Obama To Rethink Afghan War Policy

New Administration May Open Talks With Iran, Plans To Reinvigorate Hunt For Bin Laden

(Washington Post)  This story was written by Karen DeYoung.

---

The incoming Obama administration plans to explore a more regional strategy to the war in Afghanistan -- including possible talks with Iran -- and looks favorably on the nascent dialogue between the Afghan government and "reconcilable" elements of the Taliban, according to Obama national security advisers.

President-elect Barack Obama also intends to renew the U.S. commitment to the hunt for Osama bin Laden, a priority the president-elect believes President Bush has played down after years of failing to apprehend the al-Qaeda leader. Critical of Bush during the campaign for what he said was the president's extreme focus on Iraq at the expense of Afghanistan, Obama also intends to move ahead with a planned deployment of thousands of additional U.S. troops there.

The emerging broad strokes of Obama's approach are likely to be welcomed by a number of senior U.S. military officials who advocate a more aggressive and creative course for the deteriorating conflict. Taliban attacks and U.S. casualties this year are the highest since the war began in 2001.

Some military leaders remain wary of Obama's pledge to order a steady withdrawal of combat forces from Iraq, to be completed within 16 months -- an order advisers say Obama is likely to give in his first weeks in office. Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has called a withdrawal timeline "dangerous." Others are distrustful of a new administration they see as unschooled in the counterinsurgency wars that have consumed the military for the past seven years.

But conversations with several Obama advisers and a number of senior military strategists both before and since last Tuesday's election reveal a shared sense that the Afghan effort under the Bush administration has been hampered by ideological and diplomatic constraints and an unrealistic commitment to the goal of building a modern democracy -- rather than a stable nation that rejects al-Qaeda and Islamist extremism and does not threaten U.S. interests. None of those who discussed the subject would speak on the record, citing sensitivities surrounding the presidential transition and the war itself.

As Obama begins to formulate his Afghan war policy, some senior military strategists have begun to question the U.S. commitment to Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who is expected to run for reelection next year but is widely considered weak and ineffective. Some European and NATO officials have suggested that an assembly of tribal elders should select the country's next leader, an idea the State Department has rejected.

Obama advisers have emphasized that a sharper focus on al-Qaeda does not mean pulling back on the Afghan ground war. Obama called early in the campaign for deploying two or three additional U.S. combat brigades to Afghanistan. Bush has already approved such an increase, although the timing of the deployments, likely to begin next spring, depends on the drawdown of forces from Iraq.

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Mullen, frustrated by the performance of NATO allies whose troops make up more than half the total foreign force in Afghanistan, have already planned for a more overt and forceful U.S. leadership role in the war, as well as more direct involvement by U.S. forces in fighting the Taliban in southern and western Afghanistan.

Some NATO military officials said enhanced U.S. leadership would be welcome, as long as it was not seen as a "takeover bid," said one senior European officer whose country has troops fighting as part of the NATO coalition in Afghanistan. While the U.S. military has long criticized some NATO members for lacking combat zeal and expertise in Afghanistan, many European officers resent what they see as U.S. arrogance.

The NATO officer suggested that Obama, whose election was greeted with wide approval in Europe, may have more success than Bush in persuading other alliance members to increase their fighting forces in Afghanistan. "I think you'll find the new president would then be able to persuade a number of European nations who have not liked this administration's way of doing business to come in behind them," he said.

At Mullen's direction, the map of the Afghanistan battle space is being redrawn to include the tribal regions of western Pakistan. U.S. military and intelligence leaders have delivered forceful messages to Pakistani officials on the need to step up attacks against Taliban and al-Qaeda sanctuaries in their territory.

Obama, advisers said, plans to intensify the U.S. military and intelligence focus on al-Qaeda and bin Laden. Intelligence officials say the search is already as intensive as ever, even as they emphasize that the decentralized al-Qaeda network would remain a threat without him. Bush administration officials have publicly played down the importance of a single individual in the broad sweep of their anti-terrorism offensive.

[veteranx-2009]

ajaxtheleast: you got that right. Who in their right mind would deploy UNPROVEN missiles into a country in which we have no strategic interest? Oh, that''s right, Bush would do it. Get those missiles OUT. The Russians have every right to be concerned about them. Deployment of ABM missiles only increase instability.

[popstom12]

Blacks are just as racest as whites if not more

[daffy64]

Obama''''s campaign was well managed and using psychological tactics, stage training, etc. convinced people that he was the "One."

Now, that he is in, he is already changing his promises but I will give him a chance to actually govern a bit before I claim that he is one big mistake that we will all live to regret (except for the fact that we did vote for a mixed race President).

When is grandma''''s funeral?

--

So what in the world will you do if this "mixed race" person governs wisely and effectively? Give up racism?

I doubt it.

Obama''''s campaign was well managed and using psychological tactics, stage training, etc. convinced people that he was the "One."

Now, that he is in, he is already changing his promises but I will give him a chance to actually govern a bit before I claim that he is one big mistake that we will all live to regret (except for the fact that we did vote for a mixed race President).

When is grandma''''s funeral?

Posted by Joule18
---
How absolutely big of you. I bet you are the kind of person who would insist upon a fair trial before the hanging. And what possible use is it to you to know when grandma''s funeral is? You have no intention of attending, it''s being a little too late to put her on trial. Unless you have a whole lot more influence after death than I credit you with. Who knows, you do seem preoccupied with the elements of judgment and death. Are you sure you want to mess with someone we all believe to be The One?

[kevnkar]

If Americans didn''''t buy the Hummers, the SUV''''s and the other gas guzzlers, GM wouldn''''t build them
Posted by Joule18

I think that the main problem is that all cars are way overpriced. No mass produced vehicle should ever cost 50 to 60 thousand like all of these SUVs do.

[joule18]

Obama''s campaign was well managed and using psychological tactics, stage training, etc. convinced people that he was the "One."

Now, that he is in, he is already changing his promises but I will give him a chance to actually govern a bit before I claim that he is one big mistake that we will all live to regret (except for the fact that we did vote for a mixed race President).

When is grandma''s funeral?

[kevnkar]

erich_1,

He certainly does have a hard job ahead. I hope that he is half of what his supporters believe he is but I just don''t see anything more than a cult of personality. This country is indeed in a mess and it didn''t just get this way in 8 years either. Tbings have been piling up for a long time and the list of the things that got us here is long indeed. We all had a hand in it.

[joule18]

If Americans didn''t buy the Hummers, the SUV''s and the other gas guzzlers, GM wouldn''t build them.


Wake up Posted by IwasHungry68 at 04:00 PM : Nov 11, 2008. The unions are descimating our businesses by blackmailing them into submission. A long walk-out by trained assembly line employees that would keep their product off the market for an extended period of time, or raises in pay and benefits that will allow them to continue for awhile.

It''s all caught up with the auto mfgs now and they can no longer borrow to pay everything that they agreed to.

It would have cost less to hire new people who would have appreciated having a job to support their family instead of union backed employees who never think they have enough.

[erich_1-2009]

Kevnkar,

I didn''t vote for President Elect Obama. Though, I will certainly pray for him. He is going to have a very difficult job! We don''t need to throw stones at each other.

[joule18]

At least on Fox News we get to hear both sides of an argument rather than the one side some people feel is acceptable.

[erich_1-2009]

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80003

This was sent to me that goes along with that subject.
It says that the U.S. Treasury is teaching Sharia Law.

[kevnkar]

We should not act as hateful as the Left acts.

It does really make one wonder what they are smoking stating stuff like this in one breath and saying that we need to be more partisan in the other. It really shows them to be a pack of liars.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by erich_1

I agree with you. All lefties are not idiots just as not all conservatives are. It is easy to talk about bipartisanship when you are basically unopposed isn''t it? Did you ever notice that when you post something intelligent of factual, the room goes silent. You can almost hear the hatefullo name callers scratching their collective heads.

[joule18]

November 10, 2008, the Federal Reserve announced that "it will purchase $40 billion of newly issued AIG preferred shares," which, as AP reports, will give "taxpayers an ownership stake in the company."

The Federal Reserve Board and the Treasury Department apparently believe that American taxpayers owning part of company with a business that promotes an Islamic supremacist ideology that is against equality, against liberty, and in support of discrimination, is a good thing for the American taxpayer.

[joule18]

On November 10, 2008, the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department decided that they were going to use American taxpayer money to buy ownership in something against America''s values of equality and liberty -- by purchasing ownership in a company with a Sharia-Compliant Finance (SCF) based business.

As an American taxpayer, you are now a part owner in a business that promotes the Islamic supremacist Sharia ideology - whether you like it or not. Your tax dollars today are now being used for own part of a company with a Sharia-based business. This is the same Sharia ideology that was used by the Taliban in Pakistan today to murder a woman for adultery, the same Sharia ideology that was used to murder a 13 year old girl last week who was raped in Somalia, and the same Sharia ideology supported by the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and Islamic supremacists around the world. It is an ideology that is against the inalienable human rights of equality and liberty. It is an ideology that even the British courts have called "discriminatory."

[joule18]

This is potentially the greatest threat our country is now facing. There is over one trillion dollars a year generated in profits in Islamic Shariah Law governed countries from oil. Much has been coming to Wall Street and now that our country is in desperate need of cash this can become the 21st century "Trojan Horse." Jihad with money. This must be stopped. Please take the time to view this urgent video. The present economic challenges our country face elevate the importance of addressing this now before it is too late. The United States can not be allowed to become another Denmark. Please circulate this link widely.

http://www.actforamerica.org/index.php/home/18-headline-item/518-shariah-compliant-finance-jihad-with-money

[erich_1-2009]

We should not act as hateful as the Left acts.

It does really make one wonder what they are smoking stating stuff like this in one breath and saying that we need to be more partisan in the other. It really shows them to be a pack of liars.

[kevnkar]

Strange, a whole bunch of posts just disappeared.

[kevnkar]

) what is an "equestion"?
Posted by slownewsdaze

A question posted on the internet?
Actually, in defense of tex, my keyboard gets stupid sometimes too!

[triplet-man]

HOW freakin'' Conveinient. Let the "CHANGE" begin. He''s already backing up on one of his campaign promises? Did anyone keep track of all the "rambling" promises he made so that we can check up on them over the next 2 yrs.
Does anyone want to bet against me? That he is a crooked politician just like all the rest? CHange? Huh? Change his mind whenever he wants... that kind of change?

[kevnkar]

Too much of any one groups ideas is not good. That is why the founding fathers created a system of checks and balances. They would work better if the politicians weren''t carrying around a bunch of lobbies and corporate interests in their back pockets.