YOUR NEWS. NOW WITH FRIENDS.
Discover News based on what your friends are reading, publish your own reading activity and retain full control.
To get started, first

Your Friends' Activity

    Exclusive

    Obama’s Afghanistan decision: A partial exit with 2012 in mind

    By Ron Fournier
    National Journal

    Don't kid yourself. President Obama's decision to withdraw 33,000 troops from Afghanistan before he stands for re-election is not driven by the United States' "position of strength" in the war zone as much as it is by grim economic and political realities at home.

    A sagging economy, a soaring national debt and an increasingly restive Congress pushed Obama to order troop reductions that are both deeper and faster than recommended by his military commanders.

    "America," the president said in a prime-time address from the East Room, "it is time to focus on nation building here at home."

    In announcing his decision, which still leaves 68,000 troops in the country after the 2012 election, Obama focused on a set of numbers that pander to a war-weary nation -- 10,000 troops out this year and another 23,000 in 2012, keeping a promise he made in 2009 to begin winding down the "surge" by the middle of this year.

    By 2014, Obama said, "this process of transition will be complete, and the Afghan people will be responsible for their own security."

    (POLL: More Americans Want Quick Withdrawal)

    But the president's eye is set on numbers that have little to do with battlefield strategy and everything to do with his re-election hopes. They include:

    • Fifty-six percent of Americans say U.S. troops should be brought home as soon as possible, up from 40 percent a year ago (Pew Research Center).
    • Fewer than a quarter of people see signs of improvement in the economy and two-thirds say the country is on the wrong track. A clear majority of Americans say their children are destined to a lower standard of living (Bloomberg News National Poll).
    • The United States has spent $1.3 trillion in Iraq and Afghanistan in the past decade. Afghanistan alone is costing about $120 billion this year.

    "Now," Obama said, "we must invest in America's greatest resource -- our people." He called for more spending on infrastructure and new energies and urged Americans to "recapture the common purpose that we shared at the beginning of this time of war.''

    (CHART: U.S. Troop Levels, Casualties in Afghanistan)

    White House operatives went to great lengths to show Obama shifting focus from wars abroad to domestic issues at home. Their public relations plan called for, among other things, leaking word that Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, recommended a more limited withdrawal.

    The usually leak-averse White House also made sure reporters were told that both Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, two hawks in the Obama cabinet, had accepted Obama's decision —- but only reluctantly.

    The message as framed by the Obama political team: He knows it's the economy, stupid; he'll focus on it like a laser beam, even if it means "defying" his commanders and Cabinet.

    (PICTURES: Michelle Obama, Daughters Meet Mandela)

    In doing so, Obama laid out a "more centered course" in U.S. foreign policy. Without calling it a new doctrine, Obama said the United States must be "as pragmatic as we are passionate; as strategic as we are resolute."

    "When threatened, we must respond with force -- but when that force can be targeted, we need not deploy large armies overseas," Obama said. He cited Libya as an example of the United States leading a coalition whose aim is to help a nation win freedom.

    Obama does not to need to worry as much as past Democratic presidents about being labeled soft on national security -- not after giving the order that led to the assassination of Osama bin Laden. No, his biggest concern is being labeled tone deaf on joblessness and debt.

    He saw the writing on the wall when a growing number of lawmakers, Democrats and Republicans alike, clamored for a drawdown in Afghanistan. The shift was most pronounced among the candidates seeking the GOP presidential nomination. Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, who entered the race Tuesday, hammered Obama not from the right, but from the left.

    "I think there is room to draw down more," Huntsman told ABC.

    Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia was even more pointed about Obama's choice -- more war or steps toward peace? "We must choose," Manchin said in a warning shot issued before Obama's address, "and I choose America."

    In the end, Obama chose the clearest course to re-election.

    Visit National Journal for more political news.

    23 comments

    • OldPilot 4 months ago
      "Desperately Seeking Reelection" could be the title of the next big summer movie. See Barry O in 3D, sweating bullets as the poll numbers show his dismal standing! Watch Michelle tour Africain a $10,000.00 designer dress! See the fatigue on AF1's flight crew's faces as they fly around the world ( yes, the WORLD! ) during Barry's pathetic attemps to garner votes!
    • Forrest 4 months ago
      Why didn't he just Twitter our military plans to the enemy.
    • TZ 4 months ago
      This is why idiots (let's say people with an IQ of 88ish or below) should not be able to vote. They're swayed by "Faux Medias", have a natural ignorance and obliviousness of and about everything, and are naturally stupid. We would we want such people voting?

      I suggest IQ tests to weed out the true idiots.
    • BO 4 months ago
      Yeah, just like Johnson in 1967. I'd bet Obama has no intention of totally leaving either Iraq or Afghanistan. He'll do what LBJ did... Fake an attempt at negotiations and then, after the election, blame it on the Taliban when the negotiations fail. Johnson should have went to jail.
    • William 4 months ago
      What a maroon. New energy and infrastructure. Right. Go back to pie in the sky academia.
    • Michael 4 months ago
      ...snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
    • Ivan 4 months ago
      These foreign 'adventures' should not be carried out using borrowed funds. They should not be carried out in a country where large numbers in the government of the host...are really our enemies. An Arab proverb says, in effect,...that a fool is known as a fool when he mistakes enemies for friends.
    • Raccman 4 months ago
      I'd feel more confident about it - IF the military commanders made the decision and NOT an inept Marxist with no military or business experience ! This liar is nothing more than a political opportunist who doesn't give a damn for us !
    • bob 4 months ago
      Pull them all out now, we can't stay there forever and since this President has no intention of winning anything except REELECTION to ride our bankruptcy down all the way!
    • 4 months ago
      Our elected Officials, the same ones who represent their own GREEDINESS, and the concerns of Corporate America as their number"ONE PRIORITY", could use their power to eliminate some of these elobrate, expenses for non essential "TOURS" by the President and his "FAMILY" simplky by what our Constitution instructs them to do in cases that involve blatent mis-use of "TAXPAYERS" funds.
      It is a well proven fact that Mr Obama has no intention of crubbing his thrist for non-essential spending of our "TAXDOLLARS", at his pleasure. And with the financial mess caused by the Corporate World, Mr Obama has shown his "TRUE COLORS" of who he intends to favor in any attempt to help this country recover from the massive mistakes of his campaign funders help create.
      Asking the American Taxpayers to tighten their belts more, sacfrice more, do without more, watch as these taxpayers are slowly going under financially, he choses to keep right on throwing our taxdollars down the toilet and hitting the flush lever.
      America, here's a man, that, shamifully I admit I voted for, who wants us,"The American Voters", to give him 4 more years of his incompetant agendas to repay his campaign debts using our taxdollars to do so. It's happening today, right now, for the past two plus years. His "DONORS" promising to help the country recover are nothing but empty lies. They're happy, fatcats, plenty of money in their banks now, provided by the American "Taxpayers", and now these same Corporate CEO's who promised to help the Country recover with our taxdollars, only to fatten their own bank accounts and now snub their noses at their empty promises.
      Corporate America's own International Bribery Organizations, (LOBBIST) have total control of enough of our "ELECTED OFFICIALS" to assure they can buy their ways in our Government too!
    • Cassandra 4 months ago
      "... as strategic as we are resolute"? How about neither?
    • caveman 4 months ago
      it's all about being re-elected...even whacking osama was timed for political advantage..
    • Backatya 4 months ago
      Just another example of Obama putting himself and his politics above the National welfare.
      This guy needs to go now. The best way to waste our soldiers lives is to pull out before the job is done and get nothing for their sacrifice. Didn't Viet Nam teach us that? If you're not in it to win it then don't go in the first place.
    • Alex 4 months ago
      Major decisions are made on vote potential and not what is right for the US.
    • House unplugged 4 months ago
      Lets see . Change , wh y are we fixing other nations problems that only serve that nation. We need a stable economy and JOBS here. In the time he has been in the white house all he has done is screw up the system. Forcing laws NOBODY asked for nor want. Forcing a health care bill that is unconstitutional . And claiming its a change for the good. Wake up and see the truth . Unless we start telling Washington were are mad as hell and we are not going to take it anymore , then we are just a bunch of sheep.He needs to regulate gas prices. Fine company's that outsource bring our troops home STOP with the spending of our money by way of executive order. Lower the tax rate putting more money back into the hands of the people that earn it. More money spent on goods and trade is more money vested in our country. That is a growth economy . Cut all of both the house and the senates salaries and start charging for the use of our troops on foreign soil. Since when do we kick butt and come home empty handed? 4 more years of his crap and we might as well start looking in to calling our self's a 3rd world country. So yes it is time for a change , a change back to being AMERICA the United and FREE. And that means NO MORE OBAMA.
    • Bogie 4 months ago
      Appears the real reasons for getting out are about as good as the real reasons for getting in. Bring them home now!!! Enough already.
    • ROBERT P 4 months ago
      I won't kid myself. It is all about being re-elected. But, can you honestly tell me, that anyone else in office, facing the same realities (political, economic, and the simple fact this has been America's longest war) would not do the same?
    • Russell Brown 4 months ago
      Any System Which Gives So Much Power And,,
      so mush Discretion To A Few Men .
      So That Mistakes Excuseable Or Not ,
      Can Have Such Far Reaching effects Is A Bad System.
      It Is A Bad System To Belivers Freedom ,
      just because it give a few men such power '
      With Out Any effective Check By The Body
      Politic .
      This Is The Key Political Argument Againts and,
      Indepentent Central Bank.
      To Paraphrase Moeny Is Much Too
      Serious A matter To Be Left To The
      Central Bankers.
      A False Balance Is abomination To The Lord,,
      but a just weight is his delight.
    • John 4 months ago
      America," the president said in a prime-time address from the East Room, "it is time to focus on nation building here at home."

      When did the guy wake up?
    • Mike 4 months ago
      He is doing a terrible job of following Bill Clinton's plan of governing by polls. Note that many popular people from high school turned out to be failures....are these same people supporting this failure? We get what we ask for...popularity is not leadership. Looks and speaking are not leadership. Sadly is does seem to be representative of many American and their own vanity...right up to their prideful destruction.
      What we need is a leader that can focus on a real strategy and then bring us together to implement it despite the polls (polls are conducted & published to manipulate)...alas, the more we think of folks like Obama, the more we see our inability to pick a winner....the problem is not at the top...it is at the bottom. If we start governing our own homes better instead of depending on someone else to compensate, then we begin to spread the foundation that makes us stronger...It is not the Gov. it is THE People. Then this strength flows out to local communities and then states and then eventually we get better leadership on on the federal level.To bad we abdicate responsibility elsewhere and hope we get lucky.That is a loser's game.
    Loading...

    Blogs