Louisville Courier Journal Editorial: Bloody Afghanistan.
Bloody Afghanistan
The week President Obama took office earlier this year, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Afghanistan was “the biggest military challenge” for U.S. troops.
Two months later, Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the war in that country was winnable, “but we're not winning.”
Both statements reflected the misplaced priorities of the Bush years, when efforts to track Osama bin Laden and squelch al-Qaida in Afghanistan were ignored in order to promote and wage the misguided war in Iraq that consumed lives, capital and support.
To be fair, in his seven months in office, President Obama has tried to implement a change-up in prosecuting the Afghanistan war, but it is too early to tell how that will work. The President deserves more time to test his plans, and calls to withdraw American troops now are premature.
Still, as 2009 has progressed, the Gates and Mullen statements have been borne out — by any known measure the war is going badly. This does not sit well with an American public justifiably grown cynical about the war and tired of footing the human and financial bills. The Obama administration will not have the blank check and the patience of saints in Afghanistan that the Bush administration squandered in Iraq, nor should it.
In May, Gen. David McKiernan, the U.S. commander in the country, was replaced for “fresh eyes” and new strategies, an almost unprecedented move during wartime. His replacement, Gen. Stanley McCrystal, has just delivered a classified assessment of the war, including appraisals of a resurgent Taliban, how Afghans view foreign soldiers and the country's central government.
Recent elections, still not decided, have not produced a mandate for Hamid Karzai in his bid for another term as president of Afghanistan. Charges of election fraud abound. The absence of a quick victory also reflects a lack of in-country respect for him as well as the dangerous prospect of his being viewed as an illegitimate leader should the vote count go his way. Either way, he's damaged goods.
The last two months have been the deadliest for U.S. troops in the entire Afghanistan war. Forty-five Americans were killed in July; 51 were killed in August. And 2009 is on track to be the deadliest year for U.S. troops in Afghanistan: 182 have been killed this year; last year, 155 were killed.
Given these potential harbingers, it is prudent not to forget that Afghanistan played dragon slayer in the past with the Mongols, the British and the Soviets. We must learn from their mistakes — for instance, more troops aren't necessarily the answer, as the Soviets found — and fight Mullen's “winnable” war.
As we wrote last December, after his election but before he took office, “Mr. Obama must be cautious about open-ended military escalation or presence in Afghanistan.”
In light of today's Afghanistan, we'd make that “very cautious” and urge the President to make his best case for the continued war to the American people.
Editor's comment: I Agree.
The week President Obama took office earlier this year, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Afghanistan was “the biggest military challenge” for U.S. troops.
Two months later, Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the war in that country was winnable, “but we're not winning.”
Both statements reflected the misplaced priorities of the Bush years, when efforts to track Osama bin Laden and squelch al-Qaida in Afghanistan were ignored in order to promote and wage the misguided war in Iraq that consumed lives, capital and support.
To be fair, in his seven months in office, President Obama has tried to implement a change-up in prosecuting the Afghanistan war, but it is too early to tell how that will work. The President deserves more time to test his plans, and calls to withdraw American troops now are premature.
Still, as 2009 has progressed, the Gates and Mullen statements have been borne out — by any known measure the war is going badly. This does not sit well with an American public justifiably grown cynical about the war and tired of footing the human and financial bills. The Obama administration will not have the blank check and the patience of saints in Afghanistan that the Bush administration squandered in Iraq, nor should it.
In May, Gen. David McKiernan, the U.S. commander in the country, was replaced for “fresh eyes” and new strategies, an almost unprecedented move during wartime. His replacement, Gen. Stanley McCrystal, has just delivered a classified assessment of the war, including appraisals of a resurgent Taliban, how Afghans view foreign soldiers and the country's central government.
Recent elections, still not decided, have not produced a mandate for Hamid Karzai in his bid for another term as president of Afghanistan. Charges of election fraud abound. The absence of a quick victory also reflects a lack of in-country respect for him as well as the dangerous prospect of his being viewed as an illegitimate leader should the vote count go his way. Either way, he's damaged goods.
The last two months have been the deadliest for U.S. troops in the entire Afghanistan war. Forty-five Americans were killed in July; 51 were killed in August. And 2009 is on track to be the deadliest year for U.S. troops in Afghanistan: 182 have been killed this year; last year, 155 were killed.
Given these potential harbingers, it is prudent not to forget that Afghanistan played dragon slayer in the past with the Mongols, the British and the Soviets. We must learn from their mistakes — for instance, more troops aren't necessarily the answer, as the Soviets found — and fight Mullen's “winnable” war.
As we wrote last December, after his election but before he took office, “Mr. Obama must be cautious about open-ended military escalation or presence in Afghanistan.”
In light of today's Afghanistan, we'd make that “very cautious” and urge the President to make his best case for the continued war to the American people.
Editor's comment: I Agree.
Labels: News reporting
posted by KYJurisDoctor at 9:32 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home