Finally, President Obama is waging war. Unfortunately, President Obama has decided to wage war against David Petraeus and Stanley McChristal. Here’s their attack on Gen. McChrystal:

An adviser to the administration said: “People aren’t sure whether McChrystal is being naïve or an upstart. To my mind he doesn’t seem ready for this Washington hard-ball and is just speaking his mind too plainly.”

Gen. McChrystal replied forcefully:

In London, Gen McChrystal, who heads the 68,000 US troops in Afghanistan as well as the 100,000 Nato forces, flatly rejected proposals to switch to a strategy more reliant on drone missile strikes and special forces operations against al-Qaeda.

He told the Institute of International and Strategic Studies that the formula, which is favoured by Vice-President Joe Biden, would lead to “Chaos-istan”. When asked whether he would support it, he said: “The short answer is: No.” He went on to say: “Waiting does not prolong a favorable outcome. This effort will not remain winnable indefinitely, and nor will public support.”

If I’m forced to choose between trusting Gen. Vice-President Joe Biden or Gen. McChrystal on national security matters, I’ll choose Gen. McChrystal. It’s important that we remind ourselves that Vice President Biden was the idiot who thought we had the authority to split Iraq into 3 separate countries. He pitched the Biden Option while Sen. McCain pitched the Surge. Obviously, the Surge worked, thanks to Gen. Petraeus’s brilliant plan and Gen. Odierno’s decisionmaking.

Fast-forward to today. Here’s how the Obama administration is treating Gen. Petraeus:

Gen. David H. Petraeus, the face of the Iraq troop surge and a favorite of former President George W. Bush, spoke up or was called upon by President Obama “several times” during the big Afghanistan strategy session in the Situation Room last week, one participant says, and will be back for two more meetings this week.

But the general’s closest associates say that underneath the surface of good relations, the celebrity commander faces a new reality in Mr. Obama’s White House: He is still at the table, but in a very different seat.

No longer does the man who oversees the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have one of the biggest voices at National Security Council meetings, as he did when Mr. Bush gave him 20 minutes during hourlong weekly sessions to present his views in live video feeds from Baghdad. No longer is the general, with the Capitol Hill contacts and web of e-mail relationships throughout Washington’s journalism establishment, testifying in media explosions before Congress, as he did in September 2007, when he gave 34 interviews in three days.

Based on these reports, I’m left wondering whether the Obama administration wants to lose the war in Afghanistan. Obviously, they’ll never admit it but their actions aren’t giving people confidence that they’re interested in winning. Their actions don’t even say that it’s a priority.

I’ve said before that the Obama administration’s foreign policy reminded me of the Carter administration’s foreign policy. I’m revising that to say that the Obama administration’s foreign policy doesn’t even meet the lowly standard established by the Carter administration.

The Obama administration has shown a hostility towards the military experts. What’s worse is that they’ve done these things to appease their anti-war left fringe. Their actions say that they’d rather lose a war than ruffle their political allies’ feathers.

That’s a disgusting set of priorities.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

8 Responses to “President Obama: Worse Than Jimmy Carter?”

  • Eric Weber says:

    Yes, you are sooooo discerning and sooooooooo RIGHT, Mr. Conservative wise-man! OBVIOUSLY, Obama just announced that he’ll deploy an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan, (on TOP of the 35,000 he’s ALREADY deployed there this year), (in short, 65,000 troops already deployed or announced in his FIRST YEAR in office), all as part of a stunningly diabolical, counter-intuitive, and, ergo, absolutely BRILLIANT strategy to please and appease his “anti-war Left fringe,” as you so astutely put it. Well, as a certified member of the “anti-war left fringe”, I can tell you that I, along with every other old-school Democrat I know, am so “pleased and appeased” that I can hardly stop crying. In short, Dear Author, you are an ignorant FOOL who obviously doesn’t know JACK about this President, or about how he’s really perceived by the Democratic Left.

    I’d suggest that you go find something you’re actually GOOD at, Sir. Useful political-analysis is the realm of those with much better intuition and overall mental-caliber than you’ve just demonstrated.

    But Boy, as totally wrong as your “analysis” has just been proved to be, you sure said it with great confidence and AUTHORITY! Well done!

  • Gary Gross says:

    Eric, Tell me when you’ve heard President Obama talk about defeating the Taliban & al-Qa’ida. Or tell me that he would’ve done this if Gen. McChrystal’s request hadn’t gotten leaked to the press. Tell me why it took him 3 months to make a decision on whether to deploy the troops. Let’s note that 3 months after 9/11, the Bush administration had defeated the Taliban ‘government’.

    As for you being part of the Appeasement Left, yeys, I know that you’re pissed off at President Obama. As soft as he is, bowing to one world leader after another, that still isn’t good enough for you. I GET that. Perhaps you can explain why you think President Obama’s policies are wrong from the opposite direction, why he needs to be a bigger appeaser than he already is.

  • Eric Weber says:

    Well, Gary, you just brilliantly made and solidified the point I was making in my first comment about how dillusional and willfully uninformed you Cons are.

    To wit:

    “Eric, tell me when you’ve heard Pres. Obama talk about defeting the Taliban or Al Qaeda?

    Uhmmmmm… Let me think…. Oh yes, why, it was just LAST WEEK, in a PRIME TIME speech from West Point, you know, the one in which he annonced the deployment of 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan and spent the rest of his 35 minutes talking about NOTHING ELSE BUT the need to defeat the Taliban and Al Qaeda? That speech was broadcast on EVERY cable AND network channel, so, I’m really not sure how you missed it. Oh yes, and then there was his whole 18 month long campaign for the Presidency, wherein he mentioned HUNDREDS of times his intent to phase out of Iraq and re-focus our military on beating the the bad guys in Afghanistan. Did you miss that too? Wow, you really don’t get out much, do you?

    As for THIS self-evidently preposterous claim,”Lets note that 3 months after 9/11, Bush had defeated the Taliban government.” Is that so? Is that why we still have troops there now, and had them there throughout the entirety of Bush two terms? The Taliban have simply gone “underground”. They are not really defeated now, and they certainly weren’t defeated in “three months by Bush.” If you want to belive that, fine. That makeas you about as well informed as the average Fox news viewer. But just FYI, in case you didn’t know, merely STATING such delusions doesn’t magically make them so. Bush tried it for eight years, and it didn’t work for him, either. Facts are stubborn things, that way. They don’t change just because you and Fox news want them to.

    And by the way, the real enemy over there isn’t the Taliban, it’s Al Qaeda. How did Bush do at beating THEM in his eight years in office? Oh, that’s right…. Not so good. He couldn’t even catch Bin Laden when we had him COMPLETELY surrouded at Tora Bora. So don’t talk to me about Bush’s great “victories”. The proof is in the pudding, and if Bush had finished the job and truly defeated our enemies in either Iraq or Afghanistan, we woudln’t still have large numbers of troops in both places.

    Lastly, I am in no way saying or even suggesting that I want Obama to be “a bigger appeaser than he already is.” You’re putting words into my mouth, Sir, and further, you’re presuming to understand the thinking and motivations of the Left when you clearly don’t have any real understanding of either.

    If “KNOW thy enemy” is a wise credo, (and it surely is), then you’ve just shown that you have quite a lot to learn about the anti-war Left. We’re not all stupid “Hippies”, ya know? In fact, hadly any of us are, but I’m sure it’s comforting for you to fundamentally misjudge and misunderstand 1/2 of your fellow Countrymen that way. Seeing the world and all its problems in in simplistic Black & White terms, IS, actually, much simpler than actually thinking about things. But it doesn’t lead to much real insight, as your comment AND your article, (if you’re the author) have clearly demonstrated.

    Eric Weber

  • Eric Weber says:

    A quote from the Beatles song “Strawberry Fields” seems especially apropos for you Gary, and for all who gullibly depend on Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, et al., and the totally one-dimensional Fox News, as their primary sources of knowledge about current events in America and the wider World:

    “Living is easy with eyes closed, MISUNDERSTANDING all you see.”

  • Gary Gross says:

    Eric, You’re so full of BS it reeks. That you think that I get my information from “Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, et al., and the totally one-dimensional Fox News” shows how gullible you are. Yes, I sometimes get information from FNC. Otherwise, I get most of my information from government reports,, Bloomberg & other news services.

    It isn’t that bright to trust the Left’s charicature of conservatives. The Left isn’t that interested in accuracy but they’re exceptionally into promoting unflattering mischaracterizations. You’d be better off if you didn’t believe the crap that the left is peddling.

  • Eric Weber says:

    Ok, Gary, now that you’ve unloaded that rant, (and clearly, you don’t believe and NEVER employ ANY sterotypes regarding the Left, right??), how about speaking to comment #4 above, the long one?

    I’ve given you a lot to answer for there. Do you REALLY think that Obama has NEVER spoken of going after the Taliban and Al Qaeda? That’s what your question in comment #3 surely implies. How can you explain being quite THAT uninformed about the President’s very clear and PUBLICLY STATED plans?

    Do tell, Gary.

  • Gary Gross says:

    Eric, President Obama hasn’t spoken about winning, whether in Iraq or Afghanistan. Sen. Obama hasn’t talked about winning, whether in Iraq or Afghanistan. The only things he’s said is that he’s for responsibly ending the war. Thus far, he hasn’t said ANYTHING that said he’ll continue the successful Bush strategy of keeping terrorists on the defensive.

Leave a Reply