The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Archives

Dan Balz's Take

National Security

Kerry Could Buck Obama on Troop Increase to Afghanistan

By Lois Romano
Senate Foreign Relations Chairman John Kerry (D-Ma) is sounding more and more leery about sending additional troops to Afghanistan, per the request of the top U.S. general in the country. In an interview for The Post's Voices of Power video series, Kerry said he is prepared to buck the administration if his fact-finding leads him to conclude that Afghanistan could turn into another Vietnam -- a war in which he served and was decorated, but later protested against. He heads to Afghanistan for a fact-finding visit soon.

Watch the entire interview at Voices of Power»

Posted at 8:38 AM ET on Oct 1, 2009  | Category:  National Security
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: On Afghanistan, Both Parties Wary of Obama | Next: Deputy National Security Adviser Is Returning to Duty With the Navy


Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Poor misguided John Kerry. If we pull out then people will move back in who want to kill and attack Americans here. And have already done so! The Viet Cong had no such desire. A big difference eh?

Posted by: FLvet | October 1, 2009 11:05 AM

The only accomplishments we have made in Afghanistan are:

1) a booming heroin market that had been quelled by the taliban.

2) increased violence in pakistan as taliban warlords push across country borders.

If we win in Afghanistan WHAT do we win? We win nothing. Just like the big nothing we won in Iraq. China is now drilling for oil in Iraq. Not US... China.

Finding and killing Osama Bin Laden will not end terrorism any more than killing Peter ended Christianity, or killing Martin Luther King ended the civil rights movement.

Posted by: ProfessorWrightBSU | October 1, 2009 10:54 AM

Gosh!
Maybe he'll be appointed "president" after the generals stage their "bloodless coup"?
But only if Lez and Dick approve.

Posted by: Tomcat3 | October 1, 2009 10:27 AM

John Kerry's opinion on war is that of a misguided Lt. j.g. He has no concept or understanding of the true meaning of world conflict. He is a fool.

Posted by: staterighter | October 1, 2009 9:32 AM

KERRY COULD RESCUE DEMS FROM KOWTOWING TO THE GENERALS

It's about time someone among the Dems took a leadership position on Afghanistan. But why the hesitation? What more needs to be investigated? Afghanistan already has become Obama's Vietnam, placing America among the nations whose military adventures there have proven costly and futile.

If Kerry needs to study the issue further, one wonders if he's suffering from post-Vietnam amnesia. The very fact that he's willing to challenge and not appease the Pentagon raises his asset value as a possible Dem presidential alternative in 2012, should Obama fail to stand up and assert civilian control over military strategy.

***

Where's the Justice Dept. Civil Rights Division probe into the deployment of harmful, silent microwave and laser directed energy weapons against unjustly "targeted" American citizens and their families?

http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america
OR http://NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "GESTAPO USA," "Domestic Torture Via Radiation Weaponry..."

Posted by: scrivener50 | October 1, 2009 9:06 AM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.



 
 
 

© 2009 The Washington Post Company