Deja Vu All Over Again in Afghanistan

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

Eight years after the United States invaded Afghanistan, you can no longer blame the conflict there solely on George W. Bush, who as President was trying to rid the world of scoundrels on his own (and Vice President Dick Cheney's) terms.  It is now President Barack Obama's war as well, having announced to a captive audience of cadets at West Point serving as backdrop for a national television audience that he's sending 30,000 more soldiers into harm's way.

Since taking office, Obama has tripled the number of military personnel being sent to Afghanistan to fight off a resurgent Taliban.  The number, according to Associated Press (via MSNBC.com), stands at around 71,000.  There have been 924 killed since the war began, and 4,434 wounded.

The President does have an exit strategy, sort of.  Beginning in July 2011, the U.S. hopes to have enough of a viable Afghan army to enable them to leave.  But it could be a long,slow process that might be extended into Obama's second term, should he be re-elected.  Then again, there's no guarantee that the troop surge would actually work, which might result in more soldiers being sent there.

It sounds as if the President drank the Kool-Aid, relying on his generals to give him reasons why he should keep the war going.  In his speech (which could easily have been Bush talking), he sounded the alarm about avenging the terrorist attacks of  9/11/01 by fighting the Taliban as a way to get at al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.  Except that al-Qaeda and bin Laden are currently ensconced in the mountains of Pakistan.  And Pakistan is supposed to be an ally, so a military invasion is out of the question.  Besides, the U.S. also has to prop up the scandal-plagued government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

Unlike in 2001, when people were too scared to say anything negative about Bush after 9/11, they're a lot more skeptical about Obama's handling of the war now.  According to a Gallup poll (AP via MSNBC.com), the President's disapproval rating on this issue is 55%, compared to 35% in his favor.  What might be behind those numbers is that people aren't seeing positive results on the battlefield, and that the U.S. might be fighting the wrong enemy.

The President also has to convince his fellow Democrats in Congress to support the troop increase.  But they might not be so willing to pony up the $30 billion to fund a conflict which has increasingly become irrelevant.

With so many things that need fixing--health care reform, getting people back to work, taming the deficit--it would be a real tragedy if Barack Obama's presidency ended up being compared to another president who had lofty ambitions, but got bogged down in an unpopular war.  His name was Lyndon Johnson.