World

Leaving Afghanistan not an Option - White House

by albertacowpoke | October 5, 2009 at 02:18 pm

108 views | 16 Recommendations | 7 comments

There has been much discussion in the past week on what the new strategy for Afghanistan would be. The White House has now stated that leaving Afghanistan is not an option.

A report, authored by General McChrystal, ISAF Commander, he made the assessment that more troops were needed in order to avoid failure in Afghanistan.

General (Ret) Jones, NSA, VP Joe Biden and John Kerry favour a distant approach from the proximity of the border of Pakistan, using a series of surgical strikes and drones. In a speech in London this weekend, General McChrystal said that this would lead to failure of the mission.

Robert Gibbs, the White House spokesman said that walking away is not an option and that was not a consideration of President Obama.

"I don't think we have the option to leave. That's quite clear," Gibbs said.

General McChrystal is requesting up to an additional 40,000 troops.

WASHINGTON -- The White House said Monday that President Barack Obama is not considering a strategy for Afghanistan that would withdraw U.S. troops from the eroding war there.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said that walking away isn't a viable option to deal with a war that is about to enter its ninth year.

"I don't think we have the option to leave. That's quite clear," Gibbs said.

The debate over whether to send as many as 40,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan is a major element of a strategy overhaul that senior administration policy advisers will consider this week as they gather for top-level meetings on the evolving direction of the war.

0 See all footage | View Slideshow

Share: email story | add to any | | facebook | stumbleupon

recommend Add a comment

a211423

at 14:44 on October 5th, 2009

I was under the impression that the discussion was about whether to escalate, not whether to leave completely, and that other strategies were being considered that do not involve sending in more troops.

albertacowpoke

at 14:54 on October 5th, 2009

I think this comment was made amidst speculation that the decision might be to leave Afghanistan. This comment will put that to rest.

Based on what I heard today, all options could be on the table for a strategy. They made sure that that option was off the table before talking to Congress. Apparently the President is meeting with Congressional leaders to get input from them before going back to the NSC tomorrow.

Rhonda J Mangus

at 18:42 on October 7th, 2009

Thanks for this, albertacowpoke. Another view: Open Letter to the President by William R. Polk who sees an opportunity to accomplish American objectives while avoiding a course of action that could derail plans for [Obama's] presidency, just as the Vietnam War ruined the presidency of Lyndon Johnson.

rng

at 18:49 on October 7th, 2009

Rhonda, well found! Polk is spot on. I would make one amendment - the Taliban on resumption of power will contain Al Qaeda themselves as they don't want the West to intervene in their national affairs again, and for the hard of hearing Al Qaeda is a TRANS-national organization, only a few hundred strong. They don't care about Taliban's national agnda just the caliphate. I wish Polk was an adviser as he has it correct and precious few others are!

Rhonda J Mangus

at 05:52 on October 8th, 2009

Thank you, rng! It certainly reads like Polk should be the adviser:).

albertacowpoke

at 19:10 on October 7th, 2009

This is an interesting open letter to President Obama by William R. Polk. It boils down once again to Selection and Maintenance of the Aim. Without having an objective, it will be difficult to formulate a strategy.

If you go from Polk's analysis and assume that disabling Osama Bin Laden is the objective, then his course of action makes sense. This would be a difficult political selling job. It would also make one wonder what we have been doing there for the last eight years.