• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama's real McChrystal problem: Afghanistan plan in trouble

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,901
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Obama's real McChrystal problem: Afghanistan plan in trouble

Read more: Obama's real McChrystal problem: Afghanistan plan in trouble - Glenn Thrush - POLITICO.com



Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s MacArthur moment was more than an embarrassment for the White House — it was a reminder of just how badly Barack Obama’s “good war” in Afghanistan is going.

The challenge facing Obama in responding to his loose-lipped Afghanistan commander has an obvious parallel in Harry Truman’s firing of Douglas MacArthur at the height of the Korean War.

But it might actually be more comparable to another, more chronic presidential leadership crisis: Abraham Lincoln’s dilemma during the Civil War, when he was forced to repeatedly reshuffle his general staff in the face of vacillating public opinion, insubordination and, above all else, uncertainty about how best to win a bloody war he couldn’t afford to lose.

“Afghanistan is a mess, and it’s getting worse. To make matters worse, the president’s been dealing with internal squabbling on this for some time,” says Steve Clemons, a senior fellow at the New America Foundation, a nonpartisan Washington think tank, who has written extensively on Afghanistan.

“If there’s a bright side to all this, it’s that the president has an opportunity to reattach himself to a new policy, fire this guy and start with something new,” Clemons said. “It’s a tremendous opportunity to reset. But he can’t do anything until he fires McChrystal.”



Read more: Obama's real McChrystal problem: Afghanistan plan in trouble - Glenn Thrush - POLITICO.com




So in all of this do you all think that this war in Afghanistan is going how Obama had planned? Do you think that if McChrystal is fired or resigns, that this will be a new chapter for Obama?


what say you?
 

texmaster

Hippie Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
3,969
Reaction score
1,209
Location
Dallas TEXAS
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I dont think he'll get rid of McChrystal. He needs a fall guy
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Does it make a difference though? I think anyone with a few brain cells knows the U.S. cannot win this war by mid-2011 when Obama has identified the decrease in troop levels and a pull out will begin. Whether it's McChrystal or someone else, it's not going to get done. The Taliban, Al Qaeda, others --- whomever are biding their time. That's I think the entire crux of the dispute here --- Obama's carrying out the politically expedient method of Afghanistan while getting some pressure from all sides. So - do a last push - save a little face, leave and hope he's not viewed with his tail between his legs (a la Russia).

Look - there's only one thing to do with Afghanistan - raise most of it to the ground with the warlords included. But even then, it will take decades to get these people out of the 7th century A.D. A huge effort that no one wants to invest in. So, nothing will change whether we're there or not.
 

Lord Tammerlain

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
19,050
Reaction score
8,121
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The plan for Afghanistan did not include something that was done in Iraq. Which I expect was the most significant reason for the drop in violence

The Awakening Councils. The funding of militants in Al Anbar province not to fight the US and provide local security taking away 100 000 potential militants and instead making them part of the security apparatus was in my opinion far more significant then the extra 40 000 US soldiers which only took the total number of US soldiers to slightly higher then the max that had been in Iraq before
 
Top Bottom