Capitol Hill Update: Signs of America's Surrender in Afghanistan

 

Is the Democrat Party getting ready to surrender yet another American ally to our enemies?  There are signs that this could be the case.  In today's "The Washington Times," a front-page story has the headline:  "Will Army brass get day in Congress?"  The article says that the Republicans in Congress are eager to help Obama's generals in the Pentagon receive a troop surge in Afghanistan which the generals need to successfully win the war.   

The question of the year is, will the president listen to his generals and give them the extra troops needed for victory in Afghanistan?  Obama's hero, Republican President Abraham Lincoln, listened to his generals, especially Ulysses S. Grant, and won the Civil War.   

Considering the track record of the anti-war majority faction in the Democrat Party, victory against our enemies in Afghanistan does not look promising.  The anti-war Democrat majority in the early 1970's forced a surrender to America's communist enemies in South Vietnam.  This same anti-war faction almost caused America to surrender in Iraq just a few years ago, but President George W. Bush listened to his generals and gave them the troop "surge" they requested and the war in Iraq has been won.  

The president's upcoming decision on a troop surge in Afghanistan will determine the direction of his presidency; whether or not he will follow the same defeatist path as the failed one-term president, Jimmy Carter.  In "The Washington Times," article, House Minority Leader John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, was quoted accusing Obama of endangering our mission in Afghanistan by "delaying action" on sending more troops.  

His counterpart in the Senate, Republican Leader Mitch McConnell from Kentucky said:  "If our recent experience with Iraq shows us anything, it's that our commanders in the field are in the best position to tell us what to do.  General (Stanley A.) McChrystal says that without adequate resources, we will fail.  In my view, we should listen to that advice."  

"The Washington Times" article said that "General McChrystal delivered a confidential report to the president and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates several weeks ago that says without more troops, the U.S. effort in Afghanistan will not succeed."  General McChrystal said in his assessment:  "Failure to gain the initiative and reverse insurgent momentum in the near term (next 12 months)  --  while Afghan security capacity matures  --  risks an outcome where defeating the insurgency is no longer possible."  What else does Obama need to know to make his decision!  

The Chairman of the Republican Study Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives, Congressman Tom Price from Georgia said in the article:  "It is clear this president is looking for some encouragement from within his own party to do the right thing.  Republicans are willing to do what is needed to do what is needed to defeat al Qaeda.  If the generals say it's possible, we stand willing and ready."   

Chairman Price goes on to say:  "The last thing we need to do is repeat the same failed strategy we saw in Iraq in 2005 and 2006  --  at a time when our generals were saying there needs to be a change in strategy.  We need to be listening to our generals now."   It has been decades since the other party has had backbone such as this.   

Time is of the essence for the president to make his decision about a troop surge demanded by our generals or he will not only bring about America's surrender to our enemies in Afghanistan, but he will be endangering our American troops and allied troops who are there right now waiting for him to act. 

Syndicate content