At last

Jeremy

What exactly do we expect to achieve in Afghanistan, and how exactly do we expect to achieve it? And how will whatever-it-is be sustained into the future once it has been achieved?

"For months now, the Brown government has been in a position where it couldn't say the coalition was winning in Afghanistan but also couldn't say how the strategy was going to change."

...and in the meantime British troops have continued to die. I don't blame Obama for this - he is not the only one who is "deeply ambiguous" about this war - but it certainly highlights the cowardice and pusillanimity of a British government that will not take responsibility for (or exercise its powers of decision over) the movements and fates of its own armed forces. That is what sticks in the craw - all of this craven running about after the president and waiting for a nod from him whilst British blood is being spilt on the ground.

Has Gordon Brown never been taught that sycophancy is not counted amongst the virtues?

And nor do I think David Cameron will do any better. He is yet another man who seems to think the summit of political success is having his photograph taken with whoever happens to be president of the United States this week.

TGF UKIP

James, this is only a very partial picture and one that still flatters The Big Red One, even though I believe that was not your intention.

In short this is no surge. McChrystal asked for a minimum 40,000 troops within a year but what apparently he is getting is around 32-34,000 but spread over two-three years with logistical constraints being posited.

More of a trickle than a surge and additionally congressional Democrats are also suggesting a 5% War Tax on "the rich" to protect all their "priorities" aka bungs to Acorn.

Mitch

so gordon will find out what his policy is going to be eh? pitiful.

Holly ......

Would any of us have HONESTLY sent 40 thousand troops without thinking long and hard about the details of what those 40 thousand troops were going to do?
I would be more disappointed in Obama if he had just sent them as requested like an order of 'more supplies'. These men are going into situations we here, safe at home can never appreciate, we can imagine and empathise, but we will NEVER know.
I hope Obama and his commanders out there have discussed their strategies and have taken this delay to prepare these young men for every eventuallity.
Obama should not have been talking to Brown just as Brown should not have been sitting back waiting for Obama..BOTH should have been talking to the relevant commanders out in Afghanistan and the respective commanders should have been talking to their respective leaders.
We do not know what has been discussed behind closed doors and that is EXACTLY as it should be.
These men are more courageous than I could dream of being,I would be a mess if confronted with gunshots, explosions and god knows what else.I wish them all well and hope their leaders are aware of what they are sending their fellow men into.
A pause in any game of strategy is no bad thing.
The habit of Labour ministers of blaming other people for their own inadequacies will be their undoing. We are not against Afghanistan because Obama decided to THINK,QUESTION and REASON the sending of so many into harms way. We are against it because the British government are not funding the front line troops as they should be. They do everything on the cheap and it costs a fortune because they end up spending three times as much in blood & treasure to put it right after the fact.
A very sad state of affairs.
I just hope they all return safely.

Marbury

Presumably, James, you think Obama should have followed the Bush template for commander-in-chief: make decisions with minimum deliberation and do whatever the generals tell him to do? I'm not sure that worked out so well. Given that this is an enormously complex war, that it is inherently "ambiguous", and that it's likely to affect the direction of American foreign policy for at least the next ten years, I kind of think the president was right to take his time...

strapworld

A leader takes the difficult decisions far quicker than this man. I fear for the free world with this man at the helm!

Why is there such a shortage of political leaders in the western world? I cannot think of one who could inspire anyone.

And we have the worst. Gordon Brown. David Cameron. Nick Clegg!
Milliband? Hague? it gets worse the more names you consider!

Is it any wonder people are in despair and considering the minor parties?

TrevorsDen

I continue to be saddened by the poor standard of contributins to these posts - and let me say straight aay I broadly agree with what UKIP says.

Bush did not rush into his surge - we had a period of deliberation. A congressional mission recommended a pull out in fact. Bush in the end showed leadership and foresight. Iraq has a chance to become a modern country.

The point Holly should realise is that the deliberation period took at least 3 months and has resulted in 23,000 combat troops being given 9 months to do what Obama says is 'to finish the job'. We must listen carefully to Obamas words to discern if in reality they are merely the prelude to, the smoke and mirrors to covering, a pull out.

It will tale a long time a very long time to turn Afghanistan into a serious democracy. Indeed it may take centuries to reach our level, after all it took centuries for us. But even some semblance of a partial democracy (ie determining things by talk not shooting) will take many years. If Obama does not recognise or commit to this then all we have suffered will be for nothing.

(apologies if this appears twice)

ndm

This decision was the first major test of Obama as commander in chief and he has come across as a president who is deeply ambiguous about a war his military is fighting, is reluctant to commit himself and who treats his allies with contempt. Not a good start.

The reality is that Obama appropriately took his time considering how to solve a problem made his by the rank incompetence of his predecessor. I take James Forsyth's post as yet more proof the right will always prefer balls-out stupidity to careful thought.

I think it incumbent on those who advocate the US sending 40,000 troops that they tell us just where all these troops are going to come from because my understanding is that the US is running out of deployable troops.

porkbelly

Holly, go lightly on the caps.

Stewart

What? Some one in British politics has dared to question the infallible St Barack? Blasphemy, hate crime, racism surely!? I wonder if Ainsworth would have had the nerve to voice this criticism if he thought there was a slim chance he'd still be in the job this time next year.
Agree with TrevorsDen's point about the Iraq surge. It wasn't just put together on the back of a cocktail napkin and agreed upon by yes men. Popular, trendy disdain for the Bush administration was/is so strong that it blinds most to what actually happened.

Austin Barry

I suspect that time will reveal Obama's strategy to be that of the Grand Old Duke of York.

Keith D

Strapworld Mr Geert Wilders

strapworld

TrevorsDen
November 25th, 2009 11:06pm
"I continue to be saddened by the poor standard of contributins to these posts"

His spelling not mine!!!!

Holly ......

The point everyone misses is, Afghanistan does not want to be a modern democratic
country.
A bit like us not wanting to be governed by Brown.
Would Brown shooting/waterboarding a few of us make us change our minds?
Replies with no caps please.
Loved your comment Porkbelly.
Thanks
Holly
xx