creators.com opinion web
Conservative Opinion General Opinion
Susan Estrich
15 May 2013
Benghazi and Lewinsky

On its face, the murder of Americans in Libya, including our ambassador, has absolutely nothing to do with … Read More.

10 May 2013
Mother Love

My daughter was born on Mother's Day, 23 years ago. It was the happiest day of my life — matched only, … Read More.

8 May 2013
The Drunk Guy in the Parking Lot

The report from the Arlington, Va., Police Department is, on its face, hardly newsworthy: "SEXUAL BATTERY,… Read More.

Do You Recognize Your President?

Comment

There's an old saying that hard cases make bad law. The same rule, unfortunately, applies to presidential decisions.

What makes a case hard, of course, is when there is no "good" answer. The challenge for the decision maker is to find the least of the bad, the lesser of the evils. But by definition, a bad answer doesn't solve things (if it did, it wouldn't be a bad answer), but merely leaves them less bad than they would be if you made a different choice.

There is no glory in such a decision. No matter what you do, you're wrong. The only hope is to be less wrong, to cause less harm than you would by making an even worse choice.

Welcome to the president's Afghanistan dilemma.

The "good" answer to Afghanistan would be to turn back the clock to the point where we routed the Taliban and build on that success by securing as much of the country as possible, strengthening the government and winning the people's trust. Not possible. The good answer is the one Barack Obama used in his presidential campaign. It helped him get the job, but it doesn't help him one bit now that he has it.

All the other answers are bad or worse. Pulling out means a civil war and a safe haven for al-Qaida. Not good. Leaving the same number of troops in place means they don't have the resources to protect themselves, let alone the people. Also not good. On the other hand, a major buildup is ridiculously expensive at a time when even calculating the deficit is beyond most of our arithmetic skills. And there's real question whether it will make a significant difference given the weakness of the government there, not to mention the obstacles presented by the country's impossible terrain and contentious history.

Afghanistan makes Iraq look easy, or at least easier.

So what's a decision maker to do? Focus on procedure. Courts do that a lot. If the substance doesn't work, try process. If there are no good answers, then maybe there's at least a good procedure.

By all reports, President Obama and his team have established one heckuva process for deciding whether to send more troops to Afghanistan. The president has met with his advisers repeatedly, has heard various options detailed, and has encouraged open and vigorous debate. Some people are criticizing him for doing too much process, especially as our kids sit there in harm's way. I don't begrudge him a minute of it if it helps him find the least bad answer.

The only danger of this long process is that people might start thinking it will have a positive outcome. It won't. There's no such thing. No matter what he decides or when, the government will still be weak and corrupt, the terrain all but impossible, and the task facing our troops absurdly daunting. No matter how many troops he sends, it won't be enough and it will be too many. And every time a soldier dies in the future, people will ask whether that was why. Obama's war is a real stinker.

I showed my students part of "The War Room," the documentary about the 1992 Clinton campaign. There was almost a collective shock in the room when Bill Clinton, in shorts and a T-shirt, shows up for the first time. He was so unbelievably young. My students had never seen that man. I could barely remember him. I wonder how soon it will be before the Barack Obama who ran for president is unrecognizable.

To find out more about Susan Estrich and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS.COM



Comments

11 Comments | Post Comment
It seems US presidents have an easier time deciding to start a war than to end one. Guess that's because Americans don't like losing or appearing to "tuck tail and run." But European countries have lost wars many times in their histories--e.g., our Mother Country, Great Britain!--and not only do they still exist but thrive. Americans need to learn from them that losing a war isn't the end of the world. Pride goeth before the REAL fall. National bankrupty. President Obama should proclaim that THIS war is a waste of our human and financial resources, that protecting AMerican soil from terrorism can be done in other, more effective ways, or more bluntly, that Afghanistan can rot and live in their own hell.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Laurie Craw
Fri Nov 13, 2009 12:14 AM
If you're a principled person and you stick to your principles and values there is no 'dithering'.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Early
Fri Nov 13, 2009 6:30 AM
Susan, you stated situation well, but you indicated that there are no good ways out for Obama. There is, and he should use a national address to state his case. His presentation should be factual, to the point, and not verbose. He should use Kennedy's presentation on the Cuban missile crisis as his blueprint. He should come out and say, after all facts are considered, due to the political situation in Afghanistan, I have instructed Secretary Gates to present me a plan to get all combat troops out of Afghanistan in eighteen months. We will continue to support the Afghan Government in their efforts to grow their democracy. When they have established control of their country to the point that our assistance will become a decisive factor we will extend the support that they need to remove all foreign elements from their country. Until that time we will provide air support and reconnaissance information for them to help grow their internal security. Do not spin it; state facts, and leave the door open for future assistance. Until the time the Afghan government becomes a real government this is a quagmire that makes Vietnam look easy.
Comment: #3
Posted by: red5mutual
Fri Nov 13, 2009 10:47 AM
All this sounds good, if he actually had a clue. He will commit, half step, retreat, advance, charge, never any guts unless you count the guts our troops will leave on the battle field.

We are there, win it. He has been cutting the military to the bone as often as he can, anywhere he can, try cutting the freebee's to the friends of barny F. Try cutting welfare. Try not spending money we don't have with his bogus stimulus. Try cutting taxes and regulations that strangle and drive business from our shores, this drives jobs from our shores also.

A lot of things he could do, he will make it a habit of doing the wrong things as he has been doing for the last 9 or 10 months.

His cons are not going to cut it.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Evan Cowart
Fri Nov 13, 2009 8:44 PM
I don't have a problem with Obama thinking this out. However, politically, this one is pretty simple. He needs to give his generals what they request for victory. Any other decision will destroy his Presidency. Why? Because it will force him to admit that the entire Democratic Party line on Afghanistan was a lie (this is the REAL war on terror! remember?). It will also force him to admit that his speech in March about his Afghanistan strategy was also a lie. He will be seen as the President who snatched defeat out of the jaws of victory. He will no longer control his own fate. What happens in Afghanistan and Pakistan will rule over anything done locally. Therefore, in the end, this is why Obama will give the Generals what they need. He will, of course, do the appropriate hand-wringing in order to make himself and his party feel good (and isn't that all they really want anyways?)
Comment: #5
Posted by: scott365
Sat Nov 14, 2009 7:48 PM
Susan says: "On the other hand, a major buildup is ridiculously expensive at a time when even calculating the deficit is beyond most of our arithmetic skills." You realize of course that Obama spent more money on the so-called "stimulus" in his 6 weeks than Bush spend in his entire presidency on both Iran and Afghanistan. The "bad decision" was made long ago.
Comment: #6
Posted by: Darek
Sun Nov 15, 2009 8:57 PM
Bring all our troops home now! We will need them when the next administration recognizes the need to confront Islamic Terrorists over there and not here.
The current administration doesn't see the threat so why let more of our brave gals and guys perish with the absense of a leader?
Comment: #7
Posted by: Early
Mon Nov 16, 2009 6:02 AM
The initial mission of US Forces in Afghanistan was to seek out and destroy terrorist organizations and their infrastructure. Over the years "mission creep" has apparently expanded this to rebuilding the nation and setting up some form of democratic government. The people of Afghanistan have shown repeatedly what will happen when they start to believe they are being occupied by a foreign power. They now believe that to be the case, and more troops confirms it in their eyes. No amount of goodwill or even tactical military victories will change this perception. Assistance to the corrupt government will reinforce the notion that it is a puppet of the US. Battles often result in US and civilian casualties, which play into the propaganda machine of the Taliban. It is truly a no-win situation. If I were king for a day I would reduce the mission to its original intent, then loudly proclaim victory and bring the troops home.
Comment: #8
Posted by: KG
Mon Nov 16, 2009 12:02 PM
As a legislator, Obama was prone to vote "present" on many controversial issues. He decided to run for President and America voted for him as a leader. He does need to stop "dithering" and make a decision. I don't see how he cannot support his hand-picked general. The budget deficit is not a real consideration given the rampant spending by the current and previous administrations.

God grant Presdient Obama the wisdom and courage to do what is right for America, our troops, and the Afghan people.
Comment: #9
Posted by: Varjo
Mon Nov 16, 2009 12:52 PM
Re: KG
YOU DO REALIZE THAT IF WE PULL OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST WE WILL HAVE TO GO BACK IN THE FUTURE AFTER THE EVIL ONES REGROUP.
Comment: #10
Posted by: Early
Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:31 AM
The Obama Wars --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Today is November 25, 2009. I expect "The Obama Wars" to begin by the end of February, 2010. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Obama's poll numbers are in freefall. Everything he touches is a failure. He has fulfilled none of his campaign promises except the "change" part (for the worse). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- He has proven himself to be a fraud on many issues, especially with the "immoral, illegal" (during his campaign) Guantanamo Bay detainment facility located in Cuba and war in Afghanistan. He has yet to close Guantanamo or pull the troops out of the "immoral illegal" war (nor should he, by the way - but such is not what he promised). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The love story media treatment can't even save him. What is Obama to do? Start a War. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Such worked wonders for Bill Clinton. Every time he was caught with his pants down he bombed a country. And it help his poll numbers. Mr. Nobel Price Prize knows such and, guess what, I fully expect Obama to start at least one War (The Obama Wars) in an attempt to regain his once lofty poll numbers. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Afghanistan seems to be the most likely target but Iran is also a good possibility. In any event, I expect Mr. Nobel Peace Price to start the bombing of Afghanistan or Iran or some other place. Thus, by February, 2010, The Obama Wars should begin. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The only question in my mind is how many people must give their lives to boost Obama's poll numbers? I am sure Obama has no limit, but public opinion will be the check. I am just not sure how many human sacrifices in the name of Obama the America public will allow. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ But at least the media coverage of the up coming Obama Wars will be more supportatve of our troops and closer to the truth. What is going to be real interesting is watching those who hated War under Bush defend The Obama Wars.
Comment: #11
Posted by: SusansMirror
Wed Nov 25, 2009 8:10 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Susan Estrich
May. `13
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
28 29 30 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31 1
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Susan EstrichUpdated 15 May 2013
Roger Simon
Roger SimonUpdated 15 May 2013
Robert Scheer
Robert ScheerUpdated 14 May 2013

30 Mar 2012 Supreme Court Politics

6 Apr 2007 Can Cancer Close The Gravitas Gap?

29 Feb 2008 Friendship in the Fourth Estate