As Obama Dresses Down His General Others Call The President Out On “Pathetic” Response To Afghanistan


As the British Foreign Secretary David Miliband urged Obama to show some courage:

David Miliband urged President Obama to embrace a renewed “hearts and minds” strategy in Afghanistan as ministers indicated that they would not send more British troops unless the US adopted such an approach.

The Foreign Secretary did not mention America by name but called on every government in the coalition to back troops, aid workers and diplomats in support of a clear plan. “We came into this together. We see it through — together,” he told the Labour conference in Brighton.

His words reflect a growing concern in the Government over Mr Obama’s apparent reluctance to garner political consent for a troop “surge”, which commanders say is needed to build up the Afghan Army and defeat the Taleban insurgency. General Stanley McChrystal, the top commander in Afghanistan, wants a revamped counter-insurgency — more forces on the ground engaging civilians and persuading the Taleban to switch sides — as opposed to a counter-terrorism strategy focused on al-Qaeda — reducing troop numbers and attacking militants mostly with drone missile strikes.

Word comes down that Obama was a bit upset with his General actually having an opinion on how to win this war. Imagine….a military professional coming up with plans on winning instead of a politician. The gall of the General:

The relationship between President Barack Obama and the commander of Nato forces in Afghanistan has been put under severe strain by Gen Stanley McChrystal’s comments on strategy for the war.

According to sources close to the administration, Gen McChrystal shocked and angered presidential advisers with the bluntness of a speech given in London last week.

The next day he was summoned to an awkward 25-minute face-to-face meeting on board Air Force One on the tarmac in Copenhagen, where the president had arrived to tout Chicago’s unsuccessful Olympic bid.


In London, Gen McChrystal, who heads the 68,000 US troops in Afghanistan as well as the 100,000 Nato forces, flatly rejected proposals to switch to a strategy more reliant on drone missile strikes and special forces operations against al-Qaeda.

He told the Institute of International and Strategic Studies that the formula, which is favoured by Vice-President Joe Biden, would lead to “Chaos-istan”.

When asked whether he would support it, he said: “The short answer is: No.”

He went on to say: “Waiting does not prolong a favorable outcome. This effort will not remain winnable indefinitely, and nor will public support.”

But we know how excruciating this kind of decision can be!

Sigh….Obama is simply pathetic.

Here is Kristol echoing the same sentiments: (h/t Weazel Zippers)

And as Obama hems and haws there are a few who understand how important this fight is:

The head of the British Army, General Sir David Richards, has issued a wake-up call to the public by warning of the “terrifying prospect” of a defeat in Afghanistan.

In an unprecedented intervention, the chief of the general staff described the conflict as “this generation’s war” and added that failure by Nato would have an “intoxicating effect” on militant Islam.

In his first interview as the head of the Army, Sir David told The Sunday Telegraph that if Britain and Nato failed in Afghanistan the risks to the western world would be “enormous” and “unimaginable”.

But hey, what does that matter to Obama. Only thing he cares about is that the world likes him.

More here.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Obama take his lead from other hands on Commanders in Chiefs. Like Jimmy Carter, Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon who fostered the adage, ” I never met a war that, with a little help, I couldn’t lose”.

When McChrystal or any other active duty general challenges the policy of the civilian government he is treading on thin ice. Let’s watch the clock and see if he dares to do that again

You wonder if that 25 minute meeting with McChrystal was to chew the General out for going public.

This is a frightening development for America and our NATO allies. The Commander of NATO Forces is supposed to listen to strategy and tactics from Obama and Biden.

No wonder Canada has said it is pulling its troops in 2012, if I was the Prime Minister Of Canada I would have them home before Christmas. I believe in the War Against Terror, I don’t believe in the LBJ / McNamara Syndrome.

It is not a war on Terror, it is a War on Muslim Terror. Isolate the target and attack it. You on’t accomplish that by calling it an Overseas Ping Pong Operation that doesn’t care to win. Our young loyal Patriots and the troops of our loyal NATO allies don’t deserve this, they are putting their lives on the line, while our president worries over his image to the Muslim World and his precious dreams of Marxism.

This man is an international nightmare. We will soon be out of allies while he lobbies for Chicago Machine Corruption. This is a disgrace to our country and is jeopardizing our national security and the security of our allies.

I’m sure you were equally offended when Bush ignored the opinion of his top military advisers when he chose to invade Iraq – and opted instead to go with the less is more approach advanced by Sec of Def Rumsfeld.

I’m also confident you don’t remember that little episode much at all, desiring instead to praise ‘the surge’ (i.e. the great big pay off couple with troop levels that were needed 3 years before).

Initially Iraq was a fairly easy victory. The Muslim Terrorists consolidated their forces and were neutralized with the Surge that was resisted with rants of doom and gloom by Democrats, especially Harry Reid, who stood up and told the world that the war was lost. Probably the most traitorous statement ever uttered by an American Senator.

But that was in the past, Democrats and our President ignore the dire position of our troops and worry over appearances and elections. McChrystal is concerned with victory and his army, Obama has admitted that his goal is not to win this war over Muslim Terror, since Muslim Terror doesn’t exist. That must be profound news for our allies.

At some point, Obama and his legions sycophantic lemmings will realize that basing his presidency on the previous presidency and justifying failure on the performance of the previous presidency only serves to make Obama appear weak and insecure to the American people and the international community.

Having lived through more presidencies than most Americans, I can say that I have never seen a sitting president rationalize his failures by comparisons to the previous president; Obama already appears weak and ineffectual, using schoolyard logic to support his policies only compromises his presidency even more.

This also reminds me of the McNamara years when washington thought they could run the war from the white house and make the decisions that the commanders on the ground weren’t allowed to. A whole group of college intellectuals thought they knew how to run a war the right way and they were proved wrong. This administration mirrors that one in every aspect. The results will be the same, Failure.

Best policy to adopt for America’s fight against terrorism in Afghanistan is the complex mantra of conservative Ronald Regan: “We win, they lose.” Whatever it takes for the U.S. to win the war, Obama. Shit or get off the pot.

Re: “Whatever it takes for the U.S. to win the war . . .” sounds good, but . . .

where you getting the $$$ for that? Haven’t you heard, the US is broke.

So you either want to print more, or keep your hand out to China, who loans it, with interest (and likely some glee at having the capitalist superpower borrowing money from its communist enemy, but then that irony has long been lost on the right) . . .

either way, you’re fighting someone else’s war with borrowed money, all to keep what, some kid from Colo from blowing up trains in NY? Interesting.

You fail to recognize the theater has shifted and that people, even big bad terrorists, move from place to place. You also appear to have forgotten what OBL said about his true goal — the bankrupting of the West . . .

yup, whatever it takes, even if that is the Nation itself.

@po: Comment #5

You’ve come to the wrong place to spout liberal opinion. You will find the facts in the archives, do your due dilligence instead of wasting bandwidth.

USA = Third World Shit Hole

And you know who’s responsible.

Enjoy! I can’t wait to see what the USA looks like in 10-20 years.

Game Over.

My guess would be like the former Soviet Union. Crappy, ugly cars and uglier people.

I doubt that someone who compares the US to a Third World Nation has ever been to a Third World Nation. Mexico has many problems, but compared to a Third World Country, it is a modern country. If you refer to Obama forcing the US into bankruptcy or Muslim Terrorists bringing our country to a standstill, you have either no concept of the American Patriot or you are an American in the sense of an American hating Revolutionary like Ayers, Jones, Wright, or most of Obama’s associates.

We have a little more than three years of the Obama nightmare left, that is unless his corruption overwhelms his presidency and we give him the bum’s rush earlier. In a little over a year he will lose his majorities in Congress and become little more than an impotent figure head who has no purpose except to be an example of what America should avoid at all costs.

America can and will withstand this assault on our Constitution, culture, and freedoms. If you survive the next twenty years, I humbly invite you to live the interim in the Third World Nation of your choice.

Enjoy your fantasies, like wet dreams, you eventually wake up to reality with nothing; nothing, but a mess in your lap.

Re: “America can and will withstand this assault on our Constitution, culture, and freedoms.”

Yup, we lived through W, we can live through just about anything.

What assault has been made on the Constitution under Obama? waiting . . .

What assault has been made on our “culture” (love that choice of words here) under Obama? waiting . . .

What assault on any one of your freedoms has been made under Obama? waiting . . .

NOT A ONE. And you know it. You just think you’re being trampled because your team doesn’t get to say jump and the rest of us ask how high. It’s called losing the election. Get use to it.

And don’t count your chickens re: only 3 more years. Sarah Palin ain’t gonna stay fresh that long and “Just Say No” didn’t work for Reagan’s war on drugs and won’t work for y’all now.

Empty slogans, faux outrage and misperceived persecution complexes make for great headlines, but don’t equal policy.


I’m not as good an apologist as you are for not doing what should be done or, better yet, what needs to be done.

However, to think that the government is not already printing up $$$ that your great-grandchildren may have to pay back is naive. I read this morning about some $7.7 Billion dollars the U.S. is providing to Pakistan to fight terrorism; yet very, very little of it finding its way to do actual training and supplying and fighting.

Obama criticized Bush on the surge in Iraq, even voted against it, saying that the surge should be in Afghanistan. Obama said that that is where the war is. A few months later, and “commander-in-chief”, Obama doesn’t know his arse from a whole in the ground. His military advisers are saying that in order to win the war in Afghanistan we need more troops; yet Obama is not only taking and wasting his time, but Obama is making politics out of perhaps the major reason we have a federal government — and that is to protect the citizens of the U.S.

When provided with what all that our military needs, don’t underestimate the determination and dedication of our generals and soldiers to find and kill the terrorists who threaten the world.

I do however underestimate Barack Insane Obama in a serious resolve to do what needs to be done; he is a large child with naivete, ignorance, foolishness, hubris and idiocy unmatched by any of the true leaders of the free world.

“Empty slogans, faux outrage and misperceived persecution complexes make for great headlines, but don’t equal policy.”

po I think you have stumbled on to something. Obama won an election on empty slogans, faux outrage and misperceived (misdirected) persecution complexes; they did make great headlines and you are absolutely right, they don’t equal (work) as policy. Just like perpetual campaigning doesn’t substitute for running a country. Too funny!

You should join a Conservative Think Tank you can provide with great ammunition in our fight against Obama.

Adrian S, well said my Patriot Friend. I need to do some farmer work. Please watch the perimeter.

“However, to think that the government is not already printing up $$$ that your great-grandchildren may have to pay back is naive”

and putting words that someone didn’t say into their mouth is an easy way to strike down a strawman argument. Way to go for the non-argument, there.

Skookum and Adrian apparently would have preferred McCain / Palin. Rock on, but that really says a lot.

Between the time Obama said Afghanistan was the war that needed to be fought and now something very important happened . . . an election took place mired in fraud. That government is what Americans are now being asked to support – a corrupt government that cannot garner popular support without stuffing ballot boxes. No amount of NATO military engagement can change that fact. But, for this crowd, might always makes right (or at least makes that mess in your lap look worthwhile).

McChrystal holds a bachelor in science degree from the United States Military Academy (West Point), a master of arts degree in national security and strategic studies from the United States Naval War College, and a master of science degree in international relations from Salve Regina University.

Defense Distinguished Service Medal
Defense Superior Service Medal (with one Oak Leaf Clusters)
Legion of Merit (with two Oak Leaf Clusters)
Bronze Star
Defense Meritorious Service Medal
Meritorious Service Medal (with three Oak Leaf Clusters)
Army Commendation Medal
Army Achievement Medal
Expert Infantryman Badge
Parachutist Badge (United States)
Special Forces Tab
Ranger Tab
Joint Chiefs of Staff Identification Badge
2LT – June 2, 1976
1LT – June 2, 1978
CPT – August 1, 1980
MAJ – July 1, 1987
LTC – September 1, 1992
COL – September 1, 1996
BG – January 1, 2001
MG – May 1, 2004
LTG – February 16, 2006
GEN – June 15, 2009
Obama ? B. HUSSEIN Soetero:
Columbia University…B.A., No Transcripts available
Harvard Law Degree, No transcripts available
Community Organizer, Represented and Trained ACORN in RICO Violations and Voter Fraud techniques
Lecturer of Law, but barely knows the US Constitution
Illinois State Senator, Voted PRESENT!
U.S. Senator, Ran for President for the Majority of his ONE TERM
Pretender in Chief and a One Term Resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

Who do You trust?
I rest my case.


You have a very myopic and short-ranged view of world affairs. No matter what government is in power in Afghanistan our effort has been directed towards the elimination of the enemies of America hiding their bases in the emptiness of both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

It shouldn’t surprise you that even for the Obama gang, leaders and governments that are radical and extreme (or even contrary to American culture) are tolerated for one misbegotten reason or another. Take Saudi Arabia, for example. A monarchy with stringent dictatorship and Muslim governance. And, yet in stead of defeating them, U.S. administrations have appeased them for their oil. There are many governments with which the U.S. must deal with cautiously.

Fortunately for conservatives, it seems American voters and the public in general have come around after Obama’s election — to oppose him. Obama’s dire poll ratings and his lackluster performances have proven that Americans are really against the policies he espouses. The magic for Obama is lost.

You would have us believe that Obama’s flip-flop on Afghanistan has a reason. But I soundly reject that argument. Were it not for his many changes in policies (so many) and his undelivered pledges that were nothing more to him than campaign “promises” — something he apparently considers different from an honorable man’s pledge — it would perhaps be believable. But it’s not. Coward comes to mind, though.

Adrian, you have done some outstanding work in this thread, well done! Note, Richard Cohen has another interesting OpEd in this morning’s WaPo, this makes two in a row from him that I’m aware of, not too bad for a lefty. Thought you might want to peruse, here’s a taste:

Does Obama Have the Backbone?

By Richard Cohen
Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Barack Obama’s trip to Copenhagen to pitch Chicago for the Olympics would have been a dumb move whatever the outcome. But as it turned out (an airy dismissal would not be an unfair description), it poses some questions about his presidency that are way more important than the proper venue for synchronized swimming. The first, and to my mind most important, is whether Obama knows who he is.

This business of self-knowledge is no minor issue. It bears greatly on the single most crucial issue facing this young and untested president: Afghanistan. Already, we have his choice for Afghanistan commander, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, taking the measure of his commander in chief and publicly telling him what to do. This MacArthuresque star turn called for a Trumanesque response, but Obama offered nothing of the kind. Instead, he used McChrystal as a prop, adding a bit of four-star gravitas to that silly trip to Copenhagen by having the general meet with him there.

This is the president we now have: He inspires lots of affection but not a lot of awe…..”

IMHO this war should be fought to win, the president needs to hear Gen. McCrystal out and act on his request for more troops instead of using him for photo ops to distract from a domestic fiasco. Start paying attention to the generals, Biden doesn’t know st from shinola, knock off the battlefield Miranda rights, and the ROE’s should be relaxed so our troops can better protect themselves and when they say they need a gunship, send it.

Read it all, he’s makes crucial points.

@Old Trooper:

Obama KNOWS The Constitution very well. He just doesn’t like it because it doesn’t conform to his twisted views for advancing “social justice”.

Using Obama’s own rhetoric on “political and economic justice”, Roger Kimball of Pajamas Media put it well when he said:

“Political justice we know: it means equality before the law. The figure of justice on court houses used to be blindfolded (is she still?) because justice, if it is just, is impartial . But what is economic justice? That would require Justice to pull aside the blindfold and top-up your bank account if had less than others.”

Kimball continues:

“Bottom line for Obama? While the civil rights movement made some ‘formal’ strides, it was too focused on the courts”:

“The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth.”

The Supreme Court is not radical enough for Barack Obama.

“it didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers and the Constitution.”

Kimball drives it home here:

“While you think about what it might mean if the President of the United States wanted to “break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers and the Constitution,” note that Obama goes on to disparage the Constitution as merely “a charter of negative liberties”: that is, it only tells you what the state and federal government “can’t do to you.”

A “charter of negative liberties”?! WTF?!

Listen to Obama spew this garbage for yourself:
(***key board cover warning*** – the opening statement is sickening and the Q&A is even worse”

Didn’t Obama swear to protect and defend The Constitution of the United States of America?

It really has become a challenge to determine which words coming from Obama have “meaning” or “meaning meaning”, like Whoopi Goldberg’s defense of Polanski’s crime of rape as a question of “rape” as compared to “rape, rape”.