Of course it makes sense. Doesn't it?
President Obama plans to lay out a time frame for winding down the American involvement in the war in Afghanistan when he announces his decision this week to send more forces...
Just a few troops to help with the stand down. Say, 30,000 or so.
President Obama issued orders to send about 30,000 additional American troops to Afghanistan...
That's going to bring the total number to about 100,000 men fighting a war Obama promised to end last year. He's saying, in true Orwellian style, that his way of ending the war is to escalate it by an extra 30%. Um, can anyone see anything wrong with that?
“It’s accurate to say that he will be more explicit about both goals and time frame than has been the case before and than has been part of the public discussion,” said a senior official, who requested anonymity to discuss the speech before it is delivered. “He wants to give a clear sense of both the time frame for action and how the war will eventually wind down.”
Don't you love that word "eventually"? Does that mean, like, "next year" or "in my lifetime" or "your grandchildren won't see the end of this thing"? It's a very flexible word. It took, as usual, the Medium Lobster to cut through the crap and explain what I was missing.
Let us never forget just what's at stake in the war in Afghanistan: nothing less than the success of the war in Afghanistan. This war may be a mistake, a blood-soaked blunder, an unholy charnel house mindlessly consuming the bodies and souls of untold thousands, an open sore on the pockmarked face of history and an abomination before the sight of God and men, but it is first and foremost a war, and wars must be won. If the United States doesn't win this war, then will it not lose it? And if the United States loses this war, then won't the Unites States have lost it? And if the United States has lost this war, will that not then make the United States a kind of thing that loses wars? And then where would we be?
Allergic to pointless, mindless wars, I guess, and apparently that would be a Bad Thing for the country. Obama is clearly not going to be the president who lost a stupid war by not winning it, thereby forever opening Democrat conservatives to charges of being traitors and losing the war on purpose. That's not going to happen no matter how many American men and Afghan civilians have to die to prevent it. We have excuses rationalizations reasons to prove it.
And just as America can't afford to abandon this war, surely it can't afford to abandon the Afghan people, who without the American military would be left to the savage whims of their hated enemy, the Afghan people. Indeed, it remains America's solemn duty as the leader of the free world to bring freedom and security to the Afghan people by hunting down and eliminating the Afghan people. Nor can America forget its own national security, and the dire threat posed by the Afghan people to our war against the Afghan people.
Makes sense to me. The Lobster has turned me completely around on this issue.
Comments