The no-timetable for withdrawal logic

[Augustine]

As long as you strain the definition of "predetermined" to mean conditions established years after we first went to war in Afghanistan.

What is your point? I mean conditions established by the Commander in Chief in consultation with the JCS, COCOM, and theater commander, and DoS. What are you saying, that conditions can never be reevaluated? That metrics can never be reexamined? Let me know what you're trying to say here.

 

[Augustine]

What? I'm made plenty of other comments in this thread.

Fair enough. Here's Obama's statement:

You're not reading the whole speech, and you're probably not reading the whole NSS. If you look through the speech, you will see the equivalents for the Afghanistan Campaign Plan (ref. USG Integrated Civ-Mil Campaign Plan): security, development, and governance (all contained in an IO cloud). Security is secure the population, ANSF development, and neutralize the insurgent networks. Governance is support legitimate governance (and rule-of-law) and neutralize criminal networks (black market, smuggling). Development is socio-economic development. The military acts largely in the security realm and to facilitate the civilian agencies in the governance and development (although the PRTs and ADTs do a significant amount of work). All of these lines of operation have milestones associated with them. That is what we're talking about. You're reading the wrong sentence and not digesting the whole speech and the entirety of the documents. Hope this helps.

 

[Augustine]

I have already ordered the deployment of 17,000 troops that had been requested by General McKiernan for many months. These soldiers and Marines will take the fight to the Taliban in the south and east, and give us a greater capacity to partner with Afghan Security Forces and to go after insurgents along the border. This push will also help provide security in advance of the important presidential election in August.
At the same time, we will shift the emphasis of our mission to training and increasing the size of Afghan Security Forces, so that they can eventually take the lead in securing their country. That is how we will prepare Afghans to take responsibility for their security, and how we will ultimately be able to bring our troops home.
For three years, our commanders have been clear about the resources they need for training. Those resources have been denied because of the war in Iraq. Now, that will change. The additional troops that we deployed have already increased our training capacity. Later this spring we will deploy approximately 4,000 U.S. troops to train Afghan Security Forces. For the first time, this will fully resource our effort to train and support the Afghan Army and Police. Every American unit in Afghanistan will be partnered with an Afghan unit, and we will seek additional trainers from our NATO allies to ensure that every Afghan unit has a coalition partner. We will accelerate our efforts to build an Afghan Army of 134,000 and a police force of 82,000 so that we can meet these goals by 2011 – and increases in Afghan forces may very well be needed as our plans to turn over security responsibility to the Afghans go forward.

This push must be joined by a dramatic increase in our civilian effort. Afghanistan has an elected government, but it is undermined by corruption and has difficulty delivering basic services to its people. The economy is undercut by a booming narcotics trade that encourages criminality and funds the insurgency. The people of Afghanistan seek the promise of a better future. Yet once again, have seen the hope of a new day darkened by violence and uncertainty.

To advance security, opportunity, and justice – not just in Kabul, but from the bottom up in the provinces – we need agricultural specialists and educators; engineers and lawyers. That is how we can help the Afghan government serve its people, and develop an economy that isn't dominated by illicit drugs. That is why I am ordering a substantial increase in our civilians on the ground. And that is why we must seek civilian support from our partners and allies, from the United Nations and international aid organizations – an effort that Secretary Clinton will carry forward next week in the Hague.
At a time of economic crisis, it is tempting to believe that we can short-change this civilian effort. But make no mistake: our efforts will fail in Afghanistan and Pakistan if we don't invest in their future. That is why my budget includes indispensable investments in our State Department and foreign assistance programs. These investments relieve the burden on our troops. They contribute directly to security. They make the American people safer. And they save us an enormous amount of money in the long run – because it is far cheaper to train a policeman to secure their village or to help a farmer seed a crop, than it is to send our troops to fight tour after tour of duty with no transition to Afghan responsibility.

These remarks were the foundation for the integrated USG Campaign Plan (DoS/DoD) that was developed for and approved by President Obama.

 

[Beerina]

I keep hearing that we can't have a announced timetable withdrawal. But what does that mean? Can we not have a withdrawal at all? Can we withdraw without announcing it? Apparently not. Can we please, then, hear the conditions for withdrawal?

Well, "We'll leave when they're nice and happy and freedom-loving, like Germany and Japan" ain't workin' out so well.

So...hang on indefinitely waiting for it, or cut out.

 

[TimCallahan]

Well, "We'll leave when they're nice and happy and freedom-loving, like Germany and Japan" ain't workin' out so well.

So...hang on indefinitely waiting for it, or cut out.

Agreed. If those opposing the Taliban haven't gotten their act together after all this time, they probably aren't ever going to. The best thing is to declare victory an leave.