Gates: Military Ready for Obama War Plan

Amid Fierce Policy Divide, Defense Secretary Says U.S. Forces Won't Hesitate to Carry Out President's Mission in Afghanistan

(CBS/AP)  Despite the fierce policy divide inside the White House over Afghanistan, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Monday that the military will fall in line with whatever President Barack Obama decides.

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

At issue is whether U.S. forces should continue to focus on fighting the Taliban and securing the Afghan population, or shift to more narrowly targeting al Qaeda terrorists believed to be hiding in Pakistan with unmanned spy drones and covert operations.

"Speaking for the Department of Defense, once the commander in chief makes his decisions, we will salute and execute those decisions faithfully and to the best of our ability," Gates told the annual meeting of the Association of the U.S. Army.

Until then, Gates said, Mr. Obama's military and civilian advisers need to give the president candid - but private - advice.

Coming up on the "CBS Evening News": Afghanistan: The Road Ahead, a 3-part, in-depth examination of the escalating conflict, airing Oct. 5-7, 6:30 p.m. ET.

CBSNews.com Special Report: Afghanistan

A majority of Americans think that war is going badly for the U.S. and they are divided on whether the United States is doing the right thing by being involved there now, according to a CBS News/New York Times poll.

Gates has said he remains undecided on the strategy, and gave no hint Monday as to which camp he is leaning toward.

The top three U.S. military commanders overseeing the war in Afghanistan however, favor continuing the current fight against the Taliban, which could take as many as 40,000 additional U.S. troops.

Gates' comments come days after the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, bluntly warned a London audience that Afghan insurgents are gathering strength and any plan that falls short of stabilizing Afghanistan "is probably a shortsighted strategy."

On Sunday, Mr. Obama's national security adviser, former Gen. James Jones, offered a mild rebuke of McChrystal for his London speech.

It is "better for military advice to come up through the chain of command," said Jones.

But Jones also said that McChrystal "is in it for the long haul," beating back suggestions that the general's public remarks could jeopardize his job. "I don't think this is an issue," said Jones.

Jones' comments came amid growing government fissures over whether to send thousands of additional troops to the fight, and just hours after militant forces overwhelmed U.S. troops at two outposts near the Pakistan border, killing eight Americans.

Gates said Monday that Mr. Obama's decision on the future war strategy "will be among the most important of his presidency. So it is important that we take our time to do all we can to get this right."

Gates did not mention McChrystal in his comments, and made clear that all who are advising Obama in the war strategy should keep publicly quiet.

"In this process, it is imperative that all of us taking part in these deliberations - civilians and military alike - provide our best advice to the president candidly but privately," Gates said.

Mr. Obama will meet twice this week with this top national security advisers, including Gates, to continue debating the strategy.

Jones insisted Sunday that Afghanistan is not in imminent danger of falling to the Taliban, and he played down fears that the insurgency could set up a renewed sanctuary for al Qaeda. McChrystal has said that insurgents are gaining ground and the U.S. is in danger of failing unless more forces are sent to the fight.

"I don't foresee the return of the Taliban. Afghanistan is not in imminent danger of falling," Jones said. "The al Qaeda presence is very diminished. The maximum estimate is less than 100 operating in the country, no bases, no ability to launch attacks on either us or our allies."

U.S. officials also are waiting for the results of the Afghan elections, as disturbing reports of fraud grow.

Arguments on the U.S. strategy and troop requirements are also escalating among lawmakers.

"I would not commit to more combat troops at this time," said Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich. "There's a lot of other things that need to be done to show resolve. What we need a surge of is Afghan troops."

Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., countered that if commanders want more troops, they should get them.

Jones and Kyl spoke on CNN's "State of the Union." Jones also appeared on CBS' "Face the Nation," as did Levin.

Meanwhile, election workers began recounting ballots from the disputed Aug. 20 presidential election Monday, and a senior official said he expected to announce late next week whether President Hamid Karzai had won or would face a runoff with his main rival.

A U.N.-backed commission ordered a partial recount from about 10 percent of the country's polling stations after allegations of widespread fraud in the vote, which was supposed to install a legitimate government to confront the growing Taliban threat.

However, vote-rigging allegations have plunged Afghanistan into an electoral crisis at a time when Taliban militants are expanding from their southern strongholds into the north and west of the country.

In a sign of the growing threat, hundreds of militants launched fierce attacks Saturday against two isolated outposts in Nuristan province, killing eight American soldiers in the biggest loss of U.S. life in a single battle in more than a year.

[goldsurfer]

American goyim should be honored to die for their Israeli masters. We Jews are the chosen people and if a few thousand Americans have to sacrifice their worthless lives and bankrupt the United States so that Israel can take out all their rivals (Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan) and expand in the Middle East, so be it. We own your banking system and we own your stupid politicians. The Kenyan Obama, Clinton, McCain, and Huckabee come to Israel to give us American money and kiss Netanyahu's feet. President Rahm Emanuel is a great Patriot.

[hutch1934]

The Afghan election antics of Karzai is the last straw. Get the HELL out of this war without end. Tell Unocal to build their own pipeline and do it with their own money and security.

[starleo146]

While everyone in Congress and the news media are running their mouths, let me ask you since when do we fight a war on the side of politics? The Military out there fighting with all they have, How do you think you are helping them. Bring on some more they say. I say everyone should take a deep breath and let a plan be executed rightly or wrongly,remember who is in the trenches fighting this Bush or should I say Cheney wars. We have to finish it, and it is time we support the troops not with a "Thank you" with a tight lip.I do not think any of us could make these decisions, and the enemy just loves when we are so divided, that is their hope, can we for once stop this, think about the troops and show your support loud and clear for once. Imagine how they are fighting and dieing, they have no recourse that is there job, and we have a job as well, and when you downgrade the very people who are making decisions for the very ones who will implement that plan, they deserve to not let the whole world know about it before they do, and the enemy just waiting.

[SiriusVanHuygens]

Well, he could do what Mr. Bush did; land on a carrier and have a big sign that reads 'Mission Accomplished'. Of course, I am kidding. I just find it a tad disingenuous on the part of the Republicans to be howling like mad dogs when they had 7 years to get Bin Laden and not much to show for it. This is a time when Americans should unite in search of the best possible solution.

[veteran71]

Our presence in Afghanistan is the result of Strategic Energy Policy written by Darth and Big Oil before 9/11. It revolves around an Oil Pipeline that would transfer Oil from neighboring regions, and also originally included invasions and occupations of these regions.
Since the Bush/Cheney Crime Cartel envisioned little problem in dealing with these country's military responses in the face of our Monstrous War Making Capabilities, they had no plan B in the pipe to deal with the actual outcome.
Iraq was supposed to be a month-long escapade at the most, followed by the Little Decider landing gloriously on an Aircraft Carrier in his largest Cod Piece Adorned Flight Suit, declaring "Mission Accomplished" to the cheers of adoring Americans everywhere.
Then, he would launch "Operation Enduring Oil Wells" in Iran, followed shortly by little side errands to smaller Arab nations where hand-picked puppets would be quickly and neatly installed after a "Fair Democratic Election" by the citizenry, (much like the election that installed him as POTUS using cronies in the Electronic Voting Machine Industry and his baby brother's manipulation of an entire state's election results.)
The plan was ingenious, and would make untold $Trillions$ for everyone involved, and continue the promise of Obsolete Oil Energy Policy well into the next century.
And we all know how that turned out......
Now we have the same players, scrambling to put together yet another plan to resurrect the original plan from the dead, sure in the belief that Americans are really easily manipulated Dullards at best, and will still believe their lies and calls to bring "Freedom" and "Democracy" to those simple-minded Ragheads, or blow them out of existance, whichever comes first.
And the Sheeple say, "BAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh!!!

[Mortarman29]

This has absolutely no redeeming value, nor even a shred of truth. Sounds like a lot of tin foil hat stuff.

[hungry1968-16]

by Majesty_Command October 5, 2009 4:22 PM EDT
Bush's plan was to win, unlike Obama's.
If I was in the military, I would have to get out.
I would never follow orders from Obama.






I guess it's a good thing for you, that you're too cowardly to enlist, huh?

[underdogus09]

What does your son in law serving his country, have to do with your opinion?
by hungry1968-16
=============================================
there you have it folks hungry1968-16 the number one imbecile!!
Nothing left here, folks, but a sad Narcissistic fool....

[MorganBarber44]

Having any Americans in Afghanistan whatsoever is totally insane. There is no purpose for any of it. We don't have the resources.

[hungry1968-16]

by Orlandojon October 5, 2009 3:54 PM EDT
I have a son in law who did 2 tours in Iraq and is going to Afghanistan next. Obama is the least respected commander in chief since Jimmy Carter







What does your son in law serving his country, have to do with your opinion?

Is it that you think that because YOU KNOW SOMEONE IN THE MILITARY, that you somehow share that persons integrity, and therefore your opinion means more?

[underdogus09]

What are the troops fihting for in those barren lifeless mountains bomb big time from the sky!..by salibason
============================================
are you in the BOMB business? undertaker? do you sell body bags to the military? hmm?

[Orlandojon]

I have a son in law who did 2 tours in Iraq and is going to Afghanistan next. Obama is the least respected commander in chief since Jimmy Carter

[excop1949]

"The General owes the CIC his complete and honest judgment but only
in private and not in the press"

AGREED...ONCE HE GETS THROUGH WITH THE OLYMPICS AND TRYING TO SELL OBAMACARE, MAYBE OBAMA CAN FIND A FEW MINUTES FOR THE GENERAL

[salibason]

What are the troops fihting for in those barren lifeless mountains bomb big time from the sky!

[imnho]

I doubt if the general will get fired. It would have been better if he give the CIC his thoughts in private. We are in a situation where no matter what we do the conquences may be bad. If we withdraw then the Taliban will take over and invite AQL back in. If we don't we face a very protracted struggle that will not be over soon. Anyway you look at it the we are in for a rough ride.

[faceofus]

While they wait for Obama's decision young American soldiers are dying and their blood is on Obama's hands.

[ramos1129]

The top three U.S. military commanders overseeing the war in Afghanistan however, favor continuing the current fight against the Taliban, which could take as many as 40,000 additional U.S. troops.

Gates' comments come days after the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, bluntly warned a London audience that Afghan insurgents are gathering strength and any plan that falls short of stabilizing Afghanistan "is probably a shortsighted strategy."

On Sunday, Mr. Obama's national security adviser, former Gen. James Jones, offered a mild rebuke of McChrystal for his London speech.

It is "better for military advice to come up through the chain of command," said Jones.
--------------------------------------------------

General McChrystal is way out of line by going public with his statements. By doing so, he undercuts his boss - the CIC. He owes President Obama his best judgment but only in private. Truman sacked MacArthur when the General did otherwise.

Generals properly have only one job. That is to achieve whatever military objective they are assigned - period.

[Mortarman29]

While true...it is still nice to know the truth, since the White House is really not interested in dealing with the war.

[whosaid1]

It would be "nice' if it were as simple as that....but, it isn't...seems to me that Mcchrystal really believes that without the requested troops the mission will fail...he just wants "everyone" to know what the COST is. If the President can't handle the General speaking up...he can always "Fire" him.

[Mortarman29]

Yes, he can fire him. Will be interesting if he does.

[NewYork-Joey]

by Mortarman29 October 5, 2009 12:47 PM EDT
Not the Generals fault. They are being hamstrung from the White House. Time to take the dogs off the leash and let them take care of business.
_____________________

"Cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of war"

(dogs as in referring to the mechanism which restrains), not the canine.

By the way, I didn't know Obama had any "war plans", since he campaigned as a staunch anti-war candidate....go figure

[Lawyers-Guns-n-Money-01]

by NewYork-Joey October 5, 2009 1:21 PM EDT
"Cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of war"
================================================

Who new Jow was a thespian?

You go Shake Spear.

[DaVicar8]

Well, Obama said he would end these conflicts...but so far, that just remains another broken promise.

[rplat]

There was a time when Gates was considered a credible secretary of defense but unfortunately, he has become just another Obama flunky.

[rosesnpearls]

Obama's plan is to give the terrorists three speeches per day because everyone loves Obama when he speaks and fall into a trance of obedience and worship. Just like the International Olympic Committee did.

[pensacola8-2009]

Worst case scenarios:

1. If we leave, the Taliban duplicates the Cambodian "Killing Fields" scenario under the Khmer Rouge and murders between 400,000 to 600,000 Afghan citizens who supported or participated in western occupation.

2. If we stay, 115,000 Taliban militants are killed off, plus their civilian supporters amounting to 50,000 to 85,000, who are employed to feed and shelter the Taliban.

3. If we take more than 4-5 months to accomplish scenario #2, we face covert Iranian re-supply efforts that will inflate the number of Taliban militants to 175,000 or more. After 60,000 additional Iranian militants are killed off, Iranian political machine will supply combative rhetoric and try to polarize the entire Islam world against the west- escalating and keeping the terror threat alert levels high for a few years.

Whether we leave or stay, lots of blood will spill because we don't have an opponent that formally represents itself politically in international conflict resolution forums.

A weakened Pakistan is not in anyone's best interest, but staying converts friends into enemies, since the double-standard of "who does the killing?" applies in Pakistani minds, as opposed to "Who does the dying?".

We will have to find confort in the fact that the hosting countries of Afghanistan and Pakistan can recover some stability in their present form, but with severely damaged socio-economic conditions that will most likely revert to former Islamic standards.

We must be prepared to accept that Afghanistan and Pakistan are a repeat of Vietnam and Cambodia, by virtue of the facts that the region had weakened stability to offer in the first place.

The best thing we can do for the world, is to keep working with the Pakistani government to keep their nukes safe.

The sooner that President Obama prepares a military exodus, the less the intensity will become of his political black eye, but he will enjoy the acceleration of the economic recovery if he does decide to abandon Afghanistan.