The War President

Last night, President Obama spoke to the nation about the continuing occupation of and war in Afghanistan. As usual, he gave a great speech. He continually proves himself to be one of our country's finest public speakers. Unfortunately, underneath the rhetorical excellence there was little that made much sense.

I should have known it would be like that, because he opened by talking about Iraq as though that conflict was over and great things had been accomplished there. But that is not the reality. The killings continue there, and the government can't even agree on a new election law and therefore can't hold scheduled elections. Our troops still have at least two remaining years in that country and possibly even longer. Success, whatever that is, is still a long way from being a reality in Iraq.

The president has now decided that all we need to succeed in Afghanistan is another 30,000 troops. He believes this will allow us to stop Taliban advances, pacify the countryside and eliminate al-Queda. It seems he has become a master of wishful thinking.

While the troop surge may temporarily halt further advances by the Taliban, it is not nearly enough to pacify the country outside of urban areas (and I suspect bombings will continue even in the urban areas). The fact is that once you get outside of Kabul, the people simply don't like or trust the central government.

And training more Afghan troops that answer to the central government will not solve that problem. President Karzai has proven himself to be a corrupt leader who's re-election was obtained through massive fraud. In addition, his brother is the largest opium poppy grower and dealer in the country.

We are in the process of making the same mistake in Afghanistan that we made in Vietnam. We are supporting a corrupt leader and trying to convince the people, or force them, to also support that leader. It didn't work in Vietnam, and it won't work in Afghanistan. Just because a foreign leader is friendly to the U.S. and its goals, does not mean he is worthy of or capable of winning the people's support.

Then we come to the matter of al-Queda. A troop surge of 30,000 will do nothing to eliminate al-Queda. They are snugly entrenched in Pakistan and our troops cannot even enter that country. To truly eliminate al-Queda and the Taliban, we would need to not only occupy Afghanistan, but also invade Pakistan. That is neither militarily nor diplomatically possible.

The only bit of good news from the president last night was when he said our involvement in Afghanistan was not an open-ended one. He expects the central government there, as weak and corrupt as it is, to be able to take over the fight on their own in about a year and a half. He wants to begin withdrawing troops in the summer of 2011.

But note he said "begin" to withdraw. He gave no assurance that our troops would be out of Afghanistan in 2011. He also didn't tell us what would happen if the situation wasn't any better by the summer of 2011. Would there be another troop surge and another "deadline"?

I'm afraid we're still in the middle of quagmires in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and sending more troops to either will not solve the problem. We should have learned in Vietnam, that it's almost impossible to win a guerilla war in someone else's country.

Since we haven't yet learned that lesson, we are now doomed to a repeat of history (and more dead American soldiers).

America Split On Afghanistan

A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows that the American people are split down the middle on supporting the war in Afghanistan. The poll was conducted on October 22-25 by Democrat Peter D. Hart and Republican Bill McInturff, and has a statistical error of 3.1 points. Here are the polls findings about Afghanistan:

47% support increasing the troop level

43% oppose increasing the troop level

58% support delaying a decision until after Afghanistan's presidential runoff and the political situation there becomes clearer

55% could accept sending 10,000 more troops

43% could accept sending 40,000 more troops

45% favor withdrawing all American troops from Afghanistan

My question is, why does anyone think sending more troops will accomplish anything at all, let alone a victory, in Afghanistan? Didn't the Soviets try that with little or no success? Why should we think we would be more successful than they were?

The truth is the Taliban has enough support and enough hiding places (many of them in Pakistan) to prolong this war for years. The only number in the above poll that I can see getting larger is the 45% who say we should withdraw our troops. With each year that passes with no real progress, the number of people who realize we have gotten ourselves into a no-win Vietnam-like situation will grow.

We could put another 100,000 troops into Afghanistan, and it would not create a situation where we could win that war. The Taliban (and al Queda) would simply go to ground and do more guerilla operations, accomplishing a small but steady death toll of American soldiers. Then as we withdraw troops, they would come out of there holes and fight larger operations until they take over again.

Years ago, I supported the Bush administration invasion of Afghanistan (although I always opposed our adventure in Iraq). I was wrong about Afghanistan, and I'm ashamed of my former opinion. I thought we could go in and capture or kill al-Queda, and then get out. I had no idea Bush would half do the job, then invade Iraq, and then try to engage in "nation-building" in both countries -- a concept that has been an utter failure.

We needed to capture al-Queda and bring them to justice, but we didn't do that. We didn't need to engage in nation-building, and we're still trying to do that (poorly). Whether we want to admit it or not, we have failed miserably in both countries. Continuing will only cause the deaths of more American soldiers.

Let's bring the soldiers home now.

Sorry, John - It Wasn't The Surge !

The last few days have not been good for John McCain. After casting his lot with an extended war in Iraq and staying until a final victory is achieved, it seems like everyone, even his friends have turned against him.

Obama has been saying for some time that he would withdraw all the troops from Iraq within a general timetable of 16 months. A few days ago, the Iraqi leader (Maliki) also began to press for a timetable for withdrawal. He even went further and said Obama's timetable sounded about right to him. Then George Bush succumbed to pressure from the Iraqis and agreed to "time horizons" -- he couldn't bring himself to call it a timetable.

The American public is further from McCain's position. Over 63% of Americans would like to see the troops withdrawn within a year. This left McCain out in the cold on the withdrawal situation. So for a few days he's just been repeating that the surge was his idea and it worked, and Obama should admit that. But is it the truth?

In the first 6 1/2 months of 2008, over 220 Americans and more than 4,000 Iraqis have been killed. That is a long way from victory, but it does reflect a cut in the number of deaths. McCain would have us believe the troop surge was responsible for the smaller number of deaths. Some of the media are buying his argument.

But the truth is that two other things happened in Iraq about the same time as the troop surge, and both of them probably had more to do with the drop in deaths than the troop surge did. First, many of the Sunni tribal chiefs stopped supporting al-Queda and began to fight them. Second, al-Sadr declared a truce and ordered his Shiite brigades to not attack American troops.

Without those two things happening, it is highly doubtful that the troop surge would have had any effect at all. Also, with the two things occuring, the drop in the number of deaths would have happened even without a troop surge.

I realize that McCain is grasping at straws to try and maintain his credibility regarding the Iraq war, but his argument that the troop surge worked just doesn't hold water.

Death Count Still Rising In Iraq

Last year, Bush instituted his infamous "troop surge" in Iraq. McCain jumped on board, saying Bush was finally doing the war correctly. Both of them quickly declared victory when the death toll of American soldiers dropped to 23 last December. Since then they have been bragging about how they're now winning the war.

I guess they think the American people are stupid, and if they keep talking about victory we might actually believe them someday. But it's now looking like the December numbers were just a one-month fluke. Since then, 152 American soldiers have been killed, including 44 this month. That's 1.57 soldiers dying every single day in Iraq.

Since December, the American death toll is rising each month. The total now is 4,056. Frankly, I don't think we can stand much more of this kind of victory, especially since nothing is being accomplished either politically or security-wise.

McCain is still deluded enough to believe an American victory is possible in Iraq. He has even talked of leaving troops there for a hundred years (as long as they're not being killed). That shows just how deluded he is.

He doesn't seem to understand that we have placed our troops into a no-win situation. They are being killed because they are on Arab soil. The killing will go on for as long as we have troops there. If we stay for a hundred years, the killing will go on that long.

This shows the importance of defeating McCain in November. The only plan he has for Iraq is more of the same old Bush strategy. We must elect Democrats, and then pressure them to withdraw all our troops as soon as possible.

A permanent military base in Iraq is not an option.

"Victory" In Iraq Was Short-Lived

Last year, Bush sent an extra 30,000 troops to Iraq in an effort to get a handle on the violence there. By December, American deaths were at their lowest level for the year. Only 23 soldiers died in Iraq that month (0.77 per day). Even though that was 23 deaths too many, Republicans began hailing it as a sure sign that we were finally winning the Iraq War.

They are still telling that lie. Just two days ago, I heard Republican apologist Ann Coulter say we are definitely winning in Iraq. Well, that sure was a short-lived victory, because the death toll is once again climbing.

In January, 40 American soldiers were killed (1.29 per day). So far this month, 16 soldiers have been killed in the first 11 days (1.45 per day). The death rate is steadily climbing and will soon be back to pre-December levels.

Bush had told Americans that things were going so well that we could begin withdrawing troops from Iraq. After all, we had turned the corner toward victory there. But General Petraeus and Secretary Gates have now realized that no corner has been turned in the Iraq War. Both are saying that we must "delay" the withdrawal of any troops from Iraq.

It's beginning to look like the December numbers were just a fluke. No corner has been turned. No victory has been acheived. Iraq is still the same quagmire it has been for years, and nothing is being accomplished beyond the killing of more Americans and innocent Iraqis.

It should be clear to anyone by now that we cannot impose a government or a solution on the Iraqi people. They are going to have to do it themselves, and they cannot do that until we get out of the way.

Bush still has dreams of controlling Iraqi oil with permanent American bases in that country. But that's not going to happen. Our continued presence will just cause continued violence and prevent an eventual solution to their civil war.

At this point, only one thing makes sense -- the withdrawal of ALL our troops.

Surge Providing No Victory In Iraq

Last month, 24 American soldiers were killed in the Iraq War. Bush and Republican apologists jumped on this decrease in American deaths as proof that the "surge" was working there. They would like for Americans to believe that a corner has been turned there, and we are now on the way to victory.

This illusion is helped along by the fact that the major media outlets aren't saying much about the war these days. They are more concerned with the primaries being held and the bad economic news. It's kind of ironic that the failure in Iraq by Bush is being covered up by his failure in economic policies.

But in spite of the lack of coverage, the war still goes on and victory is still an impossible goal in Iraq. And the killing continues. In the first 22 days of this month, 27 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq. The American death toll now stands at 3931, not counting the soldiers that died after being evacuated with critical injuries.

In addition to this, 460 Iraqis were killed this month. That means that 1 American and 20 Iraqis are killed in Iraq every single day! That may look like victory to Republicans, but to me it looks like the same old quagmire of death that's been going on for years and has no end in sight.

There has been no real progress either politically or militarily in Iraq. Rather than helping the Iraqis to solve their problems, we have been nothing but an impediment. And every day more Americans and Iraqis lose their lives in the continuing violence.

It is time to admit the truth, and bring ALL of our soldiers home.

12,000 More Troops To Be Sent To Iraq

It looks like the "troop surge" of over 21,000 new troops sent to Iraq is not working out as Bush told us it would. He had told us that these extra troops would only be needed for a few months, and would allow him to control the violence in and around Baghdad. He was wrong on both counts.

The violence in the sectarian Iraqi civil war is nowhere near being under control, even though Republicans are doing everything they can to create the illusion that it is. Recently John McCain went to Baghdad and did a photo-op in the market area, supposedly to show how safe the area really was.

But they didn't tell us the truth about McCain's photo-op propaganda. The truth is that before McCain went to the market, the area was flooded with American troops. These troops created an artificial "safe zone" for McCain. Merchants in the marketplace said this was nothing like normal conditions in the market. It's sad that McCain, who was once known as a straight-shooter, is now just another Republican liar and Bush apologist.

Things have not gotten better in Iraq. People still die every day, including American troops. Defense Secretary Gates recently warned that putting limits on Bush's war could lead to "ethnic cleansing". Who's he trying to fool? The ethnic cleansing has been going on for quite a while now, and we are powerless to prevent it.

Now, we learn that the temporary troop surge is becoming permanent. NBC News has recently learned that the Bush administration is planning to send another 12,000 National Guard troops to Iraq in 2008, in order to bolster the troop surge that was supposed to end sometime this summer.

Is it any wonder that 70% of the American people now oppose Bush's war? Bush lied to get us into the war, and has continued to lie about it since then. Isn't it time to act in defense of our own soldiers and get them out of the middle of this civil war?

It has long-since become clear that we cannot impose our wishes on Iraq through military power, even if we had the right to do so (which we don't). The Iraqis must find their own solution, and it will probably be bloody - civil wars usually are. But keeping our troops in the line of fire between the opposing factions, can accomplish nothing except to delay the inevitable.

The only sane course of action is to bring our troops home now. Not next year, NOW!