E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
From NBC's Athena Jones
The United States had already adjusted its Afghanistan war strategy to reflect the kinds of concerns highlighted by the release of more than 92,000 secret documents -- before its release -- and must now stay on course, President Obama argued Tuesday as he called on the House to pass a war-funding bill.
The Senate already passed the bill to fund the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The brief Rose Garden statement -- after a closed-door meeting with congressional leadership from both parties -- was the first time the president has addressed the illegal leak of the sensitive, confidential information to the Web site WikiLeaks. That leak is under investigation by the Army's Criminal Investigative Division (CID), which has identified a "person of interest in the matter."
The White House has maintained that the leak of documents, which covered the years from 2004 to 2009, revealed nothing substantially new regarding the administration's concerns about possible Pakistani intelligence connections to insurgents and other issues, but that the release of names, logistical information and other data could hurt operational security -- affecting the people prosecuting the war as well as those who cooperate with coalition efforts in the region.
The president reiterated that concern, while also downplaying the information in the documents.
"They point to the same challenges that led me to conduct an extensive review of our policy last fall," Obama told the gathered reporters and television cameras.
He went on to say that after seven years of a strategy that was not "adequate to the challenge in this region," his administration had substantially increased America's commitment there, demanded more accountability from Afghanistan and Pakistan, and had developed "a new strategy that can work" and put in place a strong team to carry out the plan.
"Now we have to see that strategy through," he said. "As I told the leaders, I hope the House will act today to join the Senate, which voted unanimously in favor of this funding, to ensure that our troops have the resources they need and that we're able to do what's necessary for our national security."
The House is expected to pass the bill.
Obama also used his brief statement to push for Senate passage of a bill that would help small businesses by eliminating capital gains taxes on key investments, expanding successful Small Business Administration programs and creating a $30 billion small business lending fund to help community banks offer loans to these companies, which have had a particularly hard time getting access to credit in this economy and which he said "create two out of every three new jobs in this country."
"These are the kind of common sense steps that folks from both parties have supported in the past," Obama said. "I hope that in the coming days, we'll once again find common ground and get this legislation passed. We shouldn't let America's small businesses be held hostage to partisan politics and certainly not at this critical time."
The president also urged more progress on a comprehensive energy bill, saying that while the Senate was poised to act on a a bill that would respond to the BP oil spill and create new clean energy jobs, more action was needed. He pledged to push for broader changes, including climate legislation.
Finally, Obama said he had asked Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) to work with Democrats to confirm nominees to judicial vacancies in a more timely manner.
"If we want our judicial system to work, if we want to deliver justice in our courts then we need judges on our benches," he argued.
Leave a Comment:
Unlike most of my liberals friends, I think we don't think we can just abandon Afghanistan...just because it's not a popular war we think we can't win. Reason is because, if we leave... the mulahs and the Taliban would walk right in, and you know they would be more dangerous than they were before....
The Russians will tell you, no can win a battle against that country because you dont know who the enemy is; and also the enemy has already been through many of these sort of battles and they can always wait it out forever. The Taliban has proved it over and over again.
And also the people are so poor that their voices would never be heard by whatever government we setup there. And also whatever government we setup will always be the corrupt rich that will never want to let go of their old ways. It's tragic....
So now we have a dilemma because we can't stay forever to police the country, while losing military men on a daily bases....while on the other hand, you can't leave a destabilized region for the Taliban, Iran and Iraq to take over. We've killed to many civilians through friendly fire these past decade that family members of those terrorist are who we will be fighting if we leave the nation in shambles. Even ordinary citizens would loath the US because we caused it. They had the Taliban, they hated it, but at least the region was stable.
This begs the question of why we should be meddling in other country's development... I agree that they F-ed with us during 9/11 and we needed to show that we will meet force with force. But now, what do we do? leave? nuke the place (non-option)? Since I've tried to educate myself on this issue and I can't come to any conclusion that makes any sort of sense, I'll leave the decision to the President and hope he makes the best decision for the country. so if it's stays the course, I'll say "STAY THE COURSE MR PRESIDENT", your country and the electorate of this country support you.
Enjoyed your post.
I think a lot of us feel that Pres Obama had to give Afghanistan one more solid effort with enough troops, a different strategy and different tactics. We broke it again after Russia broke it, we have an obligation to try fixing it. The greater risk is Pakistan--would a jihadist run Afghanistan set its sights on a nuclear-armed country for revenge against the USA; we know the Taliban aided Al Qaeda, it is likely they would again.
If at the end of the troop surge, Afghanistan is making significant progress, then we should evaluate how best to help but we cannot stay there another decade in such large numbers. If there is little progress, then maybe we must evaluate and decide that we gave Afghanistan its best chance for a future than it has ever had. There is much that we can do to help and much we can do without remaining there. Bush/Cheney pretty much quit after about 6 months and headed to Iraq. That's the war most liberals really did not agree with.
Jody, you summed up what I was thinking exactly. I hope the surge works too....
I disagreed with the Iraq war from the beginning; knowing that bush admin had an agenda. They quit on Afghanistan to pursue their pet projects in order to fatten their wallets.... what a shame that they are just living large today while our troops are still fighting wars they started; and also our economy is still trying to recover from the devastation they put it through... and my friends on the right want to revert back to the same old failed politics of no ideas, but fear mongering and hate.
What I find astounding is how for 8 yrs the talking heads ignored the mismanagement of this war and as soon as this admin put out a comprehensive plan it was like someone blew a dog whistle, we have a new attack line on POTUS, WHATS THE PULLOUT DEADLINE MEAN,WHATS THE PULLOUT DEADLINE MEAN,WHATS THE PULLOUT DEADLINE MEAN, kaw, kaw polly want a cracker, y'all ran with that adnausium. Lets play pretend and just imagine what WWII would have been like with to-days media talking heads doing the reporting, we would be wearing arm bands I do believe. Imagine the reports from Tarawa or D-day or Iwo etc. How about an early report from Kasserine Pass after Rommel kicked our ass, " Americans are unprepared, untrained and ill equipped and no match for the Germans, it looks to be all downhill for the GI's and withdrawal appears to be the only option". Thanks media for all your great 20% approval help with the issues.
This is not Bush's war.
We know Bruce, Chicken George did'nt think that being attacked from Afghanistan was that Big of a Deal. That Bozo was too concerned with spending a Trillion (and Counting) with No regard whatsoever for America's Troop's(over 4000 Dead & thier family's in disarray) for some pistol Saddam had. That Bozo Chicken George, coulda had this settled by 2002, but That Clown did'nt have the BackBone!
Want some Cheese with your Whine?
Not Bush's war? Who started and failed to finish it? Even republicans pounced on that remark by Steele as ridiculous--the neocons take great pride in their two wars.
If I were a betting person, I'd put down some cash that if the Obama strategy is successful, the GOPers will be saying--see, Bush knew what he was doing.
Bruce,
Sorry, this war was started by by President Bush Jr. He started it and then mismanaged it from the git go. Now our President has to try and fix the problem, I wish him well but he has 8 years of mismanagement to try and correct in a fraction of the time and personally I do not think it can be done. I want our people back here home and safe. I also know we have a conflict in how do we get out. Politicians are afraid of how we will be perceived by the world. We been there and done that about 40 years ago. Staying in Afghanistan just because we are afraid we may look bad if we leave is a poor excuse for staying. This should have been fought as a real war from the beginning.
Unfortunately is was not (thank you BUSH).
Now our men and women are paying the price, not the politicians. This is bad news, cut our loses get our people home and use the money to create jobs and help America. We are not the world's police and I'm tired of the notion that we are with little or no help from the very people we are supposed to be defending. Let somebody else do it.
If that bozo thinks talking like Bush will save his sorry but, he's sadly mistaken. Anyone with half a brain knows if we don't stop the taliban,they will be sending nukes our way in a matter of years!
Bruce-2079393
If that bozo thinks talking like Bush will save his sorry but, he's sadly mistaken. Anyone with half a brain knows if we don't stop the taliban,they will be sending nukes our way in a matter of years!
......................................................
Bruce
The bozo you should be referring to, first of all, was George W Bush, the hand puppet of Dick Cheney and other war profiteers.
Second of all, George W Bush dropped the ball in Afghanistan by jumping over to Iraq to rob it's country of the black gold and increase the military industrial complex.
FYI: You're mistaken: Undoubtedly, you didn't get the memo. Some righties are pushing back against the insane Tea Baggars rhetoric. I doubt seriously if what you want will come to fruition.
Tunde, you will find that most posters here on First Read are against this war continuing. At least those that lean Democratic. But you will also find that if they disagree with you, they will say so respectfully. I know. I'm one who agrees with you. But at no time have I been called anything disrespectful when speaking about this. You won't find that too many places on the internets. Passions run deep on this subject. Here we talk honestly about it. And we respect other's own personal perspective on this subject.
People are entitled to their own opinions. If there are angry messages here, they are usually reserved for the President, who insists on staying put for the near future.
We all hate war. On that we all agree.
Pat, thanks I agree with you that most posters here have been pretty respectful except for the few loose canons (like the one right above you, "Bruce")...if the congress can only be like that... Rublicans and democrats both working for the will of the people, nothing will be able to break or rattle the United States of America.
IMHO. we could keep a hundred thousand ground troops in the country for the next 20 years and every day would be just like today. I do not want to sound like a doomsayer but we cannot win in Afghanistan. We are using the same tactics we have used in every conflict since WWII.
This is a new kind of enemy and it is going to take a new kind of strategy. Something along the lines of infiltration, information and education. Infiltrate the enemy, find his training grounds, supply routes and take them out, even if they are in Pakistan. Educate the young and let them know that friendship is more benefical to all than war. I lived through the same kind of thing during my tour. We cannot lose public support for this campaign as we did in Nam, we cannot continue to lose American lives without some klind of demonstrable success, we cannot continue to kill civilians and think the locals will support us.
If we speak of winning as in winning WWII, no we cannot win. If we think in terms of providing some stability and some decent infrastructure to this country which has been ravaged by war for over 30 years, and at least give the Afghanistan people a chance, then we do win--just not a traditional victory.
I do not want to spend the next 25 years rebuilding what Afghanistan never had. The only thing close to victory that we can accomplish is to get the radicals to stop attacking us. I don't know if we can ever get there given our history in the region. It will take generations for the Afghan society to reach a kind of civilized, cohesive government.
Tunde:
Did the Taliban particpate in the 911 attack? Are you confusing the Taliban with those who actually planned and carried out the 911 attack? If they did not particpate in the 911 attack then why is it we had to show the Taliban we will meet force with force. Are some of the Taliban participating in the fight against the U.S. presence simply because they see the U.S. as invaders and they want us out of the country. Are the Taliban themselves Afghans? Is it likely that the Taliban will one day have a role in the governance of Afghanistan? Would some Taliban be considered insurgents within their own country versus terrorists with the intent of particpating in terrorists attacks on a world-wide basis? Do some Taliban see themselves as insugents fighting an invader rather than as terrorists wanting to harm the U.S.? Do the Taliban have strong ties with Al-Queda or do they resent any Al-Queda who would attempt to meddle in their attempts to regain governing power in Afghanistan. If the Taliban were to regain power does the U.S. have the military technology to determine if they were allowing other terror groups to train in their country and the equipment and power to eliminate these training camps without maintaining ground troops in the same? The Taliban were cruel religious fanatic dictators when in power but as you state the region was fairy stable. Can the U.S. enter into every country where their are religious fanatic dictators, remove them, and rebuild a more democratic society in these countries? Are the lives of young American military personnel worth attempts to nation build throughout the world when many of the population that one is attempting to provide more freedom for are in fact supporting the enemy? How does one build stability in a country when after buidling a school or hospital they are blown up the next day by Taliban insurgents who live in and among the people that the school and hospital were meant to serve?
These and many other questions need to be answered before one comes to an opinion as to whether we should leave or remain in Afghanistan. I have studied these questions and others, as well as having fought in a similar conflict. It is my opinion that we need to bring our ground troops home, to improve our intelligence capabilities, and to maintain some type of quick strike military presence in a friendly nation near this region to deal with any discovered terrorist training camps.
CA,
Well spoken my friend. Clean it up and get out ASAP. Forget how the world may perceive us at this point. They will trash us no doubt in some respects until something tragic happens to them and guess who they are going to turn to? The good old USA of course.
We are not he world's police / or army. Sorry, but sometimes these countries really have to do it for themselves. We cannot do for everybody. Time to do for ourselves and I do not care if that sounds selfish. It is our blood that is being spilled out there.
Excellent post CA, I agree with you on most of the things said but out thoughts on this issue diverge on the final outcome. We need to discuss what needs to be done because we simply can't abandon the region without caring about the repercussions to America and the people of Afghanistan....whether we like it or not, we started this war and destabilized this nation.
Until a lot the questions you posed are answered, we unfortunately can't bail out on what we started. Although George Bush started this war, it is now our war and we have to find a credible solution to end it - one that would be a compromise between the interest of America and the people of that nation. In that way, they know we tried rather than abandoning them. If in any way, the Afgani people lay the blame of destroying their country on us.... it will not be good for either countries.
We can't just abandon what we started as a nation, whether each individual agrees with it or not.
US Navy,
I agree... we shouldn't be the world's police; but in this case... we do not have a choice. We committed to it and if we dont see it through then we have blood in our hands - for our dead troops and the innocent civilians that died in this war. There has to be a solution, and we have to find that solution...
We just have to in all honesty try to resolve this issue.
Tunde,
I agree with you in part except for the blood on our hands part. I put that blame at he feet of Bush and Chenney not the American People. The poiticians George and Chenney have to take the ownership for all the spilt blood. Not our soliders, not the American people. And we do have a choice however unpleasant it may be for some, there is a choice. Always is.
Tunde:
I completely understand your sentiments. It is a mess. And my point is if you and I and others have so much frustration and concern as to what is the right thing to do now that we are in this mess, how can anyone blame a newly elected President who must be losing sleep every night wondering the same things? How to get out of this mess? How to do it right? How not to abandon those Afghans who want freedom and are depending on us.? How to defeat an enemy that can't be defeated unless the entire country were to be leveled? How to preserve the honor and integrity of those Americans who have died to date fighting in Afghanistan, and how do I explain to their families if I decide to pull out? Yet how do I explain to those families who will lose loved one's in the future if I don't pull out? So many questions. So few options. Yet no matter which option a person decides to take someone is going to tell that person it is the wrong option. Somone is going to complain.
I say pull out now. But if in Obama's shoes I don't know. I suppose i would have to visit the place myself several times. Visit the commaneders and troops and Afghan ciitzens and make a determination. And that dertermination just might be placing 500,000+ troops in Afghanistan to do wha twas necessary to wipe out the hardened and more fanatical Taliban. Who is to say.
The saddest three words in the political lexicon, "Stay the course"...
A hundred years and a 100 trillion dollars and it would be the same sad place within a year of our departure...
Why don't we give the new plan time to work? Its just like POTUS said a while back "If I planted a garden today and the press returns the next day and see nothing is growing they would declare it a failure" How true of the 20% press. The moral of the troops is high and all the polls of the Afgan people are also in the 60% range or higher. POTUS has set a time line for results lets give it a choice, and one more thing Afghanistan was fairly stable until the USSR and the US decided to turn it into a cold war hot zone, which we quote "won" and then walked away from leaving a totally devastated country.
Stay the course, now where and when have I heard that before? It kills me to hear the same tired logic being expressed by the left as the Bush admistration used about for eight years in IRAQ. We can't leave but we can't stay so we should do what exactly?
The Talaban will be there long after we are they as they are one group or tribe in Afganistan and will always have a following. As Donald Trump said when asked what to do about Iraq if he were elected President "Declare victory and come home, because at some point 1,2,10 years from now we will declare victory and come home". Lets get it over with and leave now.
Obama is morphing into George Bush every day and has been a major disappointment regarding his promise to end the wars. No change in that department, sorry Obama. That guy that yelled you lied was actually correct.
RIck, KY It was your Bama who kept on spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spendng and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and spending and still continue to spend. Soon he will drive up the debt to 20 trillion dollars. You don't have a bit of common sense. If Bush left a high debt, the Bama is suppose to stop spending and cut down on expenses, no but he continue to be the big spender. No household spends when their budget is sky high, instead they cut down on expenses to reduce the debt. You DINOS can't help it. you are addicted to big spending.