By Colbert King
November 2, 2009; 11:36 AM ET
Washington Post opinion Page
All eyes are on the White House, where President Obama will soon make a decision on the way forward in Afghanistan. But it pays to keep an eye on the Kabul headquarters of senior American and NATO commander Gen. Stanley H. McChrystal. If, as is being widely rumored in Washington, Obama ends up not going along with McChrystal’s request for a reported 40,000 troops to support a sustained, substantial counterinsurgency commitment to achieve victory in Afghanistan, what will McChrystal do?
McChrystal is a consequential figure. He is one of the pioneers of counterterrorism and a highly intelligent, reliable, and well regarded general. His standing in the Pentagon and NATO and his professional reputation are on the line.
After all, McChrystal is the top military officer Obama dispatched to assess the Afghan situation on the ground. Having found a dangerously deteriorating situation, McChrystal, as instructed, proposed a strategy up through the chain of command to the White House that he concluded has the best chance of staving off defeat in what Obama has called a “war of necessity.” McChrystal wants to pursue a counterinsurgency strategy that focuses on protecting civilians, winning over cities and building infrastructure -- a strategy that calls for more manpower on top of the 68,000 U.S. troops already there and a much longer time horizon.
McChrystal has made it clear that he does not support the more limited campaign pushed by Vice President Biden that stresses a counterterrorism effort against Al Qaeda along the Pakistani border with missiles and drones.
If Obama agrees with McChrystal’s goals and strategy yet scales down the mission by sending fewer troops, will the general salute like a good soldier and carry on, as the White House would wish? Or will McChrystal conclude that he has been second-guessed by poll-driven civilians outside the military, that he has been handed a stripped-down mission that cannot succeed and which will only endanger the men and women entrusted to him?
Will he decide that he can no longer serve as Obama’s war commander? Because an Afghan strategy crafted around a table in the White House will be all Obama’s, even if it draws upon some ideas of McChrystal.
Yes, watch the White House. But keep a close eye on Stanley McChrystal.
*********************************************************************************
Wow. That is a really good question. What WILL General McChrystal do, if the Obama administration continues to procrastinate on this issue?
Now, I am by no means an expert on politics, war, or anything of that nature (which is the reason WHY I started this blog--to LEARN), but, if you appoint someone who is deemed as 'consequential' and considered to be highly intelligent, and reliable, and you tell him/her to make an assessment of the situation of a war, and they tell you what they need and when they need it, WHY in God's name would you continue to take your time on making a decision, knowing that this man is relying on YOU for help?
Now, my question is this: If Obama continues to put off making a decision on whether or not to send more troops to this Generaal (which he appointed) do you think it is fair to say that the General may decide to have an 'uprising' of his own? Would it be too far fetched to assume that General McChrystal may try to go against the Obama administration in some way, that may cause the president some major political problems?
Well, I think the next few days (or weeks) are going to be very crucial indeed, and we may see something very interesting start to transpire. What do you think?
Template:Mainpageright
3 hours ago
5 comments:
First, love your blog!!
McChrystal is probably seething over the fact that Obama is making him look like an idiot by taking so freakin' long to make a decision. And to top it off, he'll probably just ignore the General's advice.
Rush Limbaugh was right, this guy is a man-child. He's immature, inexperienced, and in over his head.
Wake up, America!
Thank you for visiting, and I hope that you will enjoy reading my other posts here.
As for McChrystal, I am wondering if maybe he will revolt against Obama? Or is that 'rebel'? Either way, it will certainly be interesting to see how this thing plays out.
I love your blog, too, and I have been reading the various posts, and trying to get around to commenting on all of them.
I agree with Rush, he is a 'man-child'. I mean it is ridiculous for a president to 'pick a fight' with a news organization or radio talk show host. Come on now, that is what kindergartners do.
Thanks again, and I hope to see more of your comments here.
Have a great week.
I know his hands are tied by the UCMJ. Unfortunately he will probably do what he is required to do under the chain of command. With that said, once he retires, Obama is fair game. I have a feeling many will write about the mess he expanded in Afghanistan.
Gen. McChrystal is a very honorable man, and I bet he'd rather resign than follow an ill-advised plan that would put our troops in great danger.
If such a thing did in fact occur, it would send a message loud and clear to the Man-Child.
Please America, We Don't Need No Mo-bama!!!
Well, in any case, I think whatever happens next will be very interesting.
I saw on the news last night that some soldiers from here in Memphis will be deployed to the war (I think they mentioned Iraq, but not sure) but they won't leave out until after the holidays.
As for whether or not a coup is in order, it's hard to tell at this point, but I do think that this is going to be a very interesting story to watch as it unfolds, especially if General McChrystal does not get the help he needs or requests.
Post a Comment