Leading Democratic Hawk Jane Harman Opposes Troop Increase In Afghanistan
Leading Democratic Hawk Jane Harman Opposes Troop Increase In Afghanistan
Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA), who has earned a reputation as a hawkish Democrat, has indicated that she is aligning with House liberals against sending more troops to Afghanistan. In the past, Harman had indicated support for increasing troops, stipulating that the surge should be tied to progress against corruption in Afghanistan. According to The Swamp, Harman is now less inclined to pour more U.S. troops into the conflict:
Harman, a longtime Intelligence Committee member, told a Brookings Institution gathering today that any further increases “wouldn’t be well received” on Capitol Hill.
Harman’s view is that the Obama administration should deal with government corruption, and build up Afghan forces, before Congress is asked to pay for more U.S. troops. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the U,S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, has asked for 40,000 additional troops.
Earlier this year, Harman spoke at the inaugural conference of the neoconservative Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI), Bill Kristol’s reincarnation of the Project for a New American Century. FPI has been advocating fiercely in favor of a surge in Afghanistan. Reporting from the FPI conference at the time, The Wonk Room’s Matt Duss wrote:
To her credit, Harman acknowledged the negative effect of the Iraq war on the Afghanistan mission, stating that “we have under-resourced Afghanistan for too long, we took our eye off the ball when we went into Iraq. All of our resources were devoted to that effort.” Harman also said that the Obama administration must do a better job describing metrics for progress Afghanistan, and that the Congress has an important role to play in holding the administration accountable for whether benchmarks are being met.
She concluded at the time that the President was “on the right track,” and that “we have to hold this administration accountable for its plan in Afghanistan.” It appears Harman is now more concerned about the track Obama is pursuing.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Where are the teabagger trash on this topic?
Trillions have been spent in Afghanistan and Iraq, and to what effect?
What exactly has been accomplished?
Why can’t we spend a fraction of that money on our own citizens via the Public Option for health care?
The answer is, of course, that no big, mighty corporations will benefit materially from a governmental service to the public.
Perhaps the citizens should stop paying taxes, and let the corporations take up the slack.
The corporations are the sole beneficiaries of government largesse these days, not the citizens.
October 17th, 2009 at 11:27 amThank god a new post, I thought we were going to be stuck on the Beck thing for the rest of the day.
October 17th, 2009 at 11:43 amMay be Jane is repenting about her many previous sins..
October 17th, 2009 at 11:46 amI wish I knew what the best course of action was regarding Afghanistan. I bet Obama wished he knew as well.
October 17th, 2009 at 11:49 amI for one have come around to the Joe Biden option. From Alexander the Great to the Russians great armies have died in Afghanistan We are rapidly becoming the latest victim. We need to stop fighting terrorists like a country and fight them like what they are a gang of thugs
October 17th, 2009 at 11:52 amObama has inherited a horrible situation from the neo-con dingbats in the Bush/Cheney regime.
October 17th, 2009 at 11:52 amI’m ambivalent about this. I’m all for getting out of this mess, but we had legitimate interests (the Taliban supporting and protecting Al-Qaeda) going in, unlike Iraq. On the other hand, what are we really accomplishing? I feel like the Taliban can just wait us out for a decade.
October 17th, 2009 at 11:52 amwell think one of the first things to do. is see how this election scandal going to turn out. it seems that there maybe a run off.
Which is good as we really do not want to send troops in there looking as if we are propping up a corrupt gov.
but its not going to be a easy road out of that place.
October 17th, 2009 at 11:54 amAfghanistan has been historically treacherous for invaders, no matter what their motives.
Isn’t there a way to entice the Taliban with non-violent incentives to end their association (if it has not already ended) with Al-Qaeda?
All of these staggering amounts of money and all of these deaths of soldiers and Afghans, as well as all those who have been horribly wounded and mutilated, seem to have accomplished virtually nothing, except for the continuation of war.
The Bushes, the Cheneys, their buddies and all the other war profiteering clans
October 17th, 2009 at 12:00 pmare the only beneficiaries of these terrible conflicts in Afghanistan and in Iraq.
Poor old, antiquated DoD.
So badly they require an “enemy”, and they’ve yet to create a viable one for decades now, despite tirelessly trying.
What a b*tch it is to try to make money via “legal” murder.
October 17th, 2009 at 12:02 pmWell I hear a good question.
Who trains and arms the Taliban? AQ?
need the answers then it would be clear on what to do.
October 17th, 2009 at 12:09 pmWhy don’t you people go invade Brazil instead and leave us the hell alone?
October 17th, 2009 at 12:10 pmWhat a fracking mess.
I don’t envy the pile o’ steaming dog crap that President Obama and General McChrystal inherited.
McChrystal needs to sell the administration on a strategy that leaves Afghanistan as a viable nation-state when we back out the door. And when our military leaves, we need to maintain a presence that can provide some assurance that we won’t have some pack of thugs who support international murderers come into power.
And President Obama’s strategy needs to focus on hammering al Qaeda and associates because that’s where the threat is. Sure, al Qaeda’s leadership is presumably in NW Pakistan now, but where will they be tomorrow?
October 17th, 2009 at 12:11 pmAny thought of nation building in Afghanistan should be rejected out of hand. We should be putting our effort in helping the Pakistan government with their surge which has started back up again, by putting our effort on the border between the two countries.
The fight is in Pakistan not Afghanistan. Its not the Taliban that attacked us or who is spreading terror around the world. No western nation is going to fix Afghanistan. The best we can do is make sure the terrorists don’t get control of the nukes in Pakistan.
October 17th, 2009 at 12:13 pmThe Afghanistan situation is one prime reason to be grateful that Obama is our president right now. I hate to think of what we would be doing there if McCain had been elected.
First of all, Obama has coordinated the military and diplomatic efforts in the region. He has also effectively and appropriately expanded the focus to include Pakistan where al Qaeda has found refuge and where our truly immediate national interests lie.
Secondly, he is taking the time necessary to decide upon troop levels and re-tuning our strategy there. Remember, his initial commitment was to assure security and completion of the recent election. Until the integrity and final result of that election is known, it would be premature to escalate our presence. Without a legitimate government in place in Afghanistan, no amount of additional forces will bring success. The time that Obama is taking right now is putting more pressure on Karzai to get his own act together and step up to the plate.
Thirdly, I think Obama’s delay in announcing a decision is giving Pakistan needed time to execute its own “surge”.
No matter what, this is a tenuous situation that was poorly resourced and abysmally managed by Bu$h. Obama is making the right moves there now — no matter what the right-wing radio rant-jockeys and Lizzie or Darth Cheney may say.
October 17th, 2009 at 12:13 pmtom says: @15
I have to agree with you.
October 17th, 2009 at 12:18 pmMcChrystal went out of the chain of command and made his views public, he should be fired. Obama needs to send a message to the Generals that he is in command. If the radical right doesn’t like it, they can scream like stuck pigs, which I am sure they will. Second the attacks in Pakistan are now the big threat, no one gives a hoot about whether Afgahnistan fails or not, the point is go after the 9-11 terrorists not prop up some corrupt regime.
October 17th, 2009 at 12:19 pmSeems to me that we have much to lose by staying. We have satellites and rockets etc. that can keep watch and inflict massive damage. That threat might be more powerful than staying bogged down.
October 17th, 2009 at 12:49 pmWe have satellites and rockets etc. that can keep watch and inflict massive damage.
Have to disagree with you on this approach. The greatest “damage” we do with rockets is collateral damage. McCrystal certainly understands that and has taken great pains to avoid it by redefining the rules of engagement.
That’s the huge dilemma we now face in the Middle East. While impossible to completely avoid, civilian death and injury caused by U.S. forces sets back our counter-insurgency efforts and separates us from the population that we are protecting and upon whom we depend in order to isolate the Taliban.
October 17th, 2009 at 1:02 pmLeading Democratic Hawk Jane Harman Opposes Troop Increase In Afghanistan
– - Get. Out. Now.
October 17th, 2009 at 1:03 pmMy solution to the Afghanistan problem:
The population of Afghanistan amounts to some 33 million people, a small percentage of whom are genuine fighters.
The US is spending about 65 billion dollars per year there, trying to root out at most about 200 Al Qaeda terrorists from caves in Pakistan.
Sixty-five billion is a lot of money. I say we use it this way:
1. Locate and hire 10,000 hard-core Afghan fighting men, mean sonsabeaches.
2. Offer to pay each and all of them one million dollars upon delivery of, say, no less than the top 100 Al Qaeda bad guys. The total cost for that operation would be ten thousand times one million, or ten billion dollars. That leaves fifty-five billion in the fund untouched.
3. Pay each resident of Afghanistan one thousand ‘good will’ dollars and say thanks for your help, buy yourself something you’ve always wanted. That would be thirty-three million times one thousand, or thirty-three billion dollars. Thirty-three billion plus the ten billion already spent totals forty-three billion, leaving the kitty still stuffed with twenty-two billion dollars.
4. For twenty-two billion, could we somehow manage to quickly reduce our presence in Afghanistan to zero and declare the war over, and won? You think?
I don’t have any (Mac)Chrystal Balls (thank all gods), but MY solution sure sounds better than anything else I’ve heard or read in the last eight freakin’ years!
October 17th, 2009 at 1:03 pmSure the 9/11 terrorists trained in Afghanistan, but they came from Saudi Arabia.
Sure al qaeda used to be in Afghanistan, but not any longer.
Al qaeda is in Pakistan now, as well as Yemen, Somalia and other hot beds around the world. So whatever we do in Afghanistan is to accomplish what?…
McChrystal should keep his big bazoo shut and talk to the president in private. If he starts yapping again, he should be fired. He needs to provide a plan for us to EXIT Afghanistan with some semblance of self-respect.
The Karzai election was a farce and everyone knows it – if we back his corrupt government, what can we possibly gain?
October 17th, 2009 at 1:06 pmUnfortunately, we are going to have to deal with the Taliban who really run that country — repugs won’t like it — but I don’t hear any substantive advice from them except bomb, invade, then bomb again. We all know what that gets us.
Are we fighting the Taliban into none existence or just trying to stop them from have AQ training camps?
October 17th, 2009 at 1:11 pmot,
From Crooks and Liars about an online game, “2011:OBAMA’S COUP FAILS“, that I’m sure Alejandro and Mr. Duke could play all day long:
Sarah Palin Found Fighting For Freedom
March 2011 – Sarah Palin found fighting in a militia in Virginia. She was helping to attack a convoy of C.O.R.N.Y. (Congress of Rejected and Neglected Youth) fighters. Sarah is still a candidate for that high office once Obama and his forces are neutralized. When asked for a comment by a local reporter she said ” The time for talk is well past us. Don’t ask me anything about any elections until we free this country completely from Obama, Hamas, and Obama’s police force. We will put a complete end to Marxism once and for all right here in Virgina, God help us!” Sarah is well remembered for the constant attacks on her by the ‘elite media’. The very same reporters and supposed news outlets such as the now defunct NY Times, that hid the news and played the most massive propaganda game on any free people in the history of mankind. With the Marxist elite media now a thing of the past, Freedom is surely rising. Sarah will make a fine President and has promised to do all in her power to put us back on the right path.
––
I reprinted this from the “Obama rips health insurance lobby as ‘deceptive,’ ‘dishonest,’ ‘bogus.’” post. It’s probably more appropriate to have it here and I just wanted to have as many people see it as possible.
October 17th, 2009 at 4:21 pmThe thing about active Generals is that they’re hammers. Interesting article from someone that shares Biden’s view.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KJ17Df03.html
A veteran United States Army officer who has served in both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars warns in an analysis now circulating in Washington that the counter-insurgency strategy urged by General Stanley A McChrystal is likely to strengthen the Afghan insurgency, and calls for withdrawal of the bulk of United States combat forces from the country over 18 months.
In a 63-page paper representing his personal views but reflecting conversations with other officers who have served in Afghanistan, Lieutenant Colonel Daniel L Davis argues that it is already too late for US forces to defeat the insurgency.
October 17th, 2009 at 5:58 pmHarman also said that the Obama administration must do a better job describing metrics for progress Afghanistan, and that the Congress has an important role to play in holding the administration accountable for whether benchmarks are being met.
… she’s been in congress how long???
did she ever say that dubya must do a better job describing metrics for ANYTHING???
i know… i know…
October 17th, 2009 at 6:25 pm@ 14. angels81 says: Any thought of nation building in Afghanistan should be rejected out of hand. We should be putting our effort in helping the Pakistan government with their surge which has started back up again, by putting our effort on the border between the two countries.
The fight is in Pakistan not Afghanistan. Its not the Taliban that attacked us or who is spreading terror around the world. No western nation is going to fix Afghanistan. The best we can do is make sure the terrorists don’t get control of the nukes in Pakistan. October 17th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
I concur on the observation about nation building, angels81, but we’ve got to do something to give the Afghans enough time and space so they can patch something together that can hold off the Taliban. Right now they just have something in Kabul that is rotten to the core; all it does is feed off our aid and that of other interested governments. If we walked, the Taliban would be back within weeks, if not days, and we’d be back to the pre-9/11 situation.
If we could come to an understanding with the Taliban that they can’t give aid and comfort to a group like al Qaeda without suffering some direct consequences, like getting the crap hammered out of them again, and they’d renounce giving succor to international murderers and terrorists, then fine; we could walk. It would be a crappy thing to do to the ordinary Afghans and might blowback from that direction eventually, but they’re caught in the middle of the firefight right now, so…
Yes, the fight is pretty much in Pakistan, but if we leave Afganistan, the fight won’t stay in Pakistan. A ‘cordon sanitaire’ has to be established around the tribal area of West Pakistan and South and East Afganistan and al Qaeda cleaned out. If the Taliban gets the shit knocked out of it in the process, that’s just too damned bad. The target is al Qaeda, and they are in more than one place on the globe.
October 18th, 2009 at 11:48 amNever elect a boy to do a man’s job.
Hussein votes “Present”…
October 18th, 2009 at 12:19 pmThis woman needs to be celebrated but also defeated:
http://americaspeaksink.com/2009/10/how-obama-lost-reelection-for-the-presidency/
October 19th, 2009 at 8:01 amBeatenMORON
OK we get that you are a stupid, racist, brainwashed piece of garbage. YOu can STFU now
October 19th, 2009 at 8:18 am911 = INSIDE JOB JUST LIKE THE ANTHRAX ATTACKS.
BIN LADEN WAS AND STILL IS ON THE CIA PAYROLL.
HE IS THE BOGEYMAN CREATED TO KEEP US IN THE OIL REGION OF THE MIDDLE-EAST.
ANYONE WHO THINKS OTHERWISE IS A COMPLETE SIMPLETON.
BETTER A TRUTHER THAN A DENIER OR LIAR!
October 19th, 2009 at 12:06 pmAccording to 2007 New York Times/CBS News poll, only 16% of Americans think the government is telling the truth about 9/11 and the intelligence prior to the attacks:
“Do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or are they mostly lying?
Telling the truth 16%
Hiding something 53%
Mostly lying 28%
Not sure 3%”
October 19th, 2009 at 12:07 pmThank you for your sharing.!
October 23rd, 2009 at 5:44 pm