Obama Rejects all Military / Nat Security Options

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Its okay, I have top secret clearance, Spectre himself signed for it.

SPECTRE is an organization, not a man. You might be thinking about Blofeld.

[Remster 30]

Quote

Quote

Its okay, I have top secret clearance, Spectre himself signed for it.

SPECTRE is an organization, not a man. You might be thinking about Blofeld.

n00bs are so cute!

Remster

[nerdgirl 0]

Comments from the SecDef regarding the leaking of information related to Afghanistan, as well as the Fort Hood shooting.

As cited on Defenselink.mil (i.e., the DoD’s own website) from Armed Forces Press “Gates Lashes Out at Leakers”

“Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates today condemned a spate of leaks regarding both the Afghanistan strategy deliberations and last week's shootings at Fort Hood, Texas, threatening to fire anyone in the Defense Department he finds is involved.

“‘I am appalled by the amount of leaking that has been going on,’ Gates told reporters traveling with him today in the wake of media reports following yesterday's national security session on Afghanistan, President Barack Obama's eighth in the past two months.

“Gates said he has little doubt that some of those leaks have come from within the Defense Department. ‘If I found out who’ was involved, he said, ‘it would probably be a career ender.’

“Leaking information as Obama is weighing critical factors serves neither the interest of the country nor the military, the secretary said. He refrained from sharing his own views about the best option, but said Obama appears to be leaning toward one that combines parts of various alternatives presented so far.”

Throughout the budget process, Gates put in place a processes to try to limit leaks, like requiring federal employees, military officers, and contractors working in OSD to keep diaries of what they thought were going to be his decisions.

Does anyone remember how long the process for the change in strategy in Iraq, i.e., “the Surge,” took?

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[usedtajump 1]

Quote

Obama is a darker version of LBJ.

Rejecting the recommendations of his top military experts reeks of his lack of respect and lack of experience in thse matters.

Hey, LBJ had no military experience either and look what blindly heeding the advice of his "expert" generals got him.

The older I get the less I care who I piss off.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Does anyone remember how long the process for the change in strategy in Iraq, i.e., “the Surge,” took?

/Marg

I don't remember exactly, but I know that leading up to Gen. Patraeus' recommendations, he was speaking about the "book" he'd written regarding the strategy that was to be used in the "surge". I saw him speak about it in October of 2006, long before his recommendation to President Bush.

President Bush, IIRC made the case of the surge in January of 2007. It was in December when he had his "policy" meetings on the subject. So, if I had to guess, it was three to four weeks.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Quote

Does anyone remember how long the process for the change in strategy in Iraq, i.e., “the Surge,” took?

I don't remember exactly, but I know that leading up to Gen. Patraeus' recommendations, he was speaking about the "book" he'd written regarding the strategy that was to be used in the "surge". I saw him speak about it in October of 2006, long before his recommendation to President Bush.

President Bush, IIRC made the case of the surge in January of 2007. It was in December when he had his "policy" meetings on the subject. So, if I had to guess, it was three to four weeks.

Yes, the official announcement was January 2007.

You're right the ground work was being laid while Petraeus, Crane, Nagl, and others were working on the revision to FM 3-24 in October 2005 when Petraeus took command of the Combined Arms Center (CAC) at Fort Leavenworth.

Does anything in the interagency get done in 3-4 weeks? (Nevermind coordination between Sec of Army, Sec of Navy [for the USMC], and OSD.)

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Does anyone remember how long the process for the change in strategy in Iraq, i.e., “the Surge,” took?

I don't remember exactly, but I know that leading up to Gen. Patraeus' recommendations, he was speaking about the "book" he'd written regarding the strategy that was to be used in the "surge". I saw him speak about it in October of 2006, long before his recommendation to President Bush.

President Bush, IIRC made the case of the surge in January of 2007. It was in December when he had his "policy" meetings on the subject. So, if I had to guess, it was three to four weeks.

Yes, the official announcement was January 2007.

You're right the ground work was being laid while Petraeus, Crane, Nagl, and others were working on the revision to FM 3-24 in October 2005 when Petraeus took command of the Combined Arms Center (CAC) at Fort Leavenworth.

Does anything in the interagency get done in 3-4 weeks? (Nevermind coordination between Sec of Army, Sec of Navy [for the USMC], and OSD.)

/Marg

I can't speak to your last question. I do know that at the time when I saw Gen. Patraeus speak, an official request had not yet been made (per a two-star I met there).

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

I do know that at the time when I saw Gen. Patraeus speak, an official request had not yet been made (per a two-star I met there).

Was an official request ever made?

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

I do know that at the time when I saw Gen. Patraeus speak, an official request had not yet been made (per a two-star I met there).

Was an official request ever made?

Unless the military has invented a new way to authorize additional forces through the executive branch...??? Hell if I know....

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Quote

Was an official request ever made?

Unless the military has invented a new way to authorize additional forces through the executive branch...??? Hell if I know....

Most folks, and I suspect this extends well beyond you, don't know if the current time span represents a long time or a short time for such a decision to be made. There is a notion that it should be faster; what's the source of that inclination or perception? And who benefits from that perception? And who is harmed by perpetuation of that perception?



Previously it has been suggested here that one explanation might be that the National Security Advisor disagrees with GEN McChrystal's assessement:

Quote

However General Jones has a different opinion than McChrystal's which may explain Obama's indecisiveness.

In an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union,” General Jones asserted that he does not believe Afghanistan is “imminent danger of falling” to the Taliban and that the presence of al Qaeda “is very diminished.”

Gen Jones (ret) is the statutory pointman of national security strategy. He is also the gate-keeper. I think it's more than that; at the same time, however, I do think that's an important explanation to consider.

As far as I am aware, no one here has commented on what the CJCS Adm Mullen might think. He is in the direct chain of command to the President.

Another player, the current Ambassador to Afghanistan, retired LTG Karl Eikenberry, USA, reportedly opposes a significant increase in troops. The reported main concern is the Karzai government. Something about which I already wrote here w/r/t a strategic delay in making a decision. And I don’t have any interactions w/the US Afghan delegation … but interesting intersection, imo.


Since taking office, President Obama has made quite a few decisions regarding Afghanistan, e.g., in February, authorizing the deployment of 17,000 more combat troops (Marines and soldiers) to Afghanistan almost immediately after he received GEN Petraeus’ request through the SecDef and another 4000 in late March; authorizing another 13,000 support troops (military intelligence, civil affairs, engineers) this summer; expanding targets to include major narco-traffickers, i.e., combatting what’s keeping the Taliban flush; authorizing increasing number of drone missions into Pakistan, something about which I have mixed opinions; and the change in leadership from GEN McKiernan to GEN McChrystal. A lot of that, especially the increases in troop numbers, hasn’t gotten much of attention, particularly by the media. If one argues that Pres Obama can’t/won’t make a decision or change w/r/t Afghanistan, does one explain those authorizations and other decisions, including his decision to change leadership, as anomalies?


Until mid-September or so, Pres Obama has, im-ever-ho, been making strategic decisions and forward-looking (rather than just reactionary) w/r/t Afghanistan and supportive of COIN approaches being brought to him by his military and national security advisors. Strategic decisions … not operational and not tactical.

My first-order explanation, imo: decision-making and intra-agency coordination, much more so inter-agency coordination, takes time. There’s more to consider than just GEN McChrystal’s recommendations regarding military force structure for US foreign policy … especially if the intent is not to replicate earlier efforts -- to quote GEN Petraeus: “a whole of government approach is required, one that integrates all tools available international and interagency partners.”

My speculation is that one factor is a strategic delay to put pressure initially on Afghan President Hamid Karzai, i.e., the single biggest obstacle to implementing a successful counterinsurgency strategy. If it's just a counterterrorism strategy, one can (more easily) ignore the head of a foreign state.

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying