While Obama announces that he will (slowly) send 30,000 troops (out of the 40,000 requested) to Afghanistan, he faces opposition from the left AND the right. (And just coincidentally, I am sure, he plans to have the troops home within three years…..just in time for the 2012 elections….)
Congressman Jason Chaffetz is one of the on the right that disagrees with the President’s plan to send more troops. In a forum at the Hinckley Institute of Politics, he unveiled his proposal for Afghanistan – get out. If you don’t get out, then by golly, go all the way and send the generals everything they need and now.
Admittedly causing some surprise and consternation among conservatives, he is also garnering support from them. Here’s an opinion from the “Voice of Deseret” blog:
Jason Chaffetz’ proposals perfectly dovetail with true conservatism. America was intended to be a republic, not an empire. Consequently, the best use of our military forces is to defend the country, not to engage in nation-building, peacekeeping, or wiping babies’ asses all over the world. If we must commit American forces outside the country, do it the way we did in Desert Storm. Ensure overwhelming force, give it a clear-cut mission, give it sufficient resources and latitude to accomplish the mission, and then get out when the mission is accomplished.
In another local conservative blog, The Daily Dose, comes this:
Rep. Chaffetz believes that the troops have already fought and won in Afghanistan by rooting out Al-Qaeda (according to Obama’s National Security Advisor fewer than 100 Al-Qaeda remain in the country) and toppling the Taliban, but the United States will need to continue to hunt and kill terrorists around the world. Chaffetz said if the President believes we need to continue fighting in Afghanistan, we need to do so with full commitment to win — otherwise we should begin the process of bringing our troops home.
Congressman Chaffetz cited President Obama’s own national security advisor, General James Jones who said in October that “”I don’t foresee the return of the Taliban. Afghanistan is not in imminent danger of falling,” He said. “The al Qaeda presence is very diminished. The maximum estimate is less than 100 operating in the country, no bases, no ability to launch attacks on either us or our allies.”
His proposal to the President states that we must “define the mission” and “redefine the rules of engagement“. He then suggests that ” If our mission in Afghanistan is simply to protect the populace and build the nation, then I believe the time has come to bring our troops home.”
As expected, however, Congressman Chaffetz is taking heat from the right. Bloggers here, here and here have no problem telling him he’s off-base on this one.
When questioned at the forum about his reasons, he simply stated that he knew he would take heat for his position from his own party, but he fundamentally felt it was the right position to take. He has not hesitated to disagree with the Republican party, either before or after his election to Utah’s 3rd Congressional district and he certainly has not hesitated to disagree with the President.
OK, Jason can almost walk on water (so he isn’t perfect),
but he nailed this one.
Do or Do Not there is no try.
If we kicked the group that attacked us out, and the group hiding them out of office, how quick can we leave and still keep the peace?
Sending more will only keep Iran from moving in. Perhaps we should be discussing this with Iran and not keeping some involved with grafts and greed in office.
Comparing President Obama’s address to the nation tonight to Jason Chavetz bloviating at the Hinckley Institute demonstrates how shallow Jason Chaffetz thinking and understanding really is on this complex issue. Chaffetz gets a B+ for showboating, a D- for preparation, and an F for content of his speech. He needs to heed the advice that “it is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt”.
JBT,
Obama’s plan has been sharply criticized on the left and the right, it is hardly a slam dunk. Can you provide any analysis that supports your derision of Chaffetz’s proposal to do it right or get out?
President Obama’s clear cut decision and the specific reasons for it that he articulated to the nation was made after weeks of intense debate and dialog among our nations leading military, foreign policy, and national security experts. His speech included well articulated specifics and details. Chaffetz speech did not.
Chaffetz generalized and simple platitudes tossed out as solutions to an incredibly complex international problem showed no real preparation or understanding on his part and amounted to nothing more than political posturing and grandstanding. Chaffetz as a freshman representative has no real experience whatsoever in national defense or foreign policy and yet he paraded himself at the Hinckley institue as though he were the real expert who knows the real solutions that everyone else is missing. Anyone with at least 4 brain cells can pull “do it right, or leave” out of their butt as the best solution to a myriad of complex problems—even the freshman Representative from Utah.
JBT,
You are again generalizing. Your comments can be summarized as “Obama good – Chaffetz bad”. Provide the information that leads to your conclusions, not merely your conclusions. Failing to do so makes you look like a partisan hack.