Spokane7
55°
July 4, 2011 in Nation/World
Republicans pan Afghan pullout plan
Senators say cutback seen as withdrawal
WASHINGTON – Two key Republican senators visiting Afghanistan said Sunday that many Afghans may see President Barack Obama’s plans to pull 33,000 American troops out of the country as a prelude to a full-fledged U.S. military withdrawal, a perception the lawmakers argued could undercut the decade-long effort to combat terrorists in the region.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., speaking in the capital, Kabul, described Obama’s decision to reduce American forces from their current level of just more than 100,000 troops as “an unnecessary risk” that would deprive the U.S. military of the “troops that are needed for a second fighting season.”
Some U.S. allies with troops in Afghanistan already have followed suit by announcing withdrawals of their own, McCain said. But “most important, we’re told in the villages that the Afghans are now wondering if we’re leaving or not,” he said on CNN’s “State of the Union” news show, “and that can undermine the whole effort and sacrifices that have been made ever since this important surge.”
The Obama administration sent an additional 33,000 troops to Afghanistan in late 2009 to combat the Taliban in its strongholds in the south and other areas. On June 22, the president announced that 10,000 troops would return by the end of the year and the remaining additional forces would be out by September 2012.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., like McCain a decorated veteran and member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, echoed the concerns.
“The difference between transitioning to Afghan control in a reasoned way and withdrawing from the fight as Americans is hugely important,” Graham said on “Fox News Sunday.” “The perception that I’m finding on the ground is that the announcement by the president is more of a withdrawal than it is transition. And that has to be corrected or it could jeopardize our whole operations.”
In ordering the drawdown, Obama has noted the successes in the past two years in Afghanistan and cited the killing in May of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. At the same time, the president has acknowledged that the U.S. military would be fighting in Afghanistan for at least another three years and that “huge challenges remain.”
McCain said Sunday that he saw “no signs whatsoever” that the Taliban were ready to talk peace.
The withdrawal would leave the U.S. with about 68,000 troops in Afghanistan by the end of 2012. That is a faster timetable than Obama’s military commanders had sought and has raised questions about whether those numbers would be enough to accomplish American objectives.
Stocks plummet as outlook in Europe dims 
DickAdams on July 04 at 6:40 a.m.
McCain needs to be put out to pasture. Pronto. Typical of career politicians. Bring our boys home, now.
jimvw2 on July 04 at 7:04 a.m.
There will never be a “right way” for President Obama to do anything as far the Tea Party GOP is concerned, so he should just do what’s right and let them carp about it, as that’s what they’ll do regardless.
I think 10 years of nation building masquerading as a national security strategy is enough. Let the Afghans sort things out for themselves. Remind them we’ll be back if we find out they are harboring terrorist training camps and targeting America. I think the people that matter, the Taliban know we’re serious now.
Ninch on July 04 at 7:30 a.m.
The Taliban are just waiting for US to renege on its commitment to Afghanistan.
BTW: Why is Obama’s incursion into Libya acceptable, but we must “let Afghans sort things out for themselves?” Very inconsistent and complete acceptance without critical analysis of Obama foreign policy. Especially, considering that Afghanistan was debated and approved by Congress, whereas Obama has basically indicated that Libya is not the business of Congress. Very troubling.
hawken on July 04 at 7:31 a.m.
It’s an “unnecessary risk” according to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.
Is he part of the grass roots, Tea Party?
Ninch on July 04 at 7:33 a.m.
The only one that needs put out to pasture is Obama who is clueless. You may not agree with McCain but he does show leadership and is pretty knowledgeable about US foreign policy as opposed to the newby idealogues.
Scoutster on July 04 at 7:45 a.m.
There is no easy way to remove oneself from an occupied country. Hell, we’re still in Japan and Germany and Korea.
We will be there in some way for a long, long time.
DHF on July 04 at 3:21 p.m.
Generals and some politicians like to fight a good war. The only thing is they are not the ones doing the combat . Its the grunts. They sit behind there desk’s in a secure area and make decisions that impact someone else’s life. Year after year after year. With no end in sight. It is time to get out of Afghanistan and Iraq. It’s to bad we cant swing by on the way out and deliver about 10 Nuclear Bombs on Iran. I believe that they are one of the biggest problems in the Middle East. One would have thought after Vietnam we would learn some lesson but the politicians and the generals are just as stupid as they were then.
eagleproducer on July 04 at 3:33 p.m.
ninch: How many “boots on the ground” did Obama put in Libya. Be truthful now. I would say providing air cover for an organic movement to see if it can gain legitimacy is letting them “sort it out,” much more so than occupying a nation for over ten years with a hundred thousand troops. C’mon man, you make this too easy.
Who cares what McCain or Graham have to say. They are marginalized actors in today’s politics, and for good reason. If a Democrat had opposed a Bush wartime decision while visiting the theater they would have been branded traitors but now that the opposite has happened they are heroic and the responsible parties?
Only in Bizzaro World…
greenlibertarian on July 04 at 10:15 p.m.
Drop a hundred nukes on Iran, killing millions of innocent people?
Are you insane? Iran’s leadership would immediately retaliate against the Green Zone, Israel, numerous other US interest targets in the ME, they have 1000s of medium and long range missiles. Pakistan would jump in with their nukes, as would Israel.
Had Northern Army leadership in the battle of Gettysburg not tenuously held on for two days, then were able to rout the rebels on July 3, the North may never have won.
And yeah, the grunts of that great battle performed heroically and fought and died by the thousands, but it was Generals (and Lincoln, at times) who made the strategic decisions that allowed the Army of the North to prevail. Until Gettysburg, the rebels had won almost every battle. Had the rebels won at Gettysburg, that might have been the end of the Republic.
greenlibertarian on July 04 at 10:21 p.m.
Correction, even the US dropping 10 nukes would kill millions of innocents, and precipitate a regional nuclear war (and possibly much worse.)
Have you no understanding of what would happen to the world economy if the flow of oil from there were near completely stopped because of regional nuclear war?
A world-wide economic depression that would make The Great Depression look like good times.
DHF on July 05 at 5:47 a.m.
It would be pretty hard to participate in a war when your country would look like a parking lot. We have some big toys in the toy box that have never been played with.