago… I’d disagree but after reading some of the comments written by Romney supporters it seems that some of them don’t.
Required reading for the Army War College is Sun Tsu’s, “The Art of War”. The most important lesson in it has nothing to do with any army officer: War is for the necessary survival of the state.
That rule, the most important one, must be embraced by those who dictate when, where, and for how long the country goes to war.
Any military hostility undertaken for any reason other than the survival of the country is morally and tactically wrong. That has been true for at least 2500 years (time when the book was written), and almost certainly longer than that. What is more, Americans do not like participating in wars of conquest. We don’t have it in us to murder and humiliate the endogenous people we would be controlling. We have a very strong Christian-themed ethic: do good to your enemies. Thus, in “The Mouse That Roared” the author depicts the USA as the best country to attack and lose a war to–because they will spend billions to rehabilitate you!
When we went into Afghanistan, we had a reason to do so–that’s where our enemies were. Shortly after we went in, we chased all of our declared (by them) enemies out of the place. Many went to Pakistan. We did not pursue them. Why not? Because the neocons who got us into the war had never fought the war in Vietnam and thus did not learn a very costly lesson: pursue your enemies wherever they are. The Johnson Adm. took many years to learn this. The Nixon Adm. also spent many years and lots of blood learning this lesson. The Bush Adm. never learned this lesson. The Obama Adm. took some time to learn, but then began using drone aircraft to attack our enemies.
If the sole reason for staying in Afghanistan is to have a base from which to launch our drones, then I believe that we need a better plan. I can see no other reason to remain there, so I believe we need a better plan. Meanwhile, using drone aircraft in Pakistan and then seeing the endogenous people decry our use of such weapons to eliminate enemies that they are either incapable or unwilling to eliminate–well, that needs to be addressed as well.
One thing I would LOVE to know: given all the friends that the GOP had/has on Madison avenue, why didn’t they pursue a plan of ‘winning hearts and minds’ via propaganda and advertising?
The drones are important, but I believe we can fly those things out of a trailer in based in Kansas. We do not need a large presence in Afghanistan to execute the war on extremists. Smaller, but well-protected, special forces bases could manage the logistics.
Thanks for the “reminder,” Steve, it is much needed it seems.
RC and SL: If continued pursuit in Afghanistan/region of those who can harm our interests/our people is indeed vital to our national security, I agree that drones is the way to go.
I was also for the Afghan war, and even the surge at the time it was launched. But it was all predicated on the fact we were there to stamp out those who launched the 9/11 attacks and specifically to kill Bin Laden. I myself had no illusions, hopes or cares about the people of Afghanistan being interested in becoming a modern American style democracy with a bill of rights. After OBL was dead, we should be bringing ourselves home ASAP. And as on so many issues, I think Obama has not done enough along these lines. But then I look across the aisle and look at the alternative, Romney, who is now towing the party line about staying indefinitely for some reason. Thanks Mittens for giving me yet another reason to not vote for you.
Thank you, Dorian, for this excellent post.
It makes me a bit ill to think of the GOP elders — who now know that Romney cannot win on domestic policy, is losing the argument about economics, is losing on social issues, and has utterly failed to capture the hearts of the US people — are now looking to drum up support by taking a hard line on an endless war, looking to extend the death wrought on our troops in order to have one thing (anything) that could have a positive spin for Romney. As was noted above, 2/3 of the population thinks we need out of Afghanistan, so I’m not sure why they think this would be a positive for Romney. We all know Romney’s a disaster in foreign policy anyway, so perhaps doubly so. I don’t think it will work, but it’s pretty disgusting that they are trying that strategy.
It’s good to hear that Young was swayed by the letter he received. I do have a feeling that it was kind of a “final straw” situation, as stories like this young soldier’s have been around for 10 years now. Either way, I’m glad he’s able to vocalize his convictions now, whatever the reason.
Well said, slamfu and spot-on roro
Added: “spot -on,” not for the compliment, but rather for the insight.
(The compliment is appreciated, too)
The war drums are beating for a round with Iran,
the drums were beating for lack of “action” toward the situation in Syria,
the drums beat before and after the beginning of withdrawal of troops from Iraq and that gosh-awful mess about “timetables” flying around during GBWs term,
Heck, the last election the war drums were beating toward Georgia’s skittle with Russia, remember the Sarah Palin “don’t even blink” comment?
War drums beat as Romney reminds us that Russia is the greatest threat to the US, when he’s not roping China, (or offending the British.)
There is seldom a time when the GOP isn’t beating the war drums.
Exception: They didn’t beat very loudly with Libya, only a couple of snare hits with Osama’s killing. The only bumper sticker I still see around these parts are the “We Got Him” ones referring to Saddam Hussein.
I’ve been reading David Sanger’s interesting book : “Confront and Conceal”-which seems multi-sourced and probably accurate.
Sanger says Obama is inclined to view Afghanistan as “close enough for government work” (not Sanger’s terminology), and would like nothing better than to get the hell out of there—but there is incredible pressure from many sides on this.There is also the problem of Pakistan.
Our off-and-on again ally now has smaller nukes —which it keeps FULLY ARMED-and which it moves around in that fashion. It also has an intelligence service that is protective of the Taliban (and other extremists-some of which it subsidizes)-viewing the radicals as a defense against India.
From what I’m reading, it is a complex problem: some inherited; some piled up by the present administration—none of it admitting to glib solution !
“From what I’m reading, it is a complex problem: some inherited; some piled up by the present administration—none of it admitting to glib solution !”
Amen, genefinneran. And it’s complicated, too.
Thanks
A lot of truth in what you’re saying, JeffP — and some of it forgotten, such as “Georgia’s skittle with Russia,.”
Heck, if McCain and Palin had had their way, we would still be in the “other” Georgia, too.
I keep reading about what a problem Pakistan is. What I’m not reading is a believable plan to fix that problem, least of all from Tweedledee or Tweedledum. Just get the hell out.