Reed More Cautious in Committing Troops to Afghanistan

After posting a video earlier in the month questioning why the US is adding troops in Afghanistan, particularly as many in Rhode Island are being called up to serve, (see video here), I am very pleased to see today that Senator Reed is helping to urge more caution in this commitment. From the Projo:

WASHINGTON, D.C. — “The burden of proof” will be on military leaders if they ask President Obama in the coming days to send more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, Sen. Jack Reed said Tuesday, as the political lines of battle on the issue sharpened.

But Reed stopped short of the declaration by his longtime ally, Senate Armed Services
Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Michigan, that a further increase in U.S. combat troops should not be undertaken until the military attempts a vigorous training program to boost the numbers of Afghanistan’s own security forces.

Levin thus put himself at odds with Admiral Michael G. Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who told the committee in forceful terms that the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, is likely to ask soon for additional combat U.S. troops — on top of the 17,000 that Mr. Obama ordered into the war effort in March.

One thought on “Reed More Cautious in Committing Troops to Afghanistan

  1. The Afghan war is Mr. Obama’s war. During the campaign he repeatedly said this was the war to fight and win, not Iraq. Mr. Bush supported his experienced and very capable military leaders in their quest for victory in Iraq, and that goal was accomplished. Unfortunately, the very thin resume and skill sets of Mr. Obama, in my view, created policy vacums because a President with absolutely zero background in foreign issues, military issues, domestic policy, health care, etc., etc., cannot lead and can waver with the winds of political opportunism. The vacums created are rapidly filled by other politicians who really think they have the answers escaping others. Mr. Reed is a West Pointer and as such I have no doubt that he is an honorable man. But he is not the President and he is not a general in command on the ground. One would wish that Mr. Reed understand that undercutting the advice of the generals advances the interest of the terrorists, and damages the cause of the allied troops. Mr. Obama, of course, has had no military experience, and has never shown that he has an understanding of regional issues anywhere, never mind Afghanistan. Mr. Reed is of course filling at least one of the gaps in Mr. Obama’s skill sets. Unfortunately, I am surprised that Mr. Reed is so passive a voice. One enters a war to win, or does not stay involved. To fumble around while our kids, and all the kids of the NATO nations are being killed by looney Islamic terrorists–many Italian kids were just killed by a suicide bomber’s murderous attack on a convoy–is not leadership, it is stupidity. The failures of the Obama administration on so many fronts, domestic and foreign are rapidly making this the worst administration since Mr. Carter. One wonders how much more damage Mr. Obama and the left driven troika of Obama, Pelosi and Harry Reid will leave in their dust in the time reamining for the admistration. One would wish that Jack Reed would rethink his positions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s