printDistilled, the Big Idea behind Bob Woodward’s new book, “Obama’s Wars,” was outlined over these pixelated pages on July 18, 2008, in “A War He Can Call His Own”:
Obama needs a “good” war. Electability in fin de siècle America hinges on projecting strength around the world—an American leader has to aspire to protect borders and people not his own. In other words, Obama needs a war he can call his own. In Afghanistan, Obama has found such a war.
By promising to broaden the scope of operations in Afghanistan, Obama has found a “good” war to make him look the part. By staking out Afghanistan as his preferred theater of war—and pledging an uptick in operations against the Taliban—Obama achieves two things: He can cleave to the Iraq policy that excited his base. While winding down one war, he can ratchet up another, thereby demonstrating his commander-in-chief credentials.
Okay, so Woodward has framed as dovish “the president’s decision to order a surge of 30,000 additional troops late last year — 10,000 fewer than what top military leaders had been strongly pushing — with a withdrawal date of July 2011.”
The bottom line is that the president pushed for enough of a commitment, in blood and treasure in Afghanistan, to make him the presidential pick of a blood-lusting public.
That commitment was slightly less than the one the military had in mind—“to keep the troop commitment more open-ended.”
Talk about triangulation—BHO was able to shed just enough blood to give the left a foot in the door, while pacifying the murderous neoconservatives (Repbulicans in all permutations).
Calibration: that was the genius of the cunning Obama.
Andrew Bacevich correctly judged the book as trivial gossip (e.g. does Jones hate Holbrook more than Hillary hates Holbrook…)
http://www.amconmag.com/blog/telling-sweet-nothings-to-power/
The war’s “non-decisions” get reduced to coffee table gossip of Washington’s Yentas while the country goes bankrupt and the Taliban (what doesn’t kill us makes us stronger) keeps on the offensive.
Think about it for a minute. There really is nothing to “win” in Afghanistan. The debate about troop increases amounts to little more than a cynical political calculation. His compromise didn’t completely alienate his base of support on the left while placating the neocons and war-thirsty generals to his right.
Obama can con enough people into thinking he had no choice but to double down in that pathetic land-locked country, and can even argue that he’s merely cleaning up after Bush’s disastrous decision. It would be a cop-out, but at least he wouldn’t look like a fool holding such a position.
But this is smoke and mirrors. He has deliberately chosen to sacrifice thousands of innocent civilians and hundreds of American soldiers and contractors. For what purpose? To avoid looking weak on terrorism. This is all for domestic political consumption. Allow me to translate: Obama is willing to kill people in large numbers in order to maintain power. Our liberties and our security are being sacrificed for this?
Until enough Americans get fed up with the absurd empire that has bankrupted us, our leaders will continue to drive us over the cliff. When will the insanity end?
Well, Zero won’t be able to triangulate Iran. Around about spring-summer 2012, he will either attack Iran, or his birth certificate – Coast Province Hospital, Mombasa, Kenya, 4 August 1961, 7:24 PM – is likely to adorn the covers of diverse neo-con media.
[“Zero”: that’s funny. I guess the “Big O” is taken.]