Skip to main content

Why was Obama "wrong" about the surge?  Why did he oppose it?  With the benefit of hindsight, wouldn't he have done it differently?  

These are the questions Obama is being asked over and over again and frankly, it is a little awkward.  CW is starting to coalesce around the idea that he doesn't have terribly good answers.

The truth is he does, he just isn't saying it.

The reasons he opposed the surge is the same reasons he opposed the war to begin with.  

Afghanistan, Al Quada and Osama Bin Laden.  

Everything we do in Iraq hurts our efforts in Afghanistan and Pakistan tracking down the real culprits for 9/11.  In fall of 2006 when the surge was proposed, three years after the original invasion of Iraq, Osama Bin Laden still wasn't in Iraq.  He never was.  

Obama has been singularly focused on dismantling the network that actually attacked us, wherever they may be.  

The war in Iraq was a distraction from the real fight 2003 when it began, in 2006 when Bush/McCain proposed their surge and it's still a distraction now.

And what's happened since then?  The situation in Iraq has improved, sure, but Afghanistan has only gotten worse.  The instability has spilled over into Pakistan, which is in a much more precarious situation than it was when the surge began.  History has born him out once again.  

By going ahead with the Bush/McCain "Surge" we have kept our eye off the ball and continued to allow Al Quada their safe havens.

I know, I know, talking point diaries are annoying, but the truth is, this IS a better answer than Obama himself has yet given.

Am I wrong?

Originally posted to dts on Thu Sep 11, 2008 at 12:32 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site