President Obama has finally decided, after about three months of hesitation, `d send 30,000 troops into Afghanistan.Il American president has taken a long time before deciding Why subjected to two opposing forces.
one hand, the liberal base of his party who want a retreat from all theaters of war by the `other conservative Democrats and moderate general for national security reasons they consider a top priority to stay in Afghanistan.
Obama, consistent with his statements and policy allla held in recent years by the Senate, should have procedures to withdraw troops but this was a `option altogether inapplicable.
thus ended `to` announce the dispatch of soldiers who will be 'completed in 2010 and at the same time submitted his retirement in 2011.
This decision has exposed to attacks from both right and left
L `radical pacifist wing of the Democratic Party that has had so much weight in` Obama's election as president, especially by making the primary to defeat Clinton, the choice had been living as a betrayal.
The president who promised to end the war, leaving lapolitica militaristic imperialism of Bush junior, when the chips are not only the soldiers did not withdraw from Iraq 'but increases the number in Afghanistan.
very similar reaction can be observed between the intellectuals and the Hollywood stars always inclined to multiculturalism and pacifism in the third worldism prescindere.Sarebbe fun to know the thoughts of the jurors who awarded the Nobel prize to Obama for peace .. trust.
Finally, he dashed the hopes of the generals who have waited three months, during which American soldiers have suffered more substantial losses since 2001, and eventually got ten thousand soldiers in less than the number that asked in order to effectively implement the "surge" on the Iraqi model.
John McCain spoke of "fuzzy logic" to regard the statements of Barack Obama.
He also insisted that Obama as commander in chief of the armed forces say they want to send the troops and at the same time you want to withdraw sent an unintended incentive for the Taliban to hold on at the same time a terrible message to both its troops and the Afghans who want to support the Americans.
In fact, this statement undermines the bud the possibility of success (already limited, given the history of Afghanistan) of the "surge." Sara is even more difficult, in fact, for Americans get the cooperation against the Taliban and Al Queda, as soon as the Afghans know that the American president in a year `withdraw its troops and the Taliban ritornerrano to rule the roost.
At the same time if the Afghans do not cooperate, the risk to American soldiers grow exponentially.
Among the conservatives were recorded but is also positive comments.
The Washington Post has spoken out about a president who has made her the Afghan war, as Norman Podhoretz has recognized the President the ability to go against his own ideology for the good of the country.
Personally believe, however, the most appropriate location of the Wall Street Journal that showed that the first to argue that Obama has really changed my mind on 'Afghanistan and hear her this war, and necessary cheegli also from political point of view poses the problem of terrorism and the war in afghanistan in the middle of suaagenda policy.
So far, after the definition of prohibited war on terror, has always avoided talking about terrorists, preferring the watered-down version of extremists in his speeches and words such as Afghanistan Iraq, terrorism, Islam is among the least used to symbolize a clear political choice
neoconservative
0 comments:
Post a Comment