The War Over Afghanistan
[Guest post by DRJ]
There’s a war in Afghanistan and a war over Afghanistan, and the latter appears to be between the Defense Department and the White House. Exhibit “A” is from The Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol who says Rahm Emanuel blindsided Defense Secretary Gates and the military on a Sunday talk show:
“Yesterday, in light of Rahm Emanuel’s comments on delaying the decision on troops for Afghanistan [until the elections are finalized and there is a credible Afghan government], I asked: “Are Sunday talk show declarations by Emanuel and political advisor David Axelrod an appropriate way to announce the considered judgment of the president at this stage of a long Cabinet-level review process? Or is Emanuel end-running the process? Do Secretaries Gates and Clinton agree with Emanuel? Were they consulted before Rahm popped off?”
I’ve now been told by an authoritative source close to Defense Secretary Robert Gates that he had no advance warning that Emanuel would be saying any such thing.”
A former government official adds some interesting context at Kristol’s link.
Now I understand why, in what appears to be a direct contradiction to statements made by Emanuel in his Sunday interview, Secretary Gates announced today that President Obama may have to make a decision on whether to send more US troops to Afghanistan before the outcome of disputed Afghan elections are fully resolved. Gates may be showing Emanuel that two can play the game of making national security policy in public. I hope Gates is playing a winning hand.
— DRJ
Just reading that reminded me of history. But then I’d be invoking Godwin’s Law.
John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 10/19/2009 @ 11:35 pmI’ve now been told by an authoritative source close to Defense Secretary Robert Gates..
Bill Kristol lasted all of a year at the NYT peddling largely vagrant omens. Somewhere last year he found “a surprising number of Democrats with whom I’ve spoken expect a McCain victory.”
In the last three weeks, Kristol predicted that President Obama “would get on the plane after his session with the International Olympics Committee at mid-day Friday Copenhagen time, and be in Afghanistan with our troops five hours later.”
This while a mysterious “foreign gentleman who deals with this government” briefed Kristol on signals pointing to “Secretary Gates leaving at the end of the year, and being replaced by Chuck Hagel.”
steve (5e0253) — 10/20/2009 @ 1:42 amIf Gates had any decency he would resign.
Paul Albers (663ee0) — 10/20/2009 @ 2:40 amI love these guys that will order a grunt to charge that macine gun nest, but hang on to their jobs suffering all the indignations heaped on them by Obama and Company.
The same goes for the Joint Chiefs.
don’t know about Gate’s hand, but Rahm’s is furry.
Ear Leader and his cohort of fellow incompetents are still trying to vote present, when they need to actually make a decision. they don’t want to have any downside from what they finally break down and order, but that’s not how life w*rks. their behavior is, at best reprehensible. scumbags, one and all.
so much for the First Fool being and “honorable man”. he’s a cowardly knave.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 10/20/2009 @ 4:10 amsteve is reporting that Kristol has talked to a bunch of people in Washington who all agree that Obama can’t make up his mind and switches his position daily. This is news ?
Mike K (2cf494) — 10/20/2009 @ 4:57 amKarzai has conceded the first vote, so a runoff will take place. This will take months, not weeks; giving the President more time to not make a decision.
More importantly, the administration will have more time to conduct the larger war against Fox news.
Corwin (ea9428) — 10/20/2009 @ 5:02 amWe need to be out of there completely, not sending in more troops. The establishment of a stable government in Afghanistan certainly is not a question of weeks, perhaps not even months. But, instead of seeing this as a trick way for Obama to avoid making decisions, maybe this is the decision, and an attempt at implementing it as smoothly as possible.
mikeb302000 (6127bb) — 10/20/2009 @ 5:20 amYeah, what do we need to be fighting the Taliban in Afganistan for, its not like they ever attacked us, right? Right?
Sean P (50f5d9) — 10/20/2009 @ 5:49 amstill Kristol lasted all of a year at the NYT peddling largely vagrant omens
Thanks for that penetrating analysis, little stevie. But the reason why Kristol left is because he wouldn’t give his boss the requisite BJ before he submitted his work for “editing.” Kristol doesn’t give a rat’s a– what anyone thinks of his work, and naturally that caused the doyennes of the NYT newsroom to faint dead away. Kristol also has about four other full – time gigs that pay a hell of a lot more than the schmucks get at that newsrag, and the other outlets have a much larger audience as well.
Dmac (5ddc52) — 10/20/2009 @ 6:17 ammikeb90210 is consistent.
JD (d467d3) — 10/20/2009 @ 6:18 amTurns out Obama made statements during his campaign which were useful to gain votes of those who thought he would be soft on issues of national security. Turns out Obama is becoming exactly what those on the far right warned us about. Obama has not interest in defending America he only wants to socialize America. He broke his oath of office and must be imeached.
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III (57cae1) — 10/20/2009 @ 6:46 amNote how the decision-making process seems to be devoid of input from the Generals, Joint Chiefs, Second Def, et al, but weighs heavily on the political calculus.
JD (f8eae0) — 10/20/2009 @ 6:51 amHe probably would want to replace Gates with Hagel, who is a total tool, whereas as Gates occasionally shows some promise. Kristol was
bishop (4e0dda) — 10/20/2009 @ 7:20 amtoo sensible for the Times, look who they replaced him with, Douthat, RINO extraordinaire
Not true, JD – I hear that teh One wets his finger and sticks it out the window each day to determine the correct course of action.
Dmac (5ddc52) — 10/20/2009 @ 7:21 amObama is voting present. Obama wouldn’t care if the Taliban retook Afghanistan and brought Bin Laden into Khandahar for protection if it resolved the situation where Obama wouldn’t have to make a decision or send in troops.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 10/20/2009 @ 8:04 amRahm must have cleared his talking points with the Prez before appearing on CNN. Rahm doesn’t do the Sunday circuit often so this was designed to break some news. I conclude Rahm spoke for Obama. Why would Obama under cut the current Afghan government by saying loudly to the world it is ill-legitimate while engaged in America’s war, a just war as Obama has loudly proclaimed?
richardb (f7470d) — 10/20/2009 @ 9:17 amIs Obama conducting deep background negotiations talks with Osama bin Laden or Mullah Omar or some other Taliban official?
Is this a quid pro quo to earn good faith with the Taliban during negotiations?
I think so.
One final point, Obama’s mouth piece, Rahm Emmanual, also undercut the American military mission. What are our soldiers to think about protecting a nation when Obama clearly is letting their mission drift while their buddies die and the Talib grow stronger? Will resignations occur in the Pentagon? Gates knows he’s the 1 Spartan keeping the Obama horde from gutting the future in the American military. Will he stand by for defeat in Afghanistan to protect what remains of a defeated army? Will senior commanders continue to salute while they see catastrophe looming or will they resign to protest loudly as they head for the exit?
richardb (f7470d) — 10/20/2009 @ 9:34 amAmerican and allied troups, as well as Afghanis, die while Obama dithers.
htom (412a17) — 10/20/2009 @ 9:39 am“…I hope Gates is playing a winning hand.”
He needs to be ready to walk if Rahm gets his way.
AD - RtR/OS! (3b92f0) — 10/20/2009 @ 10:04 amThere can be only one SecDef, and it is always best if his office is in VA, and not at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.