Congress gives Obama's Afghan plans mixed reviews

President Obama delivers an address to the nation on his plans to withdraw American forces from Afghanistan by 2014.

Updated June 23, 2 p.m. ET

Not unlike the war in Afghanistan, President Obama found himself in something of a no-win situation in announcing his plan to start pulling out U.S. forces.

Some were quick to criticize that he was putting American gains in Afghanistan at risk by withdrawing too many troops too quickly.

Others, including leading members of his own party, were disappointed that his timeline for drawing down the number of American troops was not more rapid.

The president's plan calls for withdrawing 10,000 US troops from Afghanistan by the end of this year. He said all 33,000 of the surge forces deployed starting at the end of 2009, would be out by next summer. That would still leave 68,000 American military personnel in country.

His speech anticipated the criticism that was headed his way.

Obama: This is beginning of the end of the Afghanistan war
Transcript of Obama's speech on Afghanistan
CBSNews.com special report: Afghanistan

"Some would have America retreat from our responsibility as an anchor of global security and embrace an isolation that ignores the very real threats that we face. Others would have America over-extended, confronting every evil that can be found abroad."

Within minutes of Mr Obama finishing his remarks, expressions of dismay from House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi hit reporter's inboxes.

"It has been the hope of many in Congress and across the country that the full drawdown of U.S. forces would happen sooner than the president laid out," said Pelosi. "We will continue to press for a better outcome."

Fellow House Democrat Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut said she supports the president's commitment to ending the war in Afghanistan, but believes "we need to begin a more significant drawdown of our troops now."

"The president's proposal does not go far enough," she said.

On the Republican side, Rep. Howard McKeon of California, said he was "deeply concerned about the aggressive troop withdrawals" Mr. Obama put forward.

McKeon, Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said he feared the president's timetable for withdrawals "could jeopardize the hard-won gains our troops and allies have made over the past eighteen months."

Those concerns were echoed by Sen. Joe Lieberman, a former Democrat now serving as an Independent.

"I had hoped the president would draw down our forces more cautiously," said Lieberman in a statement. He too worries the "accelerated withdrawal" will put at risk "the substantial gains we have made in Afghanistan."

One of the leading Republicans seeking to unseat Mr. Obama next year expressed concerns about adhering to "an arbitrary timetable" for the withdrawal of U.S troops from Afghanistan.

"This decision should not be based on politics or economics," says GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney. He said "the significant progress" made there must not be put in jeopardy.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who served both Presidents Bush (43) and Obama as Pentagon chief but who steps down from office at the end of the month, issued a statement of support for the Obama plan.

"It provides our commanders with enough resources, time and perhaps most importantly, flexibility to bring the surge to a successful conclusion," said Gates.

In his speech, Mr. Obama said he was trying to make good on the pledge he delivered in an Address to the Nation 18 months ago at West Point, when he announced he would send a surge of 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan but would begin to pull them out in July of '11.

He also reaffirmed his support for the principal U.S. objective in Afghanistan - to stabilize the country and ensure it never again becomes a safe haven for al-Qaeda to use for planning attacks on America.

If it works out the way he hopes, Mr. Obama can stand as a candidate for re-election in November of next year, having brought home 33,000 Americans from Afghanistan. But if the situation there turns sour, it could upend his hopes for a second term.

Correction: An earlier version of this report incorrectly stated that House Democratic Leader Pelosi emailed a statement to reporters while President Obama was still speaking. The statement was actually sent a couple of minutes after the speech was completed.

[Truth_Tracker]

Another Obama "cut the baby in half" solution. Someone needs to explain to Obama and all politicians that "Solomon's Solution" (cut the baby in half) was NEVER considered an 'acceptable' solution. King Solomon was trying to determine who was the rightful biological mother of an infant, where two women both claimed the baby was theirs. After laboring to decide who the real mother was, King Solomon finally issued the decision and decree that the baby was to be cut in half, with one-half of the infant's body given to each woman. Upon hearing this, the 'real' biological mother came forward and said "I will withdraw my claim; let the other woman have the infant." In doing this, King Solomon then realized this woman was the 'real' mother - with the compassion of a true mother, and he declared her to be the mother who should be given the infant. Once and for all, may all politicians throughout the World forever know that King Solomon had no intention of "cutting the baby in half." King Solomon at no time actually believed this was an equitable, viable or humane solution. King Solomon only proffered the absurd decision and decree for the purpose of "smoking out" the true mother of the infant. So to politicians everywhere - STOP CUTTING THE BABY IN HALF - and stop mis-portraying that atrocity as an equitable, viable, humane "solution." In fact, it is merely a gutless refusal to "Do the right thing" - a coward's refusal to make the right decision because it might offend somebody.

[rank_n_file]

Let's take a cold hard look at the US war mentality. The US fought the Iraq War, a war that should never have been waged by the US - a war predicated on false, fraudulent info and intent. And now the right-wing war hawks that got the US into the "Iraq Mistake" are now clamoring for the US to abandon the Afghanistan War - the "legitimate" war - the war that absolutely must be waged and won - the war that was utterly neglected by the US because of its preoccupation with the "Iraq Mistake" - the war that is taking place in what the whole World knows and acknowledges is the spawning grounds for Taliban and Al Queda terrorists.

THAT war, the Afghanistan War, is the war that stunted right-wing moron ideologues now want the US to abandon!?!?! That would mean two enormously costly wars fought and lost by the US in the past 10 years -- two wars which the US will have abandoned leaving those countries in utter chaos -- two wars which the US fought and abandoned leaving those countries utterly decimated and in much, much worse condition than they were in before the wars -- two wars which the US claimed to be fighting "for the benefit of those countries" -- two wars the US said would leave those countries better of than before the war - two wars which have left those countries utterly decimated and in total chaos.

Can there be any doubt whatsoever why the right-wing political dolts in the US should NOT be trusted to run our government? The right-wing political ideologues in the US have tanked the economy and trashed this country's reputation in the World by fighting AND LOSING two wars which they now complain were horrible mistakes. What a horrid right-wing global disaster these Republican and Tea Party fools have left us with.

[realist51]

World war one, we were involved for about 2 years, world war 2 lasted 4 years. why are we still in Iraq and Afghanistan after TEN years? is this another Vietnam? lasting through three presidents? and two billion dollars a week! Isn't this what OBL wanted to accomplish? to trash our nation by milking it dry in a never ending war? We could do a lot more with a lot less by attacking and preventing similar events like 9/11 from happening here and using the eye's in the sky's,drones and cruise missiles. 2 billion a week! really! if all goes to plan an troops are pulled out by 2014 that's another 330 BILLION lost from our economy that could have gone towards infrastructure schools teachers cops and firefighters here at home.And we need to ask ourselves this too What if President Obama doesn't get re-elected and a republican like Romney gets in. What will he then do? send more troops back in? would it ever end?

[RobAla]

President Obama is not pulling troops out because the Afghan government is stable and able to control threats of terrorism; nor is he following the advice of his military command. This is all about the 2012 election, and President Obama hopes this will lead to staying in the Whitehouse.

The killing of Bin Laden did not end terrorism against the people of the United States. Whether President Obama is re-elected or not; if terrorists gain control of Afghanistan again, it will jeopardize the safety of every American. If this happens, President Obama will be looked on in history as an irresponsible President who placed the safety of Americans below a political career. Time will tell.

If our troops, who are in harms way, suffer greater casualties because they don't have sufficient numbers to take of each other - this political move will prove to be a deadly one. Time will tell.

Time will tell whether President Obama is bringing about a "responsible end" or an irresponsible end. As far as Senator Manchin's statement about the possibility of the Afghan people not wanting their nation rebuilt; we did not go to war in Afghanistan because of the Afghan people wanting a rebuilt nation. We went to war because evil terrorists controlled the country of Afghanistan, and they trained and launched an attack against the people of the United States in that country. We went there to protect the people of the United States from radical extremists who killed 3,000 Americans on American soil. Manchin needs to remember why we went there.

No American enjoys seeing American service personnel killed and hurt. However, if we leave before we can be assured the Afghans can control their own country and protect Americans against more attacks, then all the troop who have been killed will have died for nothing. We will have turned this into another Viet Nam.

I hope President Obama is right. I hope the Afghan people are strong enough to handle the situation over there. I hope his desire to remain in the Whitehouse does not overshadow his desire to protect American lives. I hope this does not prove to be an irresponsible move, based on political gamesmanship rather than true leadership. Time will tell.

[babooph]

Leaving an idiotic war that had a no win start,leaves Obama with no good solution-drop our heads & come home-the media can continue to lie about our guys being sent there to fight for their country....