Obama: No Permanent Bases In Afghanistan

[ProSense]

Obama: No Permanent Bases In Afghanistan

President Obama, speaking to the nation from Afghanistan, said that the United States will hold no residual forces or bases after 2014.

“By the end of 2014 the Afghans will be fully responsible for the security of their country,” he said.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/obama-no-permanent-bases-in-afghanistan

Obama: ‘This Time Of War Began In Afghanistan, And This Is Where It Will End’

President Obama is set to address the nation tonight from Afghanistan at 7:30 PM EST. Here a few excerpts from what he will he say in his speech:

“Already, nearly half the Afghan people live in places where Afghan Security Forces are moving into the lead. This month, at a NATO Summit in Chicago, our coalition will set a goal for Afghan forces to be in the lead for combat operations across the country next year. International troops will continue to train, advise and assist the Afghans, and fight alongside them when needed. But we will shift into a support role as Afghans step forward.

As we do, our troops will be coming home. Last year, we removed 10,000 U.S. troops from Afghanistan. Another 23,000 will leave by the end of the summer. After that, reductions will continue at a steady pace, with more of our troops coming home. And as our coalition agreed, by the end of 2014 the Afghans will be fully responsible for the security of their country.”

…

“My fellow Americans, we have traveled through more than a decade under the dark cloud of war. Yet here, in the pre-dawn darkness of Afghanistan, we can see the light of a new day on the horizon. The Iraq War is over. The number of our troops in harm’s way has been cut in half, and more will be coming home soon. We have a clear path to fulfill our mission in Afghanistan, while delivering justice to al Qaeda.

This future is only within reach because of our men and women in uniform. Time and again, they have answered the call to serve in distant and dangerous places. In an age when so many institutions have come up short, these Americans stood tall. They met their responsibilities to one another, and the flag they serve under. I just met with some of them, and told them that as Commander-in-Chief, I could not be prouder. In their faces, we see what is best in ourselves and our country.”

…

“As we emerge from a decade of conflict abroad and economic crisis at home, it is time to renew America. An America where our children live free from fear, and have the skills to claim their dreams. A united America of grit and resilience, where sunlight glistens off soaring new towers in downtown Manhattan, and we build our future as one people, as one nation.”

…

“This time of war began in Afghanistan, and this is where it will end.”

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/obama-this-time-of-ar-began-in-afghanistan

[BumRushDaShow]

1. K&R

[spanone]

2. k&r....

[TheWraith]

3. Kicked and recommended. nt

[Scurrilous]

4. K & R

[rury]

5. K&R!!

[cliffordu]

6. K&R.

I love this fucking guy.

I really do.

[MineralMan]

7. K&R

[AlbertCat]

8. I wonder what the GOP-world imaginary interp...

.... and paranoid fantasy about all this will be....

[polmaven]

12. Well,

I wasn't able to hear the President's speech, but I did hear a fairly right winger on the radio, on my way home, say that it was obvious from that speech that we will have forces in the country for "at least 10 more years"........! Imagine my surprise when I got hoe,m and learned that 2014 is still 10 years away....Hummm!

[zipplewrath]

19. You might want to clear out your ears

The president didn't promise that they'd all be gone by 2014. Not by a long shot. In fact, he made no promise what so ever about getting them all out. We'll still be there in 2014. The right winger was predicting 10 more years. I figure they're either gone by 2016, or we're there a good long time.

[gademocrat7]

9. K&R

[nevergiveup]

10. K&R

[SidDithers]

11. K&R...nt

Sid

[Alexander]

13. K&R

[pasto76]

14. The number of our troops in harm’s way has been cut in half, and more will be coming home soon

despicable that the right will vilify any part of this.

[patrice]

15. Thank Goodness!!!

[Fearless]

16. Umm... haven't we been spending billions to build one?

[AtheistCrusader]

27. That was in Iraq.

[Fearless]

51. Ahh! How's that doing? Lol.

[AtheistCrusader]

54. I hear it was a really good investment.

Like, lighting money on fire.

[joshcryer]

17. It is sad that this is not getting more coverage.

Romney or Bush would have built one.

[zipplewrath]

18. Wish I could believe him

He doesn't declare that all troops will be out by 2014, or ever. It's this "combat troops" kind of promise we saw in Iraq, but they continued to die anyway. When it came time to truly pull out of Iraq, the Sec Def and others were desperately trying to extend their stay, but Iraq wouldn't agree to our terms, so we left. Karazi could be far more accommodating if it serves his larger goals, most of which appear to be extensively corrupt. We won't have any "permanent bases" but we'll have a presence that never seems to end.

If there's something that gives me "hope", it is that the Karazi government is so corrupt, that the US probably will be glad to be rid of him. And that alone could be incentive not to hang around. Combine that with 2016 election year politics, and you might actually see us leave. Plus, I was encouraged to hear Obama talk about ending that war in an attempt to begin to focus on fixing things here at home. Since he wants to hold the line on the defense cuts that came out of the failed budget talks, he may be forced to achieve them by pulling out of Afghanistan altogether.

The 2012 elections may have alot to do with this. Taking back the House could help, although they weren't able to stop these wars when we had a democratic congress the first time 'round. But a democratic congress that is looking for budget cuts may be a bit more insistent this time around. It won't be a congress of huge stimulus spending, or large deficit increases. And they surely won't want to spend increased revenues from a Buffet Rule on extending the war in Afghanistan.

[bluestate10]

33. Your observation on taking control of all of Congress is on point.

Many here on DU don't like bluedogs, but if that is the only choice to a republican, we must go in full bore to get that person elected. Opportunities are rising, like in Indiana and certainly in Massachusetts and Maine to take republican held seats in the Senate. As Obama starts to club Romney into irrelevance, republicans will shift their efforts to holding the House and gaining or taking the Senate. The best interests of the country depends on us stopping a republican takeover, and making moderate and progressive forces stronger in Congress. Seldom since just before the Civil War or the New Deal have stakes been higher.

[zipplewrath]

55. On this issue

On this issue, and a few others, electing a blue dog is no different than electing a republican. They will vote with the republicans on this issue. They already have. Attempts were made to force reductions in Afghanistan on Obama, even when the democrats controlled the House, and the blue dogs voted with the republicans to block it.

Blue dogs are useful for electing the speaker of the House and procedural votes, but other than that they tend to leverage GOP opposition to water down bills, or block them altogether.

[Daniel537]

20. That's nice, but

the fact that there will be some troops there after 2014, supposedly for "counter-terror" ops means that a future President or congress could extend our presence there, or yes, make it permanent. Remember that the Iraq Status of Forces Agreement was going to be extended until the Iraqis backed off giving our troops immunity.

[ProSense]

21. Here's something

to remember...

The End of the Iraq War: A Timeline



http://www.whitehouse.gov/iraq

This President will have ended two wars: The illegal one started by Bush, and the other one ignored by Bush.

Thank you President Obama.

[Daniel537]

22. But he hasn't ended the Afghan war yet

there will still be a large military presence for 2 more years, and a smaller presence for 10 more years. More US troops will die in all that time, that is a certainty. And i'm still looking for a reason why, since Leon Panetta himself says there are no more than 50-100 Al-Qaeda left in Afghanistan. I'm glad we're out of Iraq, but if it wasn't for the Iraqi parliament refusing to budge on the immunity agreement, we would still be there. That's a fact.

[ProSense]

23. I said

"But he hasn't ended the Afghan war yet"

...will: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002633818

[Daniel537]

24. Well then we'll just have to wait and see

But the fact that a military presence will be maintained even after Obama leaves office opens up the possibility of the agreement being tweaked with again and again. Not too mention the fact that congress will have to spend billions more every year to prop up the corrupt Karzai regime via nation building.

[Nye Bevan]

29. We have a "military presence" in Germany. And in the UK.

And in many other countries. A military presence can make smart strategic sense and is not in itself a problem. I am happy to simply have no combat troops engaged in an ill-planned war.

[bluestate10]

34. The troops that stay are likely to be specialists. nt

[progressoid]

48. The exit of troops from Iraq was was determined before he got into office.

Iraq Status of Forces Agreement was signed by W. in 2008. The Obama administration actually wanted to stay even longer. Let's not re-write history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_of_U.S._troops_from_Iraq#Withdrawal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.%E2%80%93Iraq_Status_of_Forces_Agreement

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/15/iraq-withdrawal-us-troops_n_1012661.html

[ProSense]

49. Here's a

The exit of troops from Iraq was was determined before he got into office.

Iraq Status of Forces Agreement was signed by W. in 2008. The Obama administration actually wanted to stay even longer. Let's not re-write history.

...little bit of history

Obama May Face Tough Decision as Iraqi Leader Signals U.S. Troops Could Stay
http://www.nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/obama-may-face-tough-decision-as-iraqi-leader-signals-u-s-troops-could-stay-20110512

Iraq says it's asked for 5,000 U.S. trainers, awaits reply
http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/10/11/2449098/iraq-says-its-asked-for-5000-us.html

Iraq still seeking U.S. trainers: PM Maliki
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/22/us-iraq-usa-maliki-idUSTRE79L1C720111022?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

Old rumors and reports don't count. The troops are out, the war is over, and President Obama presided over the massive withdrawal that started here:

Leaving Iraq Is a Feat That Requires an Army
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/09/world/middleeast/09pullout.html

...and ended here:



http://www.whitehouse.gov/iraq

[progressoid]

50. Ah,

So you agree that he just fulfilled an agreement made before he was President.

OK.

[JoePhilly]

25. But Obama is the most Imperialist US President ever!!!!!!

[bluestate10]

35. To some on DU.

Being an Imperialist involves nothing more than using a men's or women's bathroom instead of a unisex bathroom. I simply roll my eyes at that type.

[JoePhilly]

43. LOL.

Or those who are against personal property.

Had a debate with a few of those folks on here once. Apparently, owning your own home is an imperialist act as well.

[AtheistCrusader]

26. I cannot express what a relief it is

to finally get some traction on this issue.

Thank you, Mr. President. I got your back.

[stockholmer]

28. Bollocks......US presence in Afghanistan till 2024 under strategic deal

http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/us-presence-afghanistan-till-2024-under-strategic-deal

The US and Afghanistan reached a deal on Sunday on a long-delayed strategic agreement that ensures US military and financial support for at least a decade beyond 2014, the deadline for most foreign forces to withdraw. The pact is key to the US exit strategy in Afghanistan because it provides guidelines for US forces that remain after the withdrawal deadline. The deal also secures the future of the Hamid Karzai-led Afghan government, which has been increasingly reliant on US backing as its support base has weakened. "Our goal is an enduring partnership with Afghanistan that strengthens Afghan sovereignty, stability and prosperity and that contributes to our shared goal of defeating Al-Qaeda and its extremist affiliates," said US Embassy spokesman Gavin Sundwall. "We believe this agreement supports that goal." Insurgents linked to the Taliban and Al-Qaeda remain powerful ten years after the US-led invasion, and as recently as a week ago launched a large-scale attack on the capital Kabul and three other cities.

The draft agreement was worked out and initialed by Afghan National Security Adviser Rangin Dadfar Spanta and US Ambassador Ryan Crocker. It must still be reviewed in both countries and signed by the Afghan and American presidents. US forces have already started pulling out of Afghanistan, and the majority of combat troops are scheduled to depart by the end of 2014. But the US is expected to maintain a large presence in the country for years after, including special forces, military trainers and government-assistance programs.

The agreement comes after months of negative stories detailing US abuses of power had put the entire alliance in peril. Since the beginning of the year, US-Afghan relations have been strained by an Internet video of US marines urinating on the corpses of presumed Taliban fighters, as well as Quran burnings at a US base that sparked days of deadly protests. Tensions reached breaking point after a US soldier massacred 16 Afghan civilians as they slept in a southern Afghan village soon after the Quran burning protests. A spate of attacks by Afghan security forces on their international counterparts added further strain on ties. "The document finalized today provides a strong foundation for the security of Afghanistan, the region and the world and is a document for the development of the region," Spanta said in a statement issued by President Hamid Karzai's office.

Neither Afghan nor US officials would comment on the details of the agreement. A Western official familiar with the negotiations said it outlines a strategic partnership for 10 years beyond 2014. White House National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor said President Barack Obama expects to sign the document before a NATO summit in Chicago next month, meeting the deadline set by the two sides

snip

---------------------------------------

'Sorry but you're here until 2024': President Obama commits US to stay in Afghanistan for 12 more years as he takes 'I got Osama victory lap' to Kabul

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2138104/Osama-bin-Laden-death-anniversary-Barack-Obama-Afghanistan-TV-address-Kabul.html#ixzz1tjvQjUot


President Barack Obama last night took his victory lap marking the first anniversary of the killing of Osama bin Laden to Afghanistan, landing in Kabul amid elaborate secrecy to deliver a live televised address.

Speaking in front of a line of military vehicles at Bagram air base, Obama declared: ‘One year ago from a base here in Afghanistan, our troops launched the operation that killed Osama bin Laden.
'The goal that I set to defeat Al Qaeda and deny it a chance to rebuild is now within our reach.'
The President also used his speech to indicate that there would be a U.S. presence in the country until 2024. His previous public position has always been that troops would be out of the country by a 2014.

snip

--------------------------------------

[ProSense]

30. First of all

"Bollocks......US presence in Afghanistan till 2024 under strategic deal"

...lose the unreliable RW sources.

The President also used his speech to indicate that there would be a U.S. presence in the country until 2024.

I watched the speech, the above is bullshit. Cenk's report is bullshit. The OP has the excerpt, and here is the full text:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/05/01/remarks-president-obama-address-nation-afghanistan

[hardtravelin]

31. What utter bullshit.

The rate of build up over there is unbelievable. Every FOB I visited this last tour (I returned home about 3 weeks ago) has grown immensely since my last tour (2009-2010).

Fuck, Kandahar and Bagram are small cities. What defines a "permanent base"?. Let's be honest at least-not just trot out campaign slogans.

[ProSense]

32. Do you

"What utter bullshit."

...uttering that followed by this: " What defines a "permanent base"?. Let's be honest at least-not just trot out campaign slogans. "

...means the President's words are "bullshit." I mean, you asked a question and made a comment that amounts to say anything.

&feature=colike

[hardtravelin]

36. What I'm saying is it's not true.

If the definition of a permanent base is defined in such a way that excludes the dozens of Forward Operating Bases (FOB's) that we live and operate out of than a statement like "no permanent bases" might be true.

My job was to train and work with the ANA on a daily basis. That mission is NOT ending, it is expanding. And the facilities and infrastructure to support it is increasing as well.

You have to understand that everything the President says about Afghanistan has to pass the "street" test in that country. Karzai walks a two-faced edge to appease both his masters: the US and his people who at any given time are sympathetic with the theme of the Taliban enough to make his position very fragile.

I fully expect to deploy at least 2-3 more times before I retire, but what does it matter if my base constructed of HESCO's filled with sand and concrete has been "temporary" for 10 years.

The wording is designed to be politically expedient, and is in my opinion, Bullshit.

It's essentially saying the same thing as, "We will leave Afghanistan...someday."

[ProSense]

37. And

What I'm saying is it's not true.

If the definition of a permanent base is defined in such a way that excludes the dozens of Forward Operating Bases (FOB's) that we live and operate out of than a statement like "no permanent bases" might be true.

...what I'm saying is you're basically stating your opinion, which is not supported by anything the President said.

<...>

As we do, our troops will be coming home. Last year, we removed 10,000 U.S. troops from Afghanistan. Another 23,000 will leave by the end of the summer. After that, reductions will continue at a steady pace, with more and more of our troops coming home. And as our coalition agreed, by the end of 2014 the Afghans will be fully responsible for the security of their country.

Second, we are training Afghan security forces to get the job done. Those forces have surged, and will peak at 352,000 this year. The Afghans will sustain that level for three years, and then reduce the size of their military. And in Chicago, we will endorse a proposal to support a strong and sustainable long-term Afghan force.

Third, we’re building an enduring partnership. The agreement we signed today sends a clear message to the Afghan people: As you stand up, you will not stand alone. It establishes the basis for our cooperation over the next decade, including shared commitments to combat terrorism and strengthen democratic institutions. It supports Afghan efforts to advance development and dignity for their people. And it includes Afghan commitments to transparency and accountability, and to protect the human rights of all Afghans -- men and women, boys and girls.

Within this framework, we’ll work with the Afghans to determine what support they need to accomplish two narrow security missions beyond 2014 -- counter-terrorism and continued training. But we will not build permanent bases in this country, nor will we be patrolling its cities and mountains. That will be the job of the Afghan people.

- more -

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/05/01/remarks-president-obama-address-nation-afghanistan

Period!

[hardtravelin]

38. Believe what you want to. I'll email you during my next deployment. n/t

[ProSense]

39. More

"Believe what you want to. I'll email you during my next deployment."

...say anything. I mean, you're here basically arguing that your words are the truth and the President is lying.

[hardtravelin]

45. Not really

But the reality of the situation on the ground for the next ten years or so will be that we will be operating over there: Special Operations missions will still be executed; our troops that work with and train the ANA will continue to be executed and targeted by them; and, at the end of the day it will be for nothing permanent.

Do you think we are out of Iraq? I flew home with guys from FT Hood who were there doing route clearance (basically driving up and down roads waiting to get lit up by an IED) in Baghdad. Were they doing "combat missions"?

I'm a Soldier. I voted for this President, but we (as a force) are really getting tired of seeing our buddies die for people who just want us gone. I don't blame them, either. If I was an Afghan, I'd want us out of there too.

My personal experience and time on the ground in Afghanistan has developed my opinions. When I bounce a politician's words off of what I see with my own eyes, I am cynical.

I'm glad you're so confident. I wish I could be.

[ProSense]

47. Well,

it's one thing to be "cynical," and another thing entirely to use cynicism as a basis for refuting what the President stated.

As for this:

But the reality of the situation on the ground for the next ten years or so will be that we will be operating over there: Special Operations missions will still be executed; our troops that work with and train the ANA will continue to be executed and targeted by them; and, at the end of the day it will be for nothing permanent.

Do you think we are out of Iraq? I flew home with guys from FT Hood who were there doing route clearance (basically driving up and down roads waiting to get lit up by an IED) in Baghdad. Were they doing "combat missions"?

...again, that's more speculation based on your cynicism. You use Iraq as an example, but American troops aren't being "executed and targeted" in Iraq. The official end of the war was four months ago.

It's likely the Afghan war will end in a similar fashion.

[bluestate10]

40. Wasn't the surge in troops that Obama approved intended for Froward Operating Bases?

The troops started arriving in large numbers mid-2010. So it makes sense that you would see a buildup in front bases when you took a tour later than mid-2010. BTW, glad to hear you are home, I hope healthy in all ways. Take advantage of veteran benefits, you have earned them.

[hardtravelin]

46. Thanks, Bluestate

I'm glad to be home. I missed my family and being able to actually sleep. I do admit that I have a lot of bitterness about how these wars have been fought and the friends I have lost.

I understand the risks and responsibilities of my profession, and I ask for no sympathy or special favors. I think it's awesome how the President has made it a priority to look out for our Veteran's rights. Most of my buddies agree with that. But we need our leadership to be frank with us and the American people and leave the sinking ship that is Afghanistan.

[joshcryer]

53. I had this question in the other thread, however, if he does like Iraq...

...he can still leave without a significant presence there.

Of course, the mercenary security forces will remain...

[PoliticAverse]

41. How does "be fully responsible for the security of their country" transmute into...

"no permanent bases" ?

[ProSense]

42. I take it

"How does "be fully responsible for the security of their country" transmute into..'no permanent bases'? "

...you didn't watch the speech.

<...>

As we do, our troops will be coming home. Last year, we removed 10,000 U.S. troops from Afghanistan. Another 23,000 will leave by the end of the summer. After that, reductions will continue at a steady pace, with more and more of our troops coming home. And as our coalition agreed, by the end of 2014 the Afghans will be fully responsible for the security of their country.

<...>

Within this framework, we’ll work with the Afghans to determine what support they need to accomplish two narrow security missions beyond 2014 -- counter-terrorism and continued training. But we will not build permanent bases in this country, nor will we be patrolling its cities and mountains. That will be the job of the Afghan people.

- more -

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/05/01/remarks-president-obama-address-nation-afghanistan

The video is posted here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=636919

[PoliticAverse]

44. That's right I didn't. I just clicked on the op's links which didn't include the quote

"but we will not build permanent bases in this country" which I see now was actually in his speech.

[IamK]

52. NPR says troops in Afghanistan until 2024.... Military wants 25K

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/05/02/151854753/about-25-000-troops-may-be-needed-in-afghanistan-after-2014-planners-say