Afghanistan and Amnesty—brief updates
The following is from an e-mail put into my format from The Heritage Foundation—http://members.myheritage.org/site/R?i=AYHF73hfzUe68gh_i0ygoA..
“Moving forward in Afghanistan
October 6, 2009 By Amanda Reinecker
Last Saturday, eight American servicemen and two Afghan policemen were killed in a terrorist assault in Afghanistan. This blow comes at a critical point in the war, when General Stanley McChrystal, the NATO commander, has reportedly asked President Obama for an additional 40,000 U.S. troops in order to beat the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Despite pledges to improve security in Afghanistan, the President now seems on the fence about fulfilling his commander’s request.
McChrystal has offered a promising strategy for the war. President Obama would be wise to embrace this long view strategy, writes Heritage’s Conn Carroll in the Morning Bell, ‘and avoid short-sighted policies that undermine our friends in Afghanistan and Pakistan, while encouraging our enemies.’
Americans should pay close attention to the path President Obama chooses in Afghanistan, since his decision will prove critical to America’s national security interests, write Heritage Foundation experts Lisa Curtis and James Phillips. ‘There appears to be some wishful thinking within the Obama Administration regarding the U.S.’s ability to negotiate a political solution with the Taliban,’ write Curtis and Phillips. But negotiations have yet to work with al-Qaeda and Taliban, who are now more unified than ever by their anti-Western aims. As Henry Kissinger wrote in Newsweek, ‘even so-called realists—like me—would gag at a tacit U.S. cooperation with the Taliban in the governance of Afghanistan.’
Recent U.S. gains in Pakistan provide sufficient evidence that we can succeed, but only with continued dedication and support in both Pakistan and Afghanistan. ‘Now is the time to demonstrate military resolve in Afghanistan so that al-Qaeda and its affiliates will be squeezed on both sides,’ insist Curtis and Phillips. ‘Waiting does not prolong a favorable outcome. This effort will not remain winnable indefinitely, nor will public support.’
Yet the Left continues to stall any decision by pressuring the White House to devise an exit strategy and refuse any additional troops. President Obama should ignore the partisan rhetoric. Instead, he should trust the expertise and judgment of those he personally appointed to lead.
‘If the Obama administration chooses to deny its field commander’s request for more troops and instead seeks to engage Taliban leaders in negotiations with the vain hope that these militants will break from their al-Qaeda allies, the results will likely be disastrous,’ warn Curtis and Phillips.
Sneaking in Amnesty
When the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) worked with President Bush to enact amnesty for illegal immigrants without open debate, the American people were quite rightly outraged. Now the Obama administration is trying to do the same thing, and it’s looking ‘even worse,’ Heritage national security expert Jim Carafano writes in the Washington Examiner.
Aware that granting amnesty to lawbreakers may provoke a strong reaction, President Obama and one of the bill’s key authors, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) have decided to keep it under wraps until the new year. In fact, the administration is drafting the legislation itself behind closed doors, rather than in the usual Congressional committees. That means Congressmen won’t even see the ‘hundreds of pages of complicated legislative language’ until the bill is brought to the floor.
‘After witnessing the firestorm over health reform, Obama apparently has decided never to go down that ‘let Congress lead’ route again,’ explains Carafano. This means the proposal won’t reflect Congressional debate—including input from those skeptical of granting amnesty—but instead will reflect only the President’s priorities.
To avoid the angry protestors and heated town hall debates that greeted his health care ‘reform’ proposal, the President won’t unveil his grand plan until January. Conveniently, this is just after lawmakers return to Washington from their winter break, and therefore after lawmakers leave their home districts, where they would have to explain their actions.
The health care debates made very clear that the American people want to know what their government is up to—and they deserve to know. But how can they when even their elected representatives aren’t privy to it? ‘It’s a bad plan, Mr. President,’ writes Carafano. ‘Americans deserve better. Publish now or let perish.’”
The following is from an e-mail put into my format from The Heritage Foundation—http://members.myheritage.org/site/R?i=AYHF73hfzUe68gh_i0ygoA..
“Moving forward in Afghanistan
October 6, 2009 By Amanda Reinecker
Last Saturday, eight American servicemen and two Afghan policemen were killed in a terrorist assault in Afghanistan. This blow comes at a critical point in the war, when General Stanley McChrystal, the NATO commander, has reportedly asked President Obama for an additional 40,000 U.S. troops in order to beat the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Despite pledges to improve security in Afghanistan, the President now seems on the fence about fulfilling his commander’s request.
McChrystal has offered a promising strategy for the war. President Obama would be wise to embrace this long view strategy, writes Heritage’s Conn Carroll in the Morning Bell, ‘and avoid short-sighted policies that undermine our friends in Afghanistan and Pakistan, while encouraging our enemies.’
Americans should pay close attention to the path President Obama chooses in Afghanistan, since his decision will prove critical to America’s national security interests, write Heritage Foundation experts Lisa Curtis and James Phillips. ‘There appears to be some wishful thinking within the Obama Administration regarding the U.S.’s ability to negotiate a political solution with the Taliban,’ write Curtis and Phillips. But negotiations have yet to work with al-Qaeda and Taliban, who are now more unified than ever by their anti-Western aims. As Henry Kissinger wrote in Newsweek, ‘even so-called realists—like me—would gag at a tacit U.S. cooperation with the Taliban in the governance of Afghanistan.’
Recent U.S. gains in Pakistan provide sufficient evidence that we can succeed, but only with continued dedication and support in both Pakistan and Afghanistan. ‘Now is the time to demonstrate military resolve in Afghanistan so that al-Qaeda and its affiliates will be squeezed on both sides,’ insist Curtis and Phillips. ‘Waiting does not prolong a favorable outcome. This effort will not remain winnable indefinitely, nor will public support.’
Yet the Left continues to stall any decision by pressuring the White House to devise an exit strategy and refuse any additional troops. President Obama should ignore the partisan rhetoric. Instead, he should trust the expertise and judgment of those he personally appointed to lead.
‘If the Obama administration chooses to deny its field commander’s request for more troops and instead seeks to engage Taliban leaders in negotiations with the vain hope that these militants will break from their al-Qaeda allies, the results will likely be disastrous,’ warn Curtis and Phillips.
Sneaking in Amnesty
When the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) worked with President Bush to enact amnesty for illegal immigrants without open debate, the American people were quite rightly outraged. Now the Obama administration is trying to do the same thing, and it’s looking ‘even worse,’ Heritage national security expert Jim Carafano writes in the Washington Examiner.
Aware that granting amnesty to lawbreakers may provoke a strong reaction, President Obama and one of the bill’s key authors, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) have decided to keep it under wraps until the new year. In fact, the administration is drafting the legislation itself behind closed doors, rather than in the usual Congressional committees. That means Congressmen won’t even see the ‘hundreds of pages of complicated legislative language’ until the bill is brought to the floor.
‘After witnessing the firestorm over health reform, Obama apparently has decided never to go down that ‘let Congress lead’ route again,’ explains Carafano. This means the proposal won’t reflect Congressional debate—including input from those skeptical of granting amnesty—but instead will reflect only the President’s priorities.
To avoid the angry protestors and heated town hall debates that greeted his health care ‘reform’ proposal, the President won’t unveil his grand plan until January. Conveniently, this is just after lawmakers return to Washington from their winter break, and therefore after lawmakers leave their home districts, where they would have to explain their actions.
The health care debates made very clear that the American people want to know what their government is up to—and they deserve to know. But how can they when even their elected representatives aren’t privy to it? ‘It’s a bad plan, Mr. President,’ writes Carafano. ‘Americans deserve better. Publish now or let perish.’”
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 4:45 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home