Is Obama too much like Spock?

[Jaron]

Obama is the worst thing to happen to America since the Emancipation Proclamation. What's next? We gonna let all the animals out of the zoo?

[Fate]

Obama is the worst thing to happen to America since the Emancipation Proclamation. What's next? We gonna let all the animals out of the zoo?

Letting the negro male go free is one thing, but giving women the right to vote was infinitely worse in terms of destroying our culture, society, and freedom.

[Valmy]

I would agree that judgment is definitely a key principle of leadership.  But decisiveness is as well.  I would say that Obama has been somewhat below average in the former, and horrible in the latter.

Things certainly have not gone well so far...but I am patient and hopeful Obama will work out.  Sometimes these Presidents need to be broken in a bit.  Even Bush II was pretty decent in his last couple years in office.  Though Obama doesn't have too much time, alot can change in politics but I would be suprised if he wins another term.

Even though I wish Obama had shut up about the 2011 date thing (I know he had to say something like that to keep his own party from rebelling but I know the Taliban will be celebrating as if they only need to hold on until then and they will have won) but I will be interested to see how his new strategy will turn out in Afghanistan.  Sending more troops and focussing on building up Afghan security forces sounds good to me.

[Fate]

If he doesn't put a date on withdrawal, how long do you think we should stay? A counter insurgency strategy will take another decade to implement and succeed. I don't support eighteen years of war.

[Sheilbh]

Even though I wish Obama had shut up about the 2011 date thing (I know he had to say something like that to keep his own party from rebelling but I know the Taliban will be celebrating as if they only need to hold on until then and they will have won) but I will be interested to see how his new strategy will turn out in Afghanistan.  Sending more troops and focussing on building up Afghan security forces sounds good to me.

I think 2011 is a bit of bullshit to be honest.  He hedged it with using Iraq as a model of withdrawal and said it would depend on the situation on the ground.

The New Republic had this from before the speech:

In a conference call, the White House clarifies what those reports about a three year time line were about. Although the phrase three years doesn't appear anywhere in Obama's speech, he will set July 2011 as the date when NATO forces will start handing over the lead of combat operations to Afghan force, and apparently begin to bring U.S. forces back home.

It's not at all clear, however, whether that is a fixed date--or whether it will be tied to unpredictable conditions on the ground.

Update: I'm told that July 2011 is not condition-based, but that all decisions afterwards will be.

And along those same lines, a senior White House official speaking on background says: "This is the beginning of a process which is not yet defined in terms of the length of the process, or the endpoint." Sounds fairly open-ended to me--as it realistically has to be, given the uncertainties involved and Obama's apparent belief in the necessity of winning.

"If the Taliban thinks they can wait us out, then they are misjudging the president's approach," adds the official.

[Valmy]

If he doesn't put a date on withdrawal, how long do you think we should stay?

As long as we want.  We just should be careful about announcing the date publicly.  Signs of weakness will only make our job tougher.

I mean he could still start withdrawing in 2011 (which might mean simply bringing down forcelevels to 2009 levels for all I know) just don't announce it to the world.

[Berkut]

If he doesn't put a date on withdrawal, how long do you think we should stay?

As long as we want.  We just should be careful about announcing the date publicly.  Signs of weakness will only make our job tougher.

I mean he could still start withdrawing in 2011 (which might mean simply bringing down forcelevels to 2009 levels for all I know) just don't announce it to the world.

Indeed. The only reason to make such an announcement is to appease his political allies who for some reason have suddenly decided that the "good" and "necessary" war isn't so good or necessary after all.

All it does otherwise is announce to our enemies that there is a finite time they need to hold out, and announce to our allies that they should probably start considering what accommodations they should be laying the groundwork for with our enemies in preparation for our bailing on them in 18 months.

[Admiral Yi]

I reserve my oprobrium for the idiots who whooped and hollared during the campaign during Obama's lines about the real fight against terrorism blah blah blah. 

[Fate]

If he doesn't put a date on withdrawal, how long do you think we should stay?

As long as we want.  We just should be careful about announcing the date publicly.  Signs of weakness will only make our job tougher.

I mean he could still start withdrawing in 2011 (which might mean simply bringing down forcelevels to 2009 levels for all I know) just don't announce it to the world.

Signs of leaving before 2019 signal we aren't serious about winning a counter insurgency campaign against the Taliban. We are weak, so what?

[Sheilbh]

All it does otherwise is announce to our enemies that there is a finite time they need to hold out, and announce to our allies that they should probably start considering what accommodations they should be laying the groundwork for with our enemies in preparation for our bailing on them in 18 months.

I don't know that it wasn't caused by your allies.  I believe that every nation in NATO with the exception of the UK has set a withdrawal date and the UK government asked for the US to set one which Britain would then match.

As I say I actually think he's been very careful to leave wiggle room and I'm not clear if it means withdrawing the extra 30 000, the 17 000 ordered in in March or the entire lot of them.

[Fate]

If he doesn't put a date on withdrawal, how long do you think we should stay?

As long as we want.  We just should be careful about announcing the date publicly.  Signs of weakness will only make our job tougher.

I mean he could still start withdrawing in 2011 (which might mean simply bringing down forcelevels to 2009 levels for all I know) just don't announce it to the world.

Indeed. The only reason to make such an announcement is to appease his political allies who for some reason have suddenly decided that the "good" and "necessary" war isn't so good or necessary after all.

All it does otherwise is announce to our enemies that there is a finite time they need to hold out, and announce to our allies that they should probably start considering what accommodations they should be laying the groundwork for with our enemies in preparation for our bailing on them in 18 months.

Indeed. The intelligent strategy would be to recommit to an indefinite deployment which we already know America will not support and keep on with the bravado in the mean time.

[Berkut]

The speech was sooo dissapointing. He does the right thing in regards to commitment to Afghanistan and winning, but then follows up his two steps forwards with a giant leap back by setting a deadline for US withdrawal that has nothing to do with what is actually happening on the ground.

[Berkut]

All it does otherwise is announce to our enemies that there is a finite time they need to hold out, and announce to our allies that they should probably start considering what accommodations they should be laying the groundwork for with our enemies in preparation for our bailing on them in 18 months.

I don't know that it wasn't caused by your allies.  I believe that every nation in NATO with the exception of the UK has set a withdrawal date and the UK government asked for the US to set one which Britain would then match.

Those aren't the allies I am talking about. I am talking about afghanis who live in the areas effected. I am talking about Pakistan, who has to deal with the insurgents and Taliban in their own country.

The message this send to them is that they need to be thinking about what deals they need to make with these guys, since the US just told them that our previous claims about being in this for the long haul and asking them to stick their neck out to help fight extremism were all lies, and we will be bailing on them in a year or two.

The fact that "NATO", for what it is worth anymore, are similarly weak and unwilling to commit is unfortunate, of course, but I don't see how trying to match them in the "look how impotent we are" department is the way to go.

[Valmy]

The speech was sooo dissapointing. He does the right thing in regards to commitment to Afghanistan and winning, but then follows up his two steps forwards with a giant leap back by setting a deadline for US withdrawal that has nothing to do with what is actually happening on the ground.

I know why he had to say that politically but it was dissappointing.

Still it could have been far worse.

[Berkut]

Indeed. The intelligent strategy would be to recommit to an indefinite deployment which we already know America will not support and keep on with the bravado in the mean time.

False dichotomy.