« | »

Lawmakers Dither Over Afghan Decision

From the memory deficient Associated Press:

Lawmakers split on timing of Afghan decision

By Matthew Lee, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON – Top lawmakers sparred Sunday over the timing of President Barack Obama’s decision on how to move ahead in Afghanistan, with Republicans urging a quick move to boost troop levels and Democrats counseling patience.

In partisan displays, senators generally agreed on the need to support whatever Afghan government emerges from a Nov. 7 run-off election between President Hamid Karzai and challenger Abdullah Abdullah. But they differed on exactly how to do that and when.

Republicans said Obama must sign off soon on a recommendation from the top commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, to substantially increase the number of American troops there by 40,000. Democrats warned against a hasty decision on any increase…

None of the Republicans would second a claim made last week by former Vice President Dick Cheney that Obama is "dithering" in making a decision, but they agreed that continued delay would endanger the 68,000 U.S. soldiers now on the ground in Afghanistan.

"I would never want to call my president dithering," Hatch said. He stressed, though, that "they need these troops, there is no question about it. We’re exposing them without the proper help that they have just got to have. … I think it’s a mistake."

Distancing himself from Cheney, McCain also said he "wouldn’t use that language." But, he added, "The sooner we implement the strategy the more we will able to ensure their (troops’) safety."

Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, lashed out at Cheney’s criticism, which came in a speech on Wednesday while accepting an award from a conservative national security group.

"I thought that comments of the former vice president were totally out of bounds," said Levin, D-Mich. "I don’t think he has any credibility left with the American people in any event. But I think it is really wrong. … The president needs to make the right decision." …

Using the Afghan elections as an excuse to delay the decision on sending more troops is simply preposterous.

As the article notes, everyone claims to agree that the US needs to support whatever Afghan government emerges from a Nov. 7 run-off election. So what do the Afghan elections have to do with this decision?

Are we trying to tell Afghanistan that we will not support them if they don’t vote for the party we want? We seem to recall Mr. Obama lecturing us about how the US had to stop imposing its values on other countries. 

No, the delay will serve no purpose, except to strengthen the Taliban. Which is probably why we are having the delay.

Our politicians and media masters are arguing over whether it was rude to accuse Mr. Obama of “dithering” while are soldiers are at risk.

It is surreal.

This article was posted by Steve on Sunday, October 25th, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

17 Responses to “Lawmakers Dither Over Afghan Decision”

  1. MinnesotaRush says:

    Maybe they’d prefer BLITHERING (as in BLITHERING IDIOT) versus dithering, huh.

    Of course, that’d be racist. Guess I am than. The blithering idiot!

    • Liberals Demise says:

      “Diddle Dicking” is more like it.
      All I’ve seen from the dingle”Barry” cadre is a ‘whole lotta’ pocket pool and bending over to do the dog sniffing routine.

      Pathetic prez ….for sure!!

  2. proreason says:

    “No, the delay will serve no purpose, except to strengthen the Taliban. Which is probably why we are having the delay.”

    It could be about the Health Scare as well.

    The boy king doesn’t want to risk offending any group until he he formally gets to destroy the country through the Health Care scam.

    And we know how touchy the usually calm hard-core leftists are about their long held lust to finally rob the producers in the country by quadrupling their health care costs.

  3. Rusty Shackleford says:

    “I would never want to call my president dithering,” Hatch said
    McCain also said he “wouldn’t use that language.”
    “I thought that comments of the former vice president were totally out of bounds,” said Levin

    Answer: Because they all fear being called a racist by the Al & Jesse Show. Perhaps in McCain’s case though, it stems from the ideology that he still wants to be seen as “reaching across the aisle” (so they can smack him down again).

    These Casper Milquetoast representatives have “phone cajones”. That is, they can talk tough on the phone but when confronted with reality, they cave.

  4. Petronius says:

    We forget that we elected a community organizer.

    So when our President tackles challenges beyond his area of competence, he needs a little extra time. After all, he is now the Commander-in-Chief. With all the weight of that awesome responsibility resting on his glistening pectorals.

    And in making these tough military decisions, we don’t want him to waste time listening to his military commanders. Listening is vastly overrated as a means of gathering information.

    But are you sure we haven’t surrendered yet? Or are we really still in our deliberation-and-foot-dragging mode? And what about our apology strategy?! What is our exit strategy?!

    There are so many factors to consider.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      Petro, I am satisfied to simply hang him on the words he uttered in April: “I don’t want to run car companies. I don’t want to run banks. I have two wars to run. Believe me, I have plenty to do.”

      May answer, “So run them, then.”

      But as is blatantly obvious to even the most casual observer, he cannot. As you so clearly stated, he doesn’t know how. And, he is of a beyond-Johnsonian arrogance to allow any generals to tell him what to do. But of course, that hinges on the fact that the generals don’t know(nor care)how to preserve the boy’s political career which started and will remain, in the toilet.

      Forrest Gump was credited with “Stupid is as stupid does” but it is clearly the mantra that will follow the boy all of his days.

    • proreason says:

      General Petraeus and the other military minions are responsible for the tactics.

      The Moron is responsible for the strategy….as he told us clearly in the campaign.

      And now it is clear what the strategy is.

      Losing to the Taliban while destroying America.

  5. Gladius et Scutum says:

    I see things differently than all of the above posters. Obama/Pelosi consistently, persistently, demonstrate that they give not a wit about the 2010 or 2012 elections. They are interested only in shoring up their (20 – 30%) left-wing base. Why is that?

    • proreason says:

      Pelosi will be elected no matter what.

      The speculation is that Obamy cares more about implementing his facist ideology than he cares about reelection. And as the greatest ego to appear on Earth in 100 years, he probably can’t imagine being defeated.

      But the even more cynical reason is that they believe Health Care and Cap and Tax are steps that cannot be reversed, and that will guarantee that the criminals will have such control of our lives by 2012 that they can never be deposed.

      Remember, Obamy and Pelosi are just the front con artists. The people pulling their strings don’t need to be reelected because they weren’t elected in the first place.

  6. canary says:

    Rusty, you highlighted the 2 points I picked up. I am growing more and more disgusted with Republicans acting like door mats. The Demo’s have set the bar as far as calling Republicans murderers, extremists, astro-turf, etc. and they can do more to speak out stronger , without lowering themselves to the level to the renegades running the country.

    • canary says:

      correction, the Republicans can do more….edit not working

    • canary says:

      Democrat Senator Carl Levin wouldn’t dare complain about the CZARs and communist lover Obamas, but then the Republicans aren’t complaining either. I realise our Republican leaders are working 24/7 since commi Obama was elected, but they could save some spinning their wheels by acting like Americans.

  7. canary says:

    AP: US: 14 Americans killed in 2 helicopter crashes
    By Heidi Vogt Oct 26 2009

    KABUL – The first crash, a chopper went down in the west of the country after leaving the scene of a firefight with insurgents, killing 10 Americans — seven troops and three civilians working for the government.

    Eleven American troops, one U.S. civilian and 14 Afghans were also injured.

    In a separate incident in the south, two other U.S. choppers collided while in flight, killing four American troops and wounding two more, the military said.

    Taliban spokesman Qari Yusuf Ahmedi claimed Taliban fighters shot down a helicopter in northwest Badghis province’s Darabam district.

    U.S. forces also reported the death of two other American troops a day earlier: one in a bomb attack in the east, and another who died of wounds sustained in an insurgent attack in the same region.

    The deaths bring to at least 46 the number of U.S. troops who have been killed in October.

    This has been the deadliest year for international and U.S. forces since the 2001 invasion to oust the Taliban. Fighting spiked around the presidential vote in August, and 51 U.S. soldiers died that month

    month, insurgents killed eight American troops in an attack on a pair of isolated U.S. outposts in the eastern village of Kamdesh near the Pakistan border.

    The joint force had “searched a suspected compound believed to harbor insurgents conducting activities related to narcotics trafficking in western Afghanistan,” NATO said

    hundreds of stone-throwing university students angered over the alleged desecration of Islam’s holy book, the Quran, by U.S. troops during an operation two weeks ago in Wardak province.

    U.S. and Afghan authorities have denied any such desecration and insist that the Taliban are spreading the rumor to stir up public anger.

    On Sunday, the students in the capital burned Obama in effigy and chanted slogans such as “down with Americans, down with Israel”

    Press Writers Rahim Faiez, Todd Pitman and Robert H. Reid contributed to this report from Kabul; Noor Khan reported from Kandahar.

    I’d like to see a pic of the burning of the Obama effigy

  8. Yarddog1 says:

    It is apparent that Obomazazi is simply playing politics with the lives of American soldiers.

    Hence, he and his “advisors” and anyone else in the Congress of Fools are murderers.

    While young men and women die, Washington’s “elite” parties like the French Aristocracy and Caligula rolled into one.

    The “little people” are growing a bit tired of this selfish and incompetent behavior.

  9. ptat says:

    It has been suggested that if Obama does the right thing for Afghanistan (i.e., sends in more troops), it will cause many Democrats to lose in November. So he is stalling until after the election. Could he possibly be so evil as to risk the lives of our soldiers for political reasons?! I have a huge problem with this and can only hope it ain’t so.

  10. wardmama4 says:

    ptat that and Obama needs to figure out how to get the heck out of Afghanistan so that he won’t have to fight muslims. While many Americans can see and agree on leaving Iraq – Afghanistan is not the same issue. So Obama needs to figure out exactly how to withdraw without losing his ‘bi-partisan’ support.

    The joke is that now that guilty white elitists voted for him – they don’t have to feel guilty anymore and will turn on him just as all liberals turn on anyone they don’t need anymore.

    The most horrible thing is that in March – Obama did state that he was going to fight in Afghanistan – and that here now in October – he is indeed ‘dithering’ about exactly what to do and how to do it – while American Armed Forces die while he parties and makes no Command decision. All for political expediency and pandering to base people – who will turn on him in a second if he does the wrong thing.

    And newsflash to the spineless, gutless GOP – your refusal to call a lousy CINC a lousy CINC or to call un-Constitutional legislation un-Constitutional or to call a lie a lie – is exactly why you lost in 2008 and we are in this position. Cheney might have said dithering – I have a better word for it – COWARDICE.

  11. Georgfelis says:

    Lawmakers Dither Over Calling It Dithering.

    Thats about right.

    Plus I hate to defend McCain, but whenever a reporter sticks a microphone under your nose and asks you if you agree to what somebody else said (fill in statement here), any intelligent person will distance themselves from the quote, and then state their own opinion on the event in question. We may justly critize McCain for a great number of things, but he’s a crafty geezer, and has been mousetrapped by reporters before, and now recognizes the same trapped cheeze that our POTUS just blunders into.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »