Obama’s Right War Not Right Anymore

Campaign promises are easier to make than they are to keep and no sane person expects much from a politician once he wins office. Those promises become so yesterday as the politician works to keep the office he has obtained. During the next election cycle there are more promises, more people who believe them and then disappointment as the cycle starts over.

During the campaign last year, then candidate Obama, said that George Bush and John McCain became too focused on Iraq, a war he contends was wrong, and took their eye off Afghanistan. Obama told us that Afghanistan was the right war, that the bad guys must be defeated and that he would put less focus on Iraq and move the required number of troops to Afghanistan to win a war he claimed we had to win.

Democrat Barack Obama said Monday that as president he would send at least two more combat brigades to Afghanistan, where U.S. soldiers face rising violence and endured their deadliest attack in three years on Sunday.

The proposed force increase – about 7,000 troops – is part of Obama’s plan to pull combat troops out of Iraq and focus on the growing threat from a resurgent al Qaeda in Afghanistan.

“As president, I would pursue a new strategy, and begin by providing at least two additional combat brigades to support our effort in Afghanistan,” Obama said in an op-ed published Monday in The New York Times, a day before he plans a speech here on his vision for Iraq and Afghanistan.

“We need more troops, more helicopters, better intelligence-gathering and more nonmilitary assistance to accomplish the mission there,” Obama said.

Obama argued the emphasis on Iraq placed by the Bush administration – and supported by Republican presidential candidate John McCain – stands in the way, reports CBS News correspondent Dean Reynolds CBS

[note]As an aside, Obama also told us that he would get bin Laden.

As recently as October 7, in a presidential debate, Mr Obama said: “We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al-Qaeda. That has to be our biggest national security priority.” [emphasis mine]

In January Obama lightened up on that said it was not really necessary to get him if the noose [is that racist?] was tightened sufficiently. I guess after he was elected the national security priorities changed. Like I said, they will say anything to get elected. Obama suffered from (and still does) the wimp factor and needed to show some testicular fortitude. Once he was in, well you know the rest.[/note]

This year Obama made it clear that he was still focused on Afghanistan and that winning there “[That] is a cause that could not be more just.

That was then and this is now and now contains a 180 degree turnabout from Mr. Obama. The guy who said that he had to earn the trust of the military and would listen to the commanders on the ground has turned a deaf ear to those very commanders now that he has “focused” on Afghanistan.

General Stanley Mcchrystal has stated that he needs about 30-40 thousand more troops and that the war could be lost in the next year if he does not get more manpower. This is in his assessment report that has been delayed (but leaked) and it is quite clear, the commander on the ground needs more boots on the ground.

The campaign Obama made it clear he would put resources in Afghanistan and he continued with that theme after his coronation. He shifted some troops and his half baked plan was put into action but it is not working. His commanders are asking for more troops and Obama is stonewalling them. It is reported that his peeps have asked that the Generals scrub the report because Obama is reluctant to send any more troops to Afghanistan.

The man who vowed to do what it takes to win, who said Bush took his eye off the ball, who said that he would listen to the commanders, who said that winning was a cause that could not be more just and that has to be our BIGGEST national security issue, is turning his back on the troops and waffling on honoring his commitment to listen to the commanders and to provide resources to win.

No one expects a Democrat to have the will to fight because it is not in their blood. The only thing they will fight to the death for is their office and abortion. The country, not so much. The left has always thrown our military under the bus and Obama is no different. He wants one world order with a global community rather than keeping the separate and distinct identity that has made America the greatest nation on Earth.

But when that Democrat is the Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces he must, regardless of his personal feelings, do everything to support those troops. The politicians put the men and women who serve this country in harm’s way and it is their duty and they are obligated to give them everything they need to succeed. Failure should never be an option and neither should vacillating with resourcing the troops. The lack of forces could result in more deaths of US service personnel.

He talked like a Hawk but flies like a Dove, Obama lied. Let’s hope our troops don’t have to die because of it.

The only exit strategy is WINNING.

Resource the troops now.

Big Dog

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]