Last night’s speech shouldn’t have been a surprise to anyone. President Obama’s campaign platform was to decrease troops in Iraq, which he alluded to as being an unjust war to having a troop surge in Afghanistan if he won the election.
Many questions are continuing to be raised regarding his plan, which I believe will not succeed as outlined:
1) Is not the capturing of Al-Qaeda leaders more an exercise of intelligence and surgical operations more than escalation of ground troops? I mean, we do have satellites that can intercept all phone and radio communications and can take a picture of a penny from outer space.
2) Won’t a troop surge cause fighters to retreat into Pakistan in which our troops will not enter? And if our troops were to enter Pakistan, wouldn’t this turn Pakistani public opinion MORE against us? It’s not like Pakistanis trust our actions in the region.
3) Will paying warlords money instead of Karzai’s government bring more stability to Afghanistan and lessen corruption? Aren’t these the same warlords who are involved in exporting the world’s largest quantities of heroin and opium?
4) Despite the planned “civilian surge” and the warm words about not wanting to be an occupying force, does anyone honestly think that the masses of Afghans will not view us as occupiers with over 150,000 foreign troops on their soil who don’t look like them, don’t speak their languages and don’t practice their religion?
SEE comments below two people in Congress from the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC).
http://www.reddingnewsreview.com/newspages/2009newspages/black_lawmakers_hit_obama_on_afg_09_091000287.htm
Black lawmakers hit Obama on Afghanistan surge
Dec. 2, 2009, 3:50 a.m. – Some black lawmakers say they oppose President Barack Obama’s plan to send more than 30,000 troops to Afghanistan.Rep. Barbra Lee, who is head of the Congressional Black Caucus, said she is prepared to offer legislation that would halt funding for the surge in troops.
“While I recognize the harsh realities of war and I applaud President Obama for his thorough review of United States Policy in Afghanistan - I must respectfully disagree with the president,” the California Democrat said. “His decision to implement yet another unnecessary and counterproductive escalation of troops in Afghanistan is disappointing.
“We can’t continue to send more troops and expect different results,” she said. “Our military is already stretched too thin.Afghanistan needs a political solution — not a military one. Adding more troops won’t change this important fact.”
Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. also apposes Obama’s planned surge in Afghanistan. However, the Illinois Democrat stopped short of saying if he would support Lee’s legislation to cut funding.
“I consider myself one of the president’s men,” Jackson said. ”But, I’m deeply skeptical about his plan. I hope and want to be convinced that it will work.“
The remarks from Jackson and Lee indicate an even further split between the president and members of the CBC.
The caucus is already withholding support for an overhaul in supervision of the nation’s banks. CBC officials have said that they are concerned about blacks having access to money.