Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 2009
| Subscribe to Newser's RSS feeds RSS | Follow Newser on Twitter Twitter


14

Military Frustrated by 'Slow' Obama

Commanders irked by ongoing review of Afghanistan strategy

Share

(Newser) – President Obama's ongoing review of Afghan strategy is frustrating military officers used to a different commander-in-chief's style, say past and present top brass. Some fear that the long deliberations over Gen. Stanley McChrystal's request for more troops signal weakness and indecision to the enemy, while others fear the president is "pulling the rug out from under" them after promising to make the war a priority.

The military grew used to President Bush's policy of quickly picking one strategy and sticking to it "often to ill effect," one adviser to McChrystal tells the New York Times. Obama, by contrast, is readier to question assumptions. “There’s a value in that,” he said, “but that can be incredibly frustrating for those trying to operationalize the strategy.”

President Barack Obama meets with Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top commander in Afghanistan,  aboard Air Force One in Copenhagen, Denmark.
President Barack Obama meets with Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top commander in Afghanistan, aboard Air Force One in Copenhagen, Denmark.   (AP Photo/White House, Pete Souza )
Soldiers of the 1/501st of the 25th Infantry Division begin marching at sunrise just after being air-dropped into a field last week in Paktika Province, Afghanistan.
Soldiers of the 1/501st of the 25th Infantry Division begin marching at sunrise just after being air-dropped into a field last week in Paktika Province, Afghanistan.   (Getty Images)
« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow

The Bush administration would settle on a strategy and stick to it, and you could argue often to ill effect. - Andrew M. Exum,
adviser to General McChrystal

« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow
14 comments
VIEWING:
 
oldgoat
Oct 20, 09 4:16 AM CDT
Considering the outcome of Bush's decision making I'm not so sure that I'd want that again. Unless you like no plan, no armored vehicles or troops like we had in Iraq. Or for that matter going into Afghanistan and then basically leaving it with just basic troops to try to control the country while the Taliban and AQ took most of the country back over. Considering the Afghan gov under Karzai is shaky at best we might not be well off aligning ourselves with him. Also considering that this military commanders weren't smart enough to not have a outpost in a valley that was undermanned makes you wonder about their military judgement. Let's have the time to see where we are at and what options we have before jumping in with another 40000 troops that we don't know where we will get or how we will pay for. Reply
Vote up! Vote down!
+5
IN RESPONSE:
jamerican
Oct 20, 09 7:55 AM CDT
nobama is out campaining for the dems while more Americans die partly because of lack of support and his refusal to support the military...I guess we know where his priorities are...responsible for more deaths of Americans make him a ....
Vote up! Vote down!
-7
IN RESPONSE:
alkaseltzersammich
Oct 20, 09 11:50 AM CDT
Jamerican is a clown and will oppose Obama at every turn.
Vote up! Vote down!
-1
IN RESPONSE:
ultramarine13
Oct 20, 09 3:15 PM CDT
You mean like how Bush supported them, leading to the death and injury of thousands of American troops? Frankly, I much prefer Obama's approach of actually thinking about potential outcomes before taking action. Had Bush taken this approach, probably most of those troops that were injured and killed would still be alive and healthy today.
Vote up! Vote down!
+1
DarkFrancis
Oct 20, 09 4:34 AM CDT
Well...sit tight, fellas. Better to wait for a possible good decision than rush into a definite bad one. Reply
Vote up! Vote down!
+6
LEAVE A
COMMENT
Comment Policy
Facebook ConnectPost this comment to Facebook?

After connecting you will have the option to post your comment on your Facebook profile.