UPDATED: Does Barack Obama Want to Lose the Afghan War?

Share

UPDATED AND BUMPED: Flopping Aces has information about Obama’s “rules of engagement” and how his requirements are getting our soldiers killed.

“...We walked into a trap, a killing zone of relentless gunfire and rocket barrages from Afghan insurgents hidden in the mountainsides and in a fortress-like village where women and children were replenishing their ammunition. “We will do to you what we did to the Russians,” the insurgent’s leader boasted over the radio, referring to the failure of Soviet troops to capture Ganjgal during the 1979-89 Soviet occupation. Dashing from boulder to boulder, diving into trenches and ducking behind stone walls as the insurgents maneuvered to outflank us, we waited more than an hour for U.S. helicopters to arrive, despite earlier assurances that air cover would be five minutes away. U.S. commanders, citing new rules to avoid civilian casualties, rejected repeated calls to unleash artillery rounds at attackers dug into the slopes and tree lines — despite being told repeatedly that they weren’t near the village. “We are pinned down. We are running low on ammo. We have no air. We’ve lost today,” Marine Maj. Kevin Williams, 37, said through his translator to his Afghan counterpart, responding to the latter’s repeated demands for helicopters...”

Does Obama want to lose the war in Afghanistan?  He certainly is not listening to people like John McCain, Lindsey, or Joe Lieberman.  Lindsey spent some time in Afghanistan this month, in the reserves.  He gave a talk in Clemson.

“...Things have gone backwards in Afghanistan.” Graham said in a talk to the Clemson Rotary Club Monday.

He predicted more fighting and casualties until more troops arrive.

“The Taliban have come back because the government has failed to serve the people,” the Seneca Republican told the crowd of more than 100 people.

Graham plans to ask President Barack Obama to send more troops and resources tied to requirements that the Afghan government to clean up “rampant” corruption, Graham said.

“We’ve given them a pass and they need to start producing for their people,” Graham told The Greenville News in an interview after the meeting.

Graham spent a week with a Congressional delegation in Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Afghanistan and Libya with senators Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., John McCain, R-Az., Susan Collins, R-Maine.  Then he spent eight days in uniform as “Col. Graham” in Afghanistan….”

The rest of Lindsey’s tale can be found from a publication in Guam.  It sure isn’t being covered in this country.  Lindsey tells the story of 59 year old retired US Army SGT Jose S. N. Cristomo, who after 4 tours in Vietnam, volunteered for service in Afthanistan.  While Lindsey was in theater, Cristomo was killed while on a volunteer mission.

“…Whatever fueled Crisostomo’s contagious ability to bring people together was not quelled by four tours in Vietnam, nor even by the improvised explosive device that took Crisostomo from us on August 18, 2009, because his spirit lives on through the inspired actions of Senator Lindsey Graham. The silver lining in this story is that if Crisostomo and Graham had not crossed paths Graham may not have been as inspired to push a request for more troops and resources to bolster what evidently appears to be a protracted venture in Afghanistan.

With Guam’s renowned U.S. patriotism, loyalty to America at all costs, and consistently high rates of enlistment and casualty, perhaps it should come as little surprise that a spirited Chamorro should rise to the occasion and put fire in the belly of a fellow officer to call for more troops and supplies to rally the present forces to accomplish the democratic goals that America sought to establish there in the first place….”

Lindsey In Afghanistan in January, 2009
Lindsey In Afghanistan in January, 2009

George W. Bush had Iran flanked by troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.  When he left office we were winning both wars.  With Barack Obama marginally in charge, we’re losing Afghanistan and there are problems in Iraq.

“…All of the attention of the US military involvement in Afghanistan is focused on Al Qaeda and the Taliban in the eastern and southern parts of Afghanistan. We’re adding tens of thousands of soldiers there.

Critics of our policies, most recently George Will, discuss our involvement in Afghanistan only from the perspectives of nation building and rooting out terrorists who are dangerous to us.

Nobody mentions the Iran connection. Is this the elephant in the room?

We now have or will soon have 68,000 US troops in the country to the east of Iran. We have 131,000 US troops in the country, Iraq, to the west of Iran. Hmm….”

Lindsey is just back from Afghanistan doing a reserve stint.  He has plenty to say about the situation there.

“…Just back from a trip to Afghanistan, he said he supports adding more troops to the war there.

“It’s possible to turn it around,” he said.

U.S. military leaders have been reviewing needs for success in Afghanistan, which the United States invaded after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington. Graham, who visited the country last week with several other senators, including Republican presidential candidate John McCain, said his firsthand experience showed young military personnel working 16- to 20-hour days to meet demands.

“We are wearing these young men and women out,” Graham said. “The situation there is deteriorating.”

The Taliban has been resurgent because of major corruption in the Afghanistan government and the fact that the government of President Hamid Karzai “failed to deliver basic services to the people,” Graham said. He also said the U.S. needs to require measurements of progress from Afghanistan, which it has not done in the past.

Although the country is one of the poorest in the world, Graham said, it is strategically important because of its location in the Middle East.

“If we can pull it off, we have a chance to change the Middle East for the better,” Graham said.

“It’s not Vietnam. It’s not Iraq. It’s not anything other than a test of wills” between the Taliban and the Americans, he said.

He said he expected resistance to a call for more troops, but would work in the Senate to support an increase if the president backed it.

Iraq, he said, is “a changed country,” and threatens Iran because it is shifting toward democracy.

“Iran wants democracy in Iraq like it wants a hole in the head,” Graham said.

Michael Yon thinks the “West” is losing the Afghan War.  Let’s be blunt here.  We’re not talking about the “West”, we are talking about the vast and pathetic incompetence and politically correct pandering of both Barack Obama and Gordon Brown.  Neither man has the anatomy that it will take to defeat Al Qaeda and retake a war we’d almost won.

Yon writes:

“…Meanwhile, allies and Americans are asking themselves why we are here. Some are saying that Al Qaeda is still here or is waiting in the wings to return to its home. Yet Afghanistan was never Al Qaeda’s permanent home to begin with. Al Qaeda was just renting a little space here, just as it was renting space in places like Germany and Florida.

We must face reality: Our reasons for continuing are not the reasons we came for. We are fighting a different war now than the one that began in 2001. Today’s war is about social re-engineering. Given the horrible history of Afghanistan, and the fact that we already are here, the cause is worthy and worthwhile….”

Democrats are trying to find a way to sneak out of Afghanistan, with some conservatives like George Will helping them.  On Face the Nation Sunday, Carl Levin was trying to figure out how to lose the war.  Lindsey went for the juggular.

“…Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham admitted “I am one Republican that would support more troops in Afghanistan … I would be shocked if more troops are not requested by our commanders.”

The South Carolinian said he disagreed with President Obama’s assertion during last year’s presidential campaign that Afghanistan was the central battle in the War on Terror. Now, he said, that Iraq is more stable he agrees with the president’s assessment.

Graham, who also serves on the Armed Services Committee, said, “My message to my Democratic colleagues is: We made mistakes in Iraq, let’s not Rumsfeld Afghanistan.”

“Let’s not do this thing on the cheap,” he said.

By “Rumsfeld[ing],” Graham explained that he meant in Iraq there were not enough American troops on the ground to control the population. “Don’t resist the fact that we are going to need more [troops].”…”

Now, there’s the problem, or what annoys The Pink Flamingo.  Most conservatives have been ignoring the Afghan story for awhile.  You rarely read about it on conservative blogs.  Part of the problem is the ongoing uncivil war certain conservatives are waging on those they consider RINOs.  In fact, the uncivil conservative war against anyone who is not “pure” is getting in the way of our war on terror.  It isn’t that conservatives are anti-war.  The far right ideologues are against anyone who isn’t “pure”.  It doesn’t matter if they have a 90% ACU rating.  That’s not “pure’, ergo, anything someone like Lindsey might say about the Afghan war is mote.  He is not pure and must be destroyed.

The same people who ignore what Lindsey or John McCain is doing are now all gun-ho because Conservatives for Palin has a piece about Palin doing the very right thing and signing onto a letter to Obama.  It’s a great thing because she is being listed as a “leader” and not the chopped liver loser the Dems would have you think she is.  What gets me mad, though, is the same people who are appaluding her for doing this, do not hesistate to denigrate Lindsey.  If SP’s PAC gave money to Lindsey, she obviously approves of him.  Does that mean SP is wrong because she approves of Lindsey.

Share