Kerry prepares for cut and run in Afghanistan

| September 28, 2009

Probably the last person I’d ever ask about military issues, John Kerry (lied, while better men died), has a blueprint for cut and run in Afghanistan in this morning’s Wall Street Journal entitled “Testing Afghanistan Assumptions“. Of course, as is his MO, be compares Afghanistan to Vietnam. Except Afghanistan isn’t anything like Vietnam, except in the mind of John Kerry who wants to remind us that he spent three months in Vietnam once.

[O]ne of the lessons from Vietnam—applied in the first Gulf War and sadly forgotten for too long in Iraq—is that we should not commit troops to the battlefield without a clear understanding of what we expect them to accomplish, how long it will take, and how we maintain the consent of the American people. Otherwise, we risk bringing our troops home from a mission unachieved or poorly conceived. Gen. McChrystal offers no timetable or exit strategy, beyond warning that the next 12 months are critical. I agree that time is running out and that troops are dying without a sustainable strategy for victory. But we cannot rush to judgment.

Timetabled withdrawals seem to be the Left’s way of saying that they don’t understand “exit strategies”. You think they would have learned their lesson when, in 1995, then-President promised the American people that we’d be out of Bosnia by October 1996. of course, we still have troops in Bosnia. The Democrats don’t understand victory – they seem to think that by just announcing an end date, all parties will comply. Kerry is no different. Kerry doesn’t bother in his missive to examine what would happen if we did withdraw. He’d rather pontificate about the judicious use of force – ignoring the indisputable fact that war and victory are necessary regardless of the cost. Navel-gazing in Congress will only result in more needless deaths among US forces while Kerry and his useless pals try to appear as if they know something about war and strategy;

Mr. Obama promises not to send more troops to Afghanistan until he has absolute clarity on what the strategy will be. He is right to take the time he needs to define the mission. We should all follow his lead and debate all of the options. It may be that Gen. McChrystal has provided the road map to victory. Or it may be that some other strategy would work better, with fewer risks. We can’t know until we test every assumption and examine every option.

In other words, Kerry, Congress and Obama is more than willing to let more US soldiers die while they campaign for the 2010 elections and stroke their anti-war base. This is what we get when Democrats have both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue – 535 armchair generals.

Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Congress sucks, Military issues, Phony soldiers

16 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
las

Vietnam all over again.

BohicaTwentyTwo

Our goals in the Gulf War were so limited in scope they had almost no effect on the long term stability of the region. 12 years later, we had to go back in again to finish the job.

OnNow

Jonn,

Your closing:

“In other words, Kerry, Congress and Obama is more than willing to let more US soldiers die while they campaign for the 2010 elections and stroke their anti-war base. This is what we get when Democrats have both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue – 535 armchair generals.”

YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD !!

OnNow

Any minute now Jon Soltz should be chiming in with this support for Obama’s plan. All while he stays away from the fight. I would love to know the real reason why he never deploys back to the OIF/OEF theater. Everyone else in the Army or USMC does. But Soltz is always given a pass.

Frankly Opinionated

Typically Kerry/Left Wing blather. I wouldn’t feel safe asking Jon Carry directions across the street. Lyin’, cheatin, stealin’ Liberal Dipstick.
When did America cease letting her Generals fight the wars? With just a few tweaks to the ROE; the Marines could wrap this up while the rest of the Multi-National Force pack their bags.
Ronald Reagan, while campaigning for Californicate Governor, said something like: “If we’d just let the soldiers fight, we could blacktop Vietnam, put in parking stripes and be home for Christmas>”.
Hell yes, troops are dying there needlessly, only because the politicians won’t let them use the skills that they are best trained in.
“Learned all I need to know about Islam on 9/11!”

B Woodman

Yep, just like VietNam all over again. The politicians, NOT the professionals (the soldiers) are “fighting” the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And we ALL KNOW how efficient Big Gub’ment is at getting things accomplished. (end snark)

And since WHEN did battles and wars always go acording to plans and timetables?

If the SocLibs had been in charge of WWII, the U.S. would have cut and run after Pearl Harbor. The world (including the U.S.) would now be speaking German and Japanese.

B Woodman

HEY!! That’s an idea. If all these Big Gub’ment politicians think they can do a better job over there, then let’s SEND THEM OVER THERE and bring the soldiers home. I’m not sure if it would solve the problems over there, but it would sure help over here.

Spook86

Hey John,

Tell me again how you polish those medals. Ya, the ones you through out in protest.

John Kerry = Dousche-bag extraordinaire

OldTrooper

Well, he showed his ass back when he was running for Prez (34th Red Bull response was most excellent), but I guess “progressives” aren’t smart enough to know when to shut their pieholes.

NHSparky

Great, and 30 years from now, during the 2036 Presidential campaign, Senator Kokesh (Moonbat-NM) can tell us all about how he went over the border into Pakistan during Christmas in a riverboat, and how it’s seared–SEARED–into his memory.

At which point I’ll put the pillow over my own face to end my misery.

Sponge

So, if they were actually serious about the stratagies in Afghanistan, don’t you think the president should actually TALK TO THE GENERALS on the GROUND?!?

Obama really sucks at his job……..

ROS

His use of the phrase “consent of the American people” says it all: This is nothing more than a campaign speech.

ROS

His inclusion of “the consent of the American people” says it all: This is nothing more than a campaign speech.

ROS

I’m firing my crackberry for post double-tapping.

ponsdorf

Jonn said: The Democrats don’t understand victory – they seem to think that by just announcing an end date, all parties will comply.

Might have been better stated that they don’t consider it a victory if we win?

And to clearly re-state the obvious; many, if not most, consider Vietnam an epic victory and the right example to emulate.

That rationale makes no sense, but there it is.

Maybe it’s no more than evolution in action? Maybe the west needs a few centuries of Sharia law to thin out the nitwits?

Inbred Redneck

I’m sure some of you guys’ll be able to correct me if I’m wrong. I remember having heard that during WWII the enlistment periond was for something like the duration and six months. Now, the attention span of our elected officials is so short that they talk about “how long it will take, what we expect them to accomplish” as opposed to just getting it done. If the Party in power allows John Kerry (spit!gag!puke!) to be its spokesman, it deserves every bit of scorn that’s piled upon it.
Pretty sorry individual, but at least he wasn’t named as SecDef by the current Commander-in-Chief. I guess we always have something for which to be greatful, huh?