Karl Rove, former senior adviser to President George W. Bush, contributes a regular opinion column to the Wall Street Journal. The paper has a conservative ideological philosophy so it's intended audience would be for republicans or moderate conservatives. In this article, Mr. Rove claims that President Obama is neglecting the war in Afghanistan by not speaking to our top commanders on the frontline. He makes the claim that former President Bush spoke to commanders "every week or two" and that active communication assisted in forming a working strategy to fight insurgency on the ground. He views President Obama's actions to be "hands off" and foresees failure in this war. He asserts that up to this point President Obama has "treated the conflict as a distraction" from nationalizing the US health care system. Mr. Rove goes on in the article to criticize President Obama's current strategy of using surgical attacks or drone planes to fight insurgency. Citing the loss of foot soldiers and "actionable intelligence" as the determent to democratic efforts in Afghanistan. Mr. Rove places further criticism upon the shoulders of Vice President Joe Biden's war voting record, noting that he has consistently voted passively on war related legislation since the 1970's. Mr. Rove fears that Vice President Biden's presence weakens our military and country.
Karl Rove supports having the military act as strategists in Afghanistan and Pakistan instead of the President. This method proved fatal in the past, so I'm glad that President Obama is trying to rally support in Congress for new ideas. President Obama recognizes the delicate balance between the tribal people of Afghanistan and the Taliban/aL Qaeda, he understands that you need to have the natives support to save Afghanistan from a future of oppression. And I'm glad that he's calling on the UN to assist in these efforts. However, I do agree with Mr. Rove in that active lines of communication whether it be with General Petraeus or Commander McChristal need to be visited often to understand our military's efforts on the ground.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
After Bush decided to invade Iraq, Afghanistan became a footnote. For every 5 soldiers we sent to Iraq, we sent 1 to Afghanistan.
Bush's entire focus was winning the war in Iraq.
The unfinished war in Afghanistan could wait till later.
Problem is, the Taliban weren't going to sit around to wait till Iraq was over. They started to regroup, rebuild, rearm, retrain and retake much of the ground that they had lost when the US first invaded Afghanistan.
In 2007, as Senators were demanding to know why the Afghan war was going so badly and why the Taliban were retaking much of country, The U.S. military's top officer acknowledged .... that for all the importance of preventing Afghanistan from again harboring al-Qaida terrorists, Washington's first priority was Iraq.
"In Afghanistan, we do what we can," said Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "In Iraq, we do what we must."
Mullen, testifying with Defense Secretary Robert Gates on the effort to stabilize Afghanistan, said that war is "by design and necessity, an economy-of-force operation. There is no getting around that. Our main focus, militarily, in the region and in the world right now is rightly and firmly in Iraq."
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-12-11-3963072919_x.htm
Post a Comment