Post by dgriffin on Oct 6, 2009 6:50:49 GMT -5
US media reflects bitter Afghan debate
Debate in Washington is raging over what the US should do in Afghanistan. This selection of recent opinion pieces illustrates the deep divisions in thought.
Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, writing in Newsweek magazine, sets out why the decision facing President Obama is so tough.
"The request for additional forces by the US commander in Afghanistan, Gen Stanley McChrystal, poses cruel dilemmas for President Obama. If he refuses the recommendation and General McChrystal's argument that his forces are inadequate for the mission, Obama will be blamed for the dramatic consequences. If he accepts the recommendation, his opponents may come to describe it, at least in part, as Obama's war. If he compromises, he may fall between all stools - too little to make progress, too much to still controversy. And he must make the choice on the basis of assessments he cannot prove when he makes them."
Lisa Curtis and James Phillips, of the Heritage Foundation think tank, argue for an increase in troop numbers.
"If the Obama administration chooses to deny its field commander's request for more troops and instead seeks to engage Taliban leaders in negotiations with the vain hope that these militants will break from their al-Qaeda allies, the results would likely be disastrous."
But EJ Dionne, writing in the Washington Post, urges caution....
CONTINUE AT:
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8292345.stm