I have watched with no small shortage of puzzlement as much of the progressive blogosphere has taken the Obama Administration to task for its plans to send additional troops to secure Afghanistan from the threat posed by the resurgence of the Taliban. The comments in Brandon Friedman's diary are a good sample of the vocal opposition to the Obama plan being voiced by many respected figures in the progressive blogging community.
It is not my intent here to rehash all the arguments for and against committing to the mission in Afghanistan: those who believe that Afghanistan is unwinnable; that it is impossible to do good through the use of military force; that any civilian casualty is by definition a war crime; that the only proper use of American force is to repel an invading army on our own soil or to respond to an immediate genocide; that the Taliban are no worse than other despotic regimes whose own people must deal with them; that a significant distinction can be made between the Taliban and Al-Qaeda such that we are not currently engaged in a war of self-defense; that the situations of Afghanistan and Iraq are in essence the same--well, those are not people who can at this point by swayed by reasoned argument on this issue. Presumably these same folks also opposed what President Clinton did with full allied support in Kosovo--and if so, I guess we'll never see eye to eye.
No, my question is this: where were all of you during the election campaign?
We all voted for this guy, right?
He's been pretty darn clear since the beginning of his campaign what his plans were for Afghanistan. He's been pretty darn clear since the beginning of his campaign about the difference between Afghanistan and Iraq. Remember the guy who said this?
I don’t oppose all wars.
After September 11th, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this Administration’s pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such a tragedy from happening again.
I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.
Same guy. It is curious to me that all those who are so vehemently opposed to Obama's plans in Afghanistan today were so silent during the campaign, but we couldn't hear the end of opposition to Obama's stance on FISA. Where was the outrage?
But maybe you supported someone else during the primary. Perhaps you tolerated Obama during the general, but found him inferior to your preferred primary alternative. Maybe you supported this guy:
">
Partial transcript from the John Edwards vid above:
We might need to have some additional American troops in Afghanistan at least until it stabilizes. So I'm for getting out of Iraq, I'm totally for getting out of Iraq. But I think Afghanistan is a different story. I think when we went into Afghanistan we actually went after the people who attacked us on September 11th. And I supported it then, and I still support it.
Or perhaps you supported Hillary Clinton?
It is a great and brave thing that our allies from Canada, Britain, the Netherlands and other NATO countries have done by sending troops to Afghanistan. But Afghanistan and NATO need us as a leading partner, to help with security, to root out corruption, to find alternatives to opium, to improve the situation with Pakistan. We know the general area where the leaders of the Taliban and probably the leaders of Al Qaeda are. It is a failure of our policies on all fronts that five years later they are sending waves of fighters into Afghanistan from their safe havens. The stakes are unbearably high: for Afghanistan, for Pakistan, for the country's northern neighbors in Central Asia; for the reach of Al Qaeda; and for our own credibility and leadership.
We should begin by responding to our NATO commander's call for more troops in Afghanistan, where on a per capita basis we have spent 25 times less than we spent in Bosnia, and deployed one-fiftieth as many troops.
Presidential candidate and current Vice-President Joe Biden:
Vice President-elect Joe Biden pledged long-term American support for Afghanistan during a visit Saturday, and the commander of NATO-led forces told him that thousands of new American troops expected this year will need more support against surging Taliban violence.
Dodd and Richardson also supported increasing troop levels in Afghanistan, and currently support President Obama in his policy. There were only two Democratic candidates who promised an end to our engagement in Afghanistan: Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel. There was one Republican candidate to do so: Ron Paul.
And Ron Paul, the Republican, got a far greater share of the vote than Kucinich and Gravel, the Democrats, combined.
Which leaves me wondering two things: first, where was all this sturm und drang from the progressive blogosphere over the need to leave Afghanistan during the primary process, when all the major candidates had made their positions perfectly clear? Where were the screaming cries of agony during the campaign?
Second, I wonder if those calling for abandonment of Afghanistan are the slightest bit concerned that the vast majority of their fellow supporters on this issue are not Kucinich Democrats, but Ron Paul Republicans?
Personally, I believe the Taliban are the most dangerous entity in the world right now, both from the point of view of terrorism and human rights. I believe they were fully allied with Al-Qaeda, and that Mullah Omar is just as guilty of the 9/11 attacks as Osama Bin Laden. I believe that the war in Afghanistan is winnable, and that it is a war of self-defense. I believe that leaving Afghanistan will put the Taliban back in charge of the country, and that Pakistan will be no safer on account of it. I believe that outcome to be unacceptable.
More importantly, I know that my Democratic Administration is with me on this, and that every other major Democratic candidate was also with me on this. And I have the peace of mind of knowing that when I did oppose my own leadership on issues as fundamental as war and peace or social security, I let my voice be heard when it could have made a significant difference, and I voted with the candidate who best represented my ideals.
It is frankly disturbing to me that there are so many just now finding their voices on this critical issue.