Will Obama’s Weakness Cause Us To Lose The War In Afghanistan?
Since our foolish, weak President who believes he can solve all problems simply via his sheer wonderfulness took office, there have been some extremely alarming developments that may have an enormous impact on the war in Afghanistan.
A couple of weeks ago, I noted that, “The “Stans” Side(d) With Russia Over Obama.
The timing of this move says a lot about how much confidence these nations have in the United States now that Barack Obama is President,
A Russian-led bloc of post-Soviet nations has agreed to establish a rapid-reaction military force to combat terrorists and respond to regional emergencies, Russian media reported Wednesday.
The decision came a day after reports that Kyrgyzstan is planning to close a strategically important U.S. military base that Washington uses to transport troops and supplies into Afghanistan.
On Wednesday, the Collective Security Treaty Organization — made up of Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan — decided on the rapid-reaction force at a Kremlin summit, the Russian news agency RIA-Novosti reported.
You think it’s a coincidence that this happened so soon after Barack Obama became President?
For all the abuse and attacks that were heaped on George Bush from abroad, other nations knew he was made of stern stuff. Obama, on the other hand, is a cream puff. A weakling. All talk and no action. A eunuch who’s more concerned about the reaction in Europe than protecting his own country.”
Now Pakistan, which was insulted by Obama’s politically motivated threats to bomb their country during the campaign, obviously senses that they can’t count on the US with Barack Obama in charge and they have capitulated to the Taliban/Al-Qaeda in a major way,
The government announced Monday that it would accept a system of Islamic law in the Swat valley and agreed to a truce, effectively conceding the area as a Taliban sanctuary and suspending a faltering effort by the army to crush the insurgents.
The concessions to the militants, who now control about 70 percent of the region just 100 miles from the capital, were criticized by Pakistani analysts as a capitulation by a government desperate to stop Taliban abuses and a military embarrassed at losing ground after more than a year of intermittent fighting. About 3,000 Taliban militants have kept 12,000 government troops at bay and terrorized the local population with floggings and the burning of schools.
The accord came less than a week before the first official visit to Washington of the Pakistani army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, to meet Obama administration officials and discuss how Pakistan could improve its tactics against what the American military is now calling an industrial-strength insurgency there of Al Qaeda and the Taliban militants.
The militants have also made deep gains in neighboring Afghanistan, where the United States is sending more troops.
Pakistani government officials insisted the truce with the Taliban and the switch to the Shariah, the Islamic legal code, were consistent with the Constitution and presented no threat to the integrity of the nation.
But the truce offered by the Taliban, and accepted by the authorities, rebuffed American demands for the Pakistani civilian and military authorities to stick with the fight against the militants, not make deals with them.
Under the terms of the accord, the chief minister of the province, Amir Haider Khan Hoti, said that Pakistani troops would now go on “reactive mode” and fight only in retaliation for an attack.
Pakistan has always been a balancing act. They’ve had large swaths of their country that are beyond their control, parts of the ISI are sympathetic to the Taliban, and the country isn’t particularly stable.
However, with Bush in charge, they feared and respected America enough to side with us against the terrorists. However, with a weakling like Obama in the White House, that’s no longer the case and they’ve concluded, like the “Stans,” that it’s better to cut a deal with people who don’t want to see us succeed.
As a practical matter, this is going to lead to two major league snags.
The first is that Pakistan’s uneven cooperation with us in killing members of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, looks like it is about to cease almost entirely.
Perhaps more problematically, especially with our base in Kyrgyzstan closing, is that Pakistan is our major supply route into Afghanistan. If we lose that supply route, it would cripple the war effort. And let’s face it, since Pakistan’s government just calculated that it made more sense to side with the Taliban than us once, it’s entirely possible that they may do so again and leave us in an untenable position.
Obama spent a lot of time talking tough about Afghanistan during the campaign, yet the surrounding region started going rapidly backwards when he got into office. Now the question has become: will Obama’s weakness and incompetence lose the war for us in Afghanistan?
PS: Am I saying that had John McCain, who is a more credible and respected figure than Obama, won the election, the base in Kyrgyzstan would have remained open and that this deal with the Taliban probably wouldn’t have happened? Although we can’t know for sure, that is likely the case.