Jim Hoagland in the WaPo does a nice job of relating the behind-the-scenes factors in Obama's Afghanistan decision. Mostly they seem to come across as political in nature, it appears to me. Very little talk of 'why' we're there and what we're trying to accomplish, and more about fending off the various political powers that be, such as the Republicans, the Generals, the lefwing of the Democratic party.
It's funny, Al-Qaeda (I can never spell that right) and the Taliban are not mentioned once, nor is Pakistan. It's like those things aren't even important in the consideration. That of course could simply be Hoagland's focus and nothing else.
It's hard to conceive of a time when Obama might find it possible to begin to draw down in Afghanistan. When will the political considerations be any less than they are now? And I think his hope of somehow bringing the Democratic left along is foolish. They may vote for Obama rather than Romney (or Huckabee or Palin or Petreaus) in 2012, but then again, maybe they won't, if they don't think there's much of a real difference. They may migrate again to people like Ralph Nader in enough numbers to give the election to the Republicans.
Between Afghanistan casualties, high unemployment and foreclosures, and other unpleasantries, 2010-2012 could be a really ugly political time.
No comments:
Post a Comment