President Obama today announced a full halt to America’s planned drawdown of military forces to “embassy levels” through the end of his term in office in 2017, ensuring that the American occupation will endure in the country for years to come.
Incredibly, during the announcement Obama reiterated his false claim that “America’s combat mission in Afghanistan may be over,” just a week after US troops engaged in combat around the northern city of Kunduz. Roughly 10,000 US ground troops remain.
The drawdown has gotten pushed back before, it was supposed to begin this year, but was eventually pushed back to “after 2016,” citing security problems. The new announcement doesn’t even include the pretense of a future date, and effectively punts the matter to the next administration.
Which almost certainly means the occupation will be continuing for many years before Obama’s term, as the military leadership seems united in wanting to keep troops there, citing growing ISIS presence and worsening security situation as proof the US has to stay.
Yet growing ISIS presence and a worsening security situation are happening amid this US military presence, and 14 years into the occupation the situation is worse than its been throughout the war. The US military presence clearly isn’t the solution to these problems.
7 thoughts on “Obama Announces Halt to Afghanistan Withdrawal”
The US still has work to do in Afghanistan: There are hospitals which remain unbombed.
Sadly, at this point I doubt this is even the case.
The US will become a belligerent occupant of Afghanistan
just like the Israeli occupation of the West Bank.
Once you realize that he was never going to be allowed to end the Afghan adventure. The real reason they were sent there has not been accomplished. Of course, they'll never talk about the real reason they invaded Afghanistan, or Iraq, or Libya because the American people would not understand their twisted, sick explanation. But the reasons they've already given are not sufficient nor logical. So, why are they doing these things? Anyone know?
Growing ISIS presence? A worsening security situation? 14 years? Why does anybody bother to claim that Putin will do any better in Syria? A standing army can never win a war aginst an insurgency. Israel has been trying to "crush" the Palestinians for nearly 70 years and still hasn't succeeded.
Does Putin plan on occupying Syria? Or do you have to compare him to any and every situation.
Obama will always take the worst advice and be as belligerent as possible for false reasons.
Comments are closed.