Half-Pregnant
Obama rules out any big reduction in forces in Afghanistan but won’t say if he’s on board for the big win, as they used to say. NYT:
WASHINGTON — President Obama told Congressional leaders on Tuesday that he would not substantially reduce American forces in Afghanistan or shift the mission to just hunting terrorists there, but he indicated that he remained undecided about the major troop buildup proposed by his commanding general.
Meeting with leaders from both parties at the White House, Mr. Obama seemed to be searching for some sort of middle ground, saying he wanted to “dispense with the straw man argument that this is about either doubling down or leaving Afghanistan,” as White House officials later described his remarks.
But as the war approached its eight-year anniversary on Wednesday, the session underscored the perilous crosscurrents awaiting Mr. Obama. While some Democrats said they would support whatever he decided, others challenged him about sending more troops. And Republicans pressed him to order the escalation without delay, leading to a pointed exchange between the president and Senator John McCain of Arizona, his Republican opponent from last year’s election.
Mr. McCain told the president that “time is not on our side.” He added, “This should not be a leisurely process,” according to several people in the room.
A few minutes later, Mr. Obama replied, “John, I can assure you this won’t be leisurely,” according to several attendees. “No one feels more urgency to get this right than I do.”
So it sounds like he wants to split the baby. Apparently the Biden plan doesn’t call for cutting the 68,000 already there, just for leaving them fighting in place, undermanned for the job in the view of the generals, while stepping up attacks in Afghanistan. Sounds like a bit of a slow, go-nowhere bleed.
A further thought on yesterday’s remarkable news yesterday that the Democratic leadership was actually going to support a wartime president’s decision, something new and different for them in recent years… and apparently not a unanimous stance, according to this NYT report. They must figure, as with Bush in 2003, he’ll own it. They can always denounce it later.
Speaking of taking responsibility, here’s a positive sign of maturity on the part of the commander-in-chief:
And in the final moments of the meeting, Mr. Obama sought to put to rest suspicions of friction with General McChrystal. “I’m the one who hired him,” Mr. Obama said, according to participants. “I put him there to give me a frank assessment.”
Meanwhile, here’s some same-old same-old:
Senator John Kerry, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said after the meeting that “it would be irresponsible” to send more troops until it became clear “what is possible in Afghanistan.”
I’m not sure exactly what that means. Wait more? Figure out if you can win before you try to? Send McChrystal back to do another assessment? See what the next round of polls say? Let me rephrase that. I know exactly what it means. The senior senator from Massachusetts is the same unreliable, gutless mountebank he always was. Count on him to be the first to bolt when the going gets ugly, leading the Democratic retreat if Obama does actually commit to fighting this war now, on this ground.
OK, he’s consulted. He’s gotten the nod. Now, all he needs to do is do something. Like a real president.*
Maguire: The elusive central front in the War on Terrorism. And the search for middle ground as the story of O’s presidency. How about winning?
Riehl: Choosing politics over soldiers’ lives.
Weekly Standard: “General Biden.” Does the Biden plan actually exist on paper? At least when he (stupidly) advocated splitting Iraq into three pieces, he wrote an article about it. Goldfarb opines that the White House has killed the counter-terrorism option by labeling it the Biden Plan. I wouldn’t be so sure, based on the above. Biden looks to be emerging as chief baby-splitter. Slapping his name on it will make him a good fallguy, too. Obama’s Cheney. Which makes me miss the real Dick Cheney even more.
Lowry at NRO’s The Corner on splitting the difference: “… this looks wise only to a political consultant. Waging a war on the cheap is almost always more expensive in the long run, as we learned in Iraq. McCain is right.”
Marbury with a vote for “muddling through.”
Ed at HotAir thinks O will face resistance in Congress to doing the right thing, and going with McChrystal. I think it’s charitable to think he is thinking of doing the right thing.
Gateway: Hell freezes over. Code Pink rethinks their call for an Afghan pullout.
In other business, Surber: Public opinion says, “Bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran …”
* You know. A real president. One who recognizes that there are some things bigger than his own ambitions, image and political agenda, and maybe even recognizes that his ambitions, image and political agenda depend on recognizing that.
In compliance with FTC regs regarding blogger conflict of interest, I hereby disclose that I can’t believe, even after all these years, this is the best we can do for leadership in this country.
(Care to comment? Use the “contact” link to assure me you are a real human being interested in commenting on the topics at hand. Include your preferred screenname and temporary password. Lefty Kumbayah singers, moderate handwringers, meanspirited rightwingers all welcome. This is a free speech zone as long as you keep it clean and make an effort to be accurate.)
Topics: Afghanistan, Obama, pols
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 10:00 am Comments (7) on Wednesday, October 7, 2009
7 Responses to “Half-Pregnant”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
October 7th, 2009 at 10:35 am
“I can’t believe, even after all these years, this is the best we can do for leadership in this country.” I’m with you on this. But what about the “followship?” All we have are twits in the Congress.
October 7th, 2009 at 11:23 am
So he’s decided not to make a decision. How Obama.
October 7th, 2009 at 11:26 am
“I can’t believe, even after all these years, this is the best we can do for leadership in this country.”
I can, and I suspect so can you.
October 7th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
One who recognizes that there are some things bigger than his own ambitions, image and political agenda, and maybe even recognizes that his ambitions, image and political agenda depend on recognizing that.
You assume that President Ego-Won is capable of this much maturity. I’m not at all sure he is.
October 7th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
[...] Jules Crittenden [...]
October 7th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
[...] President Obama is showing followership, not leadership. Jules Crittenden called it half pregnant. [...]
October 13th, 2009 at 9:17 am
[...] Meanwhile, the generals that all of the troops trust and that are the foremost experts in counterterrorism and counterinsurgency and that Americans all want Obama to listen to (except now, the Dems), are being ignored and brushed aside – as they’re calling for winning the war, which is something Obama’s not certain he wants to do. [...]