.
A presidential campaign waged on discussions about the Afghan War favors President Obama. Most people won't like the Hawks that have always failed in their predictions of easy Victory.
"Obama will get plenty of slack cut for whatever he decides — after all, the death of bin Laden is powering the decision —."
"The Republicans will not be able to develop a credible and unified critique of Obama's policies in Afghanistan."
Forum of POLITICO.COM "The Arena" - On Afghanistan
**********************************
Rep. Barbara Lee Member of Congress (D-Calif.) :
(Interview with POLITICO's Erika Lovley)
This is not a significant or visible reduction. The American people are war weary. When you look at the number of troops there, you see there is no military solution in Afghanistan. The surge was 30,000 troops and we need at least 20,000 to come home quickly.
I think the American people are going to listen carefully for what the president will say. The American people recognize that we have many challenges here at home. We can no longer spend $100 billion on a war that has no military solution.
******************************
Rep. Joe Walsh Congressman, (R-Ill.) :
Once again the president refuses to take a stance and lead. Instead, he tries to please all sides. That’s not leadership. We should be drawing down troops much faster, without announcing to the world and our enemies what we’re doing.
******************************
Rep. John Garamendi Congressman (D-Calif.) :
(Interview with POLITICO's Erika Lovley)
The critical question is ‘what is the mission?’ If the mission is nation building, we’re going to need a lot of troops for many years to do that. I want to hear the president say that the successful elimination of bin Ladin gives us the opportunity to change our mission in Afghanistan from nation building to counterterrorism.
We will focus like a laser on terrorists wherever they are in the world. To accomplish that, I’d like to hear the president say we will enter into serious negotiations with all of the relevant parties and will reduce our troops to a level that is not more than 10,000 at the end of 2013. Those would mainly be special forces. This is a strategy that cannot be won politically in Afghanistan. It’s a strategy that’s not politically feasible.
************************
Rep. Dennis Cardoza Member of Congress (D-Calif.) :
(Interview with POLITICO's Erika Lovley)
Well, I think that today the efforts have been a success. We’ve caught 20 of the 30 biggest targets that we set out to capture. But I think it's time to start policing the streets of American and quit policing streets of Kabul. We’re laying off police officers in every city and town. The economy is in bad shape. It’s time to reinvest in America. I don’t think the president is doing enough. I don’t think anyone is particularly fond of this strategy. The American people are very tired of this conflict.
*****************************
Aaron David Miller Former State Department official; Wilson Center scholar; author :
.................
Having never set foot in Afghanistan with not a single military credential to back up my case, I just don't believe them. we're leaving; that much is clear; and we should; we've paid a terrible price for our "success" in American lives, money and credibility.
Our friends and enemies have known for some time we're leaving. We don't have the long windedness capable of achieving the kind of hurting stalemate that might actually persuade Taliban to participate in the kind of Afghanistan we want to see; we don't have the leverage over Karzai to produce good governance and we don't have an answer to the Pakistan problem. Taliban, Karzai and the Pakistanis -- both Taliban and ISI - do have the staying power; it's their neighborhood.
And so tonight - President Obama's night - will be about numbers; about creating a decent interval for withdrawal, and about finding a rationalization to get out of a war - now the longest in American history fought by less than 1% of our nation that will not offer America victory. Bin Laden is dead; but so is any hope that America will look back on its decade in the great game and say it was worth the terrible price we've paid.
**************************
David Boaz Executive VP, Cato Institute :
If the president indeed withdraws 30,000 troops by the end of 2012, then we will still have about 70,000 troops in Afghanistan more than 11 years after the war began, and twice as many as President Bush deployed. If we can't do whatever we want to do in 10 years, when will we achieve our purposes? U.S. troops have overthrown the Taliban and dispatched Osama bin Laden, and it's time to end this war.
Tonight, on June 22, the president should pick up some language from another June speech and tell the nation, "Generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we ended a war."
******************************
Michael Yaki Member, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights :
As much a comment on America's penchant toward isolationism, no president has ever lost an election because he withdrew from a conflict. To the majority of the American people, the death of bin Laden, coupled with the perceived prowess of our special forces and Predator drone program, means it is time politically, to bring the troops home.
*****************************
Brad Bannon President, Bannon Communications Research :
Let me get this straight.
We killed the guy, Osama bin Laden who was the reason we went into Afghanistan in the first place.
The war there costs $100 billion a year which the U.S. doesn't have and can't afford.
We are fighting for a guy, President Karzai who hates us, insults our troops and has a brother who is a heroin kingpin. And we are only withdrawing 5,000 soldiers this year and leaving 70,000 troops there until 2013 or later. You gotta be kidding me.
Last week, Mitt Romney said we should stay in Afghanistan until the situation there is stable. Afghanistan has never been stable and by the time it is, if it ever is, Gov. Romney's great-grandchildren will be old enough to serve there.
*************************
Ross Baker Political scientist, Rutgers University :
The president wants to be re-elected. The war is increasingly unpopular. The draw down was inevitable in light of the West Point promise. It's a hell of a way to fight a war.
******************************
David Orentlicher Visiting professor, University of Iowa; ex-Indiana state representative :
War Policy Should Be Driven by Necessity, Not by Politics
In the wake of a troop surge that never was justified by any threats to our national security, our soldiers should be brought home quickly. As today's question indicates, political considerations play an inappropriate role in the shaping of our military policy. Defense Secretary Robert Gates was right to acknowledge that we should not be fighting wars of choice. Wars should be fought only out of necessity. It may be difficult for presidents to rise above politics, but they cannot let political factors put the lives of our soldiers at risk.
***********************
Steve Murphy Democratic consultant; Managing Partner at Murphy Vogel Askew Reilly :
All that matters politically is what the Republicans say, especially prominent opponents in the presidential campaign. If they criticize the president for withdrawing troops they will lose the argument. Voters realize we simply cannot afford to keep doing so much internationally.
The president is getting it right fighting terrorism. He has made over 200 drone strikes in two-and-a-half years while President Bush made about 30 in the four years he had the technology available. Bin Laden's dead, Al Qaeda is pinned down, and we're talking to a less active Taliban.
The neocons will complain but few voters share their vision of Pax Americana. A presidential campaign waged on this turf favors President Obama.
*************************
Darrell M. West Vice President, Governance Studies, Brookings :
Obama is doing on Afghanistan what he has done on most other major issues. He is a centrist president with a slight tilt to the left. He is doing enough to prevent an open revolt from his liberal base, while not doing enough to appease conservative critics. As long as he avoids a liberal, anti-war primary challenge, people will look back on this decision as the right political and policy choice.
**************************
Greg Dworkin Contributing Editor, Daily Kos :
Everyone (except for non-influential John McCain and Lindsay Graham) wants out. The question is how fast can it be done? Here is an area where the “bin Laden bounce” is still alive; Obama will get plenty of slack cut for whatever he decides — after all, the death of bin Laden is powering the decision — so long as he makes it clear we are leaving ASAP. The only argument is “define ASAP”.
****************
Larry Schwab Professor of Political Science, John Carroll University :
Splitting the difference on troop withdrawals from Afghanistan will not be a political win for President Obama because the majority of Americans want to end the military operations in a short period of time. However, his Afghanistan policy will not harm him in the 2012 election. First, the positive impact of ending the Iraq War, killing bin Laden, and improving the country's international image will be much greater than the negative impact of Afghanistan. Second, the Republicans will not be able to develop a credible and unified critique of Obama's policies in Afghanistan.
*********************
No comments:
Post a Comment