Image via Wikipedia
How frustrating Obama's "leadership" must be to the military. One would think the President would at least try to give the illusion of being strong and decisive. Apparently the military has a lot of opinion it's giving about Obama's commandeering of the war, but fear of reprisal from the White House only allows them to speak anonymously with exception of Secretary Gates.
This is the type of confusing language coming from the White House and the news wires that report it: " WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama has not yet determined whether he will make a decision on sending more troops to Afghanistan before the November 7 election runoff, a US official said Tuesday." Reuters reports that "Meetings among his (Obama's) senior advisers will continue next week. The debate has exposed divisions over what to do next."
Reuters also reports McCrystal as giving Obama this advice: "the option of sending more than the 40,000 additional troops -- up to 80,000 according to some sources -- and has described the option of sending no additional troops as "high risk." McChrystal has spoken in grave tones about Afghanistan, warning that success in the campaign against the Taliban could not be taken for granted."
Who is the biggest dissenter to McChrystal's plan? Joe Biden. Biden has served on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for many years and has Rahm Emanuel's agreement. Rahm is concerned that Afghanistan will be a U.S. quagmire and distract from Obama's successful conclusion of Health-Care reform. Media talk seems to imply that Hillary Clinton supports Gates thinking on Afghanistan. Meanwhile, casualties are high among our troops.
America will at least lose a moral victory if we retreat from Afghanistan. Yet when our President is so consumed with political play, it would do our troops a deserved service not to be involved in Afghanistan.