A Time for Choosing

There's been a flurry of reports in the last few months over Afghanistan. As you may have read or heard, things are getting worse: July and August were the worst months in years of the war in terms of casualties. I wouldnt be complete if I didnt mention that some of the problem is Obama's fault. He put in place several directives to "protect civilians;" being that our enemies use these civilians as shields, these policies have resulted in some casualties on our side. With the politicking out of the way, I can get to the necessary facts.

Michael Mullen, US Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman - a big guy in the military, first called for more troops in Afghanistan (sending 21,000 during the Afghan elections) and "stalled" on liberal calls for allowing morale-damaging gays in the military. Doing his job (read: these two grievous offenses) provoked Sen. Susan Collins (D-somewhere) to request a review of the 'rules of engagement' from Mullen (meaning that she doesnt have confidence in his work). In the executive branch, the reaction has been much less exciting: Obama has stated that he will not make an 'immediate' decision on sending more troops and that he's going to be boring and "take a very deliberate process" of decision. In other words, Obama has reached a time for choosing and he doesnt know what to do - therefore he pulls over his legacy from the senate...and does nothing.

On the side seemingly pressuring him towards giving up on the war is the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Michigan's wonderful senior senator (who hits the deck if an engine backfires) Carl Levin, seems to think he and his life of Lansing, caviar and fine wine are better suited to make military judgment calls than those who eat MRE's and sleep in foxholes outside Kabul. He's supported by the liberal lifestyle groups, European socialist nations, and my more libertarian friends. Cumulatively, this support is a remnant of the arthritic "New Left" who would scrap the war effort on the advice of a few misguided, anti-pragmatic leftist faculty members who, themselves, are holed up in a fantasy world. This, however, is the world Obama comes from.

Thus his choice: he can choose to side with those who actually understand the issue, or he can play politics, satisfy his base, and secure renomination. Judging from the Guantanamo Bay Prison issue (where Obama decided to close it against common sense, the majority of the American people, and Dick Cheney), Obama will side with his Lefty base in order to gin-up sufficient inflammation to pass the energy tax, health care, and "card check." On the other hand, Dem Sen. Max Baucus' Gang of 6 (which includes John McCain...the ranking Senate Armed Services Committee Republican, who fervently disagrees with Levin's anti-war recommendation) has just released a misguided health insurance bill that will need some GOP support to have legitimacy post-passage. Upon the desk in the oval office sits one choice: it is a complex choice when viewed through a political lens yet a simple one if based in common sense.

If he decides pragmatically, Obama will apply Patraeus' model in Iraq (troop surge, essentially) with a little flexibility to compensate for Afghanistan's historical lack of a developed government. This choice will get harder and the conditions worse the longer he puts it off; regardless of what he decides, his decision will dramatically shape the future of the Obama presidency. I, for one, hope the president makes the prudent one.