There's been a lot of discussion about President Obama's decision to withdraw 33,000 troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2012. The left such as Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi have made the statement that it's moving too slow. Many on the right such as Senator Lindsey Graham, believe that we are moving too fast. Their decisions are made in a political context. This is no less true for the President of the United States. A military decision has been made according to financial costs, political cost, and human costs. To me that is much better than a ok corral decision made by the previous administration.
Some of the discussion has been around who won the debate. Some say VP Joe Biden, and that Gen. Petraus lost. Both points are naive.
To me the biggest winner in this debate is Gen. Colin Powell. Almost two decades ago Gen. Colin Powell in what is called the Powell doctrine said if we are going into war we must go in with overwhelming force. General Powell also said that if you break it you own it.
For those who say that the President did not listen to the generals they need a little history lesson.
The military would love to have had four hundred thousand troops to deal with Afghanistan at the very beginning. That would've been adhering to the original Powell doctrine and it is quite possible that if we had done that at the beginning, our involvement in Afghanistan as well as Iraq would've ended years ago. To his credit President Obama had escalated the Afghan war with a surge in troops which he had committed to bringing home at the end of 2012 and that is a commitment that I am glad he is honoring. The problem is that it came almost a decade too late. The issue is not why didn’t President Obama accept the general’s suggestion. The issue is why wasn’t the Powell doctrine followed at the beginning.
We have seen the Powell doctrine proved correct in Iraq and Afghanistan. We were told that we would be welcomed as heroes in Iraq. That turned out to be false. Both wars were said to be winnable by less troops that what was actually needed. That also turned out to be false.
The Powell Doctrine was rejected by liberal Secretary of State Madeline Albright when she served under President Bill Clinton as well as neo conservatives including Dick Cheney.
The rejection of the Powell Doctrine led us into a quagmire and here we are 10 years later.
What President Obama inherited was a boneheaded rejection of the Powell doctrine by the left and the right and has been left with a damned if you do, damned if you don’t scenario.
The political side of it is that after 10 years, the American people are no longer willing to tolerate this war. Whether good or bad in a democracy, war is not sustainable if the population is not with you. We learned that from Vietnam. That lesson has been consistently missed by the military.
On the other side if you enter into a country based on a miscalculation it is not fair for us to simply leave without leaving something in place. That is something that liberal activists normally miss. MSNBC commentators such as Cenk Uygur and Rachael Maddow (Maddow is usually correct) are wrong on this issue
Unfortunately, where we are now stems back from 10 years ago when an initial decision was made that this was not going to be a difficult fight. Consequently, the president has had to figure out how to deal with this issue from a political and military perspective.
I tend to agree with Richard Haas who believes that even if we stayed there for another 10 years, it would not make much of a difference but I also believe that to be fair we must move out and a slow and methodical manner.
I wish that the previous administration would've listened to Gen. Colin Powell. Decisions we make today are not made in isolation, but in the context of previous decisions. The decision not to adhere to the Powell doctrine of military operations is a major reason for our protracted war in two nations.
Will there be lessons learned from this. I certainly hope so. One lesson that we learned is that victory is a nebulous thing unless everyone agrees on the definition of victory and loss.
We no longer have the waving of the white flag and the signing of a treaty as we did in the European theatre during World War II. It is much more complicated and nuanced.
The time to listen to the generals is at the beginning, not at the end when it is too late.
Some of the discussion has been around who won the debate. Some say VP Joe Biden, and that Gen. Petraus lost. Both points are naive.
To me the biggest winner in this debate is Gen. Colin Powell. Almost two decades ago Gen. Colin Powell in what is called the Powell doctrine said if we are going into war we must go in with overwhelming force. General Powell also said that if you break it you own it.
For those who say that the President did not listen to the generals they need a little history lesson.
The military would love to have had four hundred thousand troops to deal with Afghanistan at the very beginning. That would've been adhering to the original Powell doctrine and it is quite possible that if we had done that at the beginning, our involvement in Afghanistan as well as Iraq would've ended years ago. To his credit President Obama had escalated the Afghan war with a surge in troops which he had committed to bringing home at the end of 2012 and that is a commitment that I am glad he is honoring. The problem is that it came almost a decade too late. The issue is not why didn’t President Obama accept the general’s suggestion. The issue is why wasn’t the Powell doctrine followed at the beginning.
We have seen the Powell doctrine proved correct in Iraq and Afghanistan. We were told that we would be welcomed as heroes in Iraq. That turned out to be false. Both wars were said to be winnable by less troops that what was actually needed. That also turned out to be false.
The Powell Doctrine was rejected by liberal Secretary of State Madeline Albright when she served under President Bill Clinton as well as neo conservatives including Dick Cheney.
The rejection of the Powell Doctrine led us into a quagmire and here we are 10 years later.
What President Obama inherited was a boneheaded rejection of the Powell doctrine by the left and the right and has been left with a damned if you do, damned if you don’t scenario.
The political side of it is that after 10 years, the American people are no longer willing to tolerate this war. Whether good or bad in a democracy, war is not sustainable if the population is not with you. We learned that from Vietnam. That lesson has been consistently missed by the military.
On the other side if you enter into a country based on a miscalculation it is not fair for us to simply leave without leaving something in place. That is something that liberal activists normally miss. MSNBC commentators such as Cenk Uygur and Rachael Maddow (Maddow is usually correct) are wrong on this issue
Unfortunately, where we are now stems back from 10 years ago when an initial decision was made that this was not going to be a difficult fight. Consequently, the president has had to figure out how to deal with this issue from a political and military perspective.
I tend to agree with Richard Haas who believes that even if we stayed there for another 10 years, it would not make much of a difference but I also believe that to be fair we must move out and a slow and methodical manner.
I wish that the previous administration would've listened to Gen. Colin Powell. Decisions we make today are not made in isolation, but in the context of previous decisions. The decision not to adhere to the Powell doctrine of military operations is a major reason for our protracted war in two nations.
Will there be lessons learned from this. I certainly hope so. One lesson that we learned is that victory is a nebulous thing unless everyone agrees on the definition of victory and loss.
We no longer have the waving of the white flag and the signing of a treaty as we did in the European theatre during World War II. It is much more complicated and nuanced.
The time to listen to the generals is at the beginning, not at the end when it is too late.
No comments:
Post a Comment