Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Feingold to Obama: Announce Withdrawal Timetable from Afghanistan
The Obama administration has been keenly aware of discontent among many in its liberal base with regard to its Afghanistan policy and an expected request for additional troops following General McChrystal's upcoming assessment of the situation there.
Democratic Senator Russell Feingold, seen here in 2008, has called on President Obama to announce a timetable for withdrawal from Afghanistan. (AFP/File/Aamir Qureshi) That liberal base just got a high-profile voice to lead its charge.
Sen. Russ Feingold, D-WI, called on President Obama to announce a timetable for withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan. "This is a strategy that is not likely to succeed," Sen. Feingold said about the troop buildup in Afghanistan.
"After eight years, I am not convinced that pouring more and more troops into Afghanistan is a well thought out policy," said Feingold. The liberal Democrat said he has expressed his reservations with President Obama, Admiral Mullen, and others inside the administration and he says he has "never been convinced they have a good answer."
"I think it is time we start discussing a flexible timetable so that people around the world can see when we are going to bring our troops out," said Feingold. "Showing the people there and here that we have a sense about when it is time to leave is one of the best things we can do," he added.
Sen. Feingold didn't offer up a specific timetable for when he would like to see American troops out of Afghanistan. The senator opposed the war in Iraq and eventually became a leading voice among Democrats in pushing the Bush administration to adopt a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.
In an interview with the editorial board of The Post-Crescent in Appleton, WI this afternoon, Sen. Feingold highlighted that the three top terrorist targets originally in Afghanistan - Osama bin Laden, al-Zawahiri, and Mullah Omar - are now in Pakistan.
"Aren't we helping to drive more extremists into Pakistan?," Feingold asked. He went on to call Pakistan the home of the "witch's brew of every kind of nightmare."
Sen. Feingold pointed to Af-Pak Ambassador Richard Holbrooke's recent comments when asked about what success will look like in Afghanistan. "We'll know it when we see it," said Holbrooke.
"That's not good enough for me," Feingold responded.
Mr. Feingold said that he believes the United States needs to maintain its ability to go after Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and continue operations there to "make sure we can do the most we can in the remaining time."
The Wisconsin Democrat is starting to be a bit of a liberal thorn in the President's (left) side and has some Democrats wondering if he may be plotting a 2012 primary challenge to Mr. Obama.
His call for an Afghanistan timetable withdrawal today comes on the heels of his pressuring the president to include a public option in whatever health care reform bill he signs into law. "I am not interested in passing health care reform in name only. Without a public option, I don't see how we will bring real change to a system that has made good health care a privilege for those who can afford it," Feingold said last week in response to some perceived wavering on the public option from Obama administration officials.
Last April, Sen. Feingold issued a report card on President Obama's handling of "rule of law" issues and gave him a "D" on his administration's posture on "state secrets."
68 Comments so far
Show AllSenator Feingold bravely tells the truth. Do most Afghans see us as allies or occupiers given their history of fighting off invasions? Do drone attacks on the tribal areas with much "collateral damage" win hearts and minds or enhance Taliban recruitment? Whose sons and daughters will die or become paralyzed? Other ways of defeating terrorists: see building schools for girls (consult with Greg Mortenson).
The only lesson learned from the Viet Nam occupation was that when an occupation ends, the miltary industrial media complex's revenue stream slows down and they don't want that to happen.
Eternal occupation equals eternal revenue for the war machine.
CQ from Maine
Clearly it is time to get out of Afghanistan and Iraq and Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Let the Pakistanis attend to Pakistan. The global war on terror is a fools game start to finish.
The only people benefitting from it now are the mercenary armies and Private Military Firms like, KBR, Blackwater, Dyncorp, MPRI and SAIC whose contracts cost the taxpayers billions more than if the same functions were carried out by our own armed forces. Don't let the Republicans say they are for a strong defense. They are not. They are for a profitable defense. They all but wrecked the US military and gave rise to this obscene corps of private armies. All at taxpayer expense. We need to clean house--before they do.
One of the best we got in Congress.
Being the only guy in the US Senate to vote against the Bush Unpatriot Act, I often think he is the ONLY good guy in the Congress.
Well, there is the House too...we still got a few.
Chupacabra sez: "Being the only guy in the US Senate to vote against the Bush Unpatriot Act, I often think he is the ONLY good guy in the Congress."
***
Bernie Sanders has since joined the Senate.
You can take the other 98, though.
"After eight years, I am not convinced that pouring more and more troops into Afghanistan is a well thought out policy"
Understatement of the year.
Senator Feingold along with Bernie Sanders restore one's hope that there are a few good people left in our government.
"This is a strategy that is not likely to succeed"
Knowing success "when we see it" is a strategy?!
And, in the meantime, just keep on bombing more Afghans until that success magically reveals itself somehow.
Jeez! The only thing that might possibly be worse than the "supreme international crime" is a war of aggression based on utter stupidity.
Excuse me....do you know where we could get some "utter stupidity" and upgrade our leadership on this incursion and occupation of Afganistan?
"Knowing success "when we see it" is a strategy?!"
A replay of Viet Nam strategy.....we know there is no solution, no "winning" other than winning battles, which we did then and will do now, but we don't know how to get out without damaging ourselves politically. So lets send more troops!
Any Lt. fresh out of the Naval Academy could tell John WEayne....We ain't gonna win this one either John.
Actually, I kinda liked the old romanticised American cowboy approach to handling the "black hats" where the hero was slow to anger and, even when provoked beyond endurance, used only minimal force. The more recent "bull in a china shop" Rambo-style responses (or anticipatory attacks in some cases) just don't have the same appeal somehow, and they don't seem to work as well either.
In either case, a very clear mission statement would probably be a good start. But I suppose that's difficult when you're trying hard to pretend that the objectives are different from what they actually are, especially where NATO sensitivities are involved.
"Actually, I kinda liked the old romanticised American cowboy approach to handling the "black hats" where the hero was slow to anger and, even when provoked beyond endurance, used only minimal force."
Thats still my ideal actually. My country used to be a bit more like that till the non-fighters/big talkers took over.....the ones that wouldn't go themselves but have no problem sending kids to their death so they can talk big.
George 1 is a good example, he was a combat veteran and stopped before going into Iraq. George 2 "served" without hearing a clap of thunder even, but no problem attacking a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.
"But I suppose that's difficult when you're trying hard to pretend that the objectives are different from what they actually are"
You got it for sure.
Henry8, don't give too much credit to George 1. He's been around the barn enough times to learn where to avoid putting down his foot. Don't forget, it was he who set up the Iraqi Shiites for slaughter post Desert Storm, promising them cover, and then yanking it. And he who set up the Carter ambush over the Iran hostages. His whole family history reeks, including their affiliation with the Nazis.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
All those who think that 'quitting Afghanistan' will be an exit strategy that could be accepted by people here in southernest California (where the sound of cannon fire echoes past the hills), please answer the message scrawled into the dust on the back of a pick-up window seen recently,
Are you a stab the troops in the back democrat.
This quittin' time in Afghanistan idea ain't gonna get us out of there, or keep us from getting stuck elsewhere (say, the DRC, where Hillary has just found victims desperately needing US aid to be delivered by US military - in a country with a valuable and rare resource, coincidentally).
Prof. Juan Cole today advises that the US needs to pass laws to curtail torture, not just issue Executive Directives. The same goes with the absurd war against future terrorism. In this case, Congress needs to revoke Public Law 107-40.
Mr. Feingold may win favor with next year's voters, but calling on Obama for a future exit is only a futile gesture.
You are free, of course, to trust a Democrat again.
I have often wondered why the Congress does not repeal the so-called authorization to fight terror wherever that War Against It may take us.
How foolish to invade country after country, to militarize continent after continent, to pour our national treasure into an impossible quest for "safety" in a world made less safe by our military presence everywhere you look. Or don't.
Public Law 107-40 allows the President to wield the US military against enemies to be named later.
Bush named al-Qaeda as the enemy.
Bush said the Taliban would be treated the same.
Obama named al-Qaeda affiliates.
Hillary's taking us into the DRC, where there's a rare resource and lots of people with guns (and undoubtedly a future terrorist).
Stop the DAFT war (Defense Against Future Terrorism)
Feingold will of course stand alone on this, the only sane voice in Congress, as he has done before. Let's hope he will run against Obama the Worthless in 2012, because there sure as hell isn't anyone else out there.Since Obama will no more announce a withdrawal timetable than he will pass any actual healthcare reform, isn't it time to call for his impeachment? He won't prosecute or even investigate the most criminal bunch who ever held power in this country, and this miserable, cowardly Congress wouldn't impeach them when it has the chance for 8 years, so maybe we need to impeach the present sitting fraud of the Oval Orifice.
Remember, Feingold explored the idea of running in 2008 and realized he could not raise sufficient funds for a competitive campaign, so he decided not to run. Feingold is a man of integrity and character who does appear to work for what he believes to be the common good, which is why the corporatocracy will not give him any money. And even if Feingold did manage to raise revenue from other sources, he probably understands that the corporate media would do all in its power to kneecap his candidacy.
Good comment!
All true. He stands no more chance under the present system, where corporate money determines every election, than Kucinich or Nader ever did. The corollary to this is that it's impossible to get a non-corporate stooge in the White House. Witness the present occupant, sold to many gullible "progressives" as one of them, who would drastically turn around the ship of state headed over the abyss. Sorry, he's guiding us in exactly the same direction his predecessors did. So long as corporations alone have any real power over this corrupt government, we can only expect the same damn thing every four years.
Impeachment, of course, is off the table. It seems that Barry was clever enough to use Bush's strategy. Namely, pick a VP that no one would want in the white house.
I think just the fact that they are part of the "1" party system, cripples their options to make peace.
Senator Feingold is telling the truth about Afganistan but wasting his time on the "Public Option".
ChrisQueally had a good comment about one of the real problems of the military in this. "ChrisQueally August 25th, 2009 10:12 am"
Decoupling the availability of health care from employment is one of the first things that need to be done to disempower the military-industrial complex. When people who are directly or indirectly dependent on military spending for their jobs and therefore their health insurance (most of us) know that their health insurance will continue if they loose their jobs they will be less likely to suppport politicians who vote to approve that spending. Restoration of the remainder of the New Deal social safety net will further that process.
I am one of Russ Feingold's constituents. I have written him repeatedly to let him know I support his positions on the war in Afghanistan and health care reform. I will write him again about this article. Every one of his constituents that I know supports him on this and I have let him know this.
"Decoupling the availability of health care from employment"
Absolutely! But I'm afraid the moment has passed. It sure feels like it.
Sen. Feingold pointed to Af-Pak Ambassador Richard Holbrooke's recent comments when asked about what success will look like in Afghanistan. "We'll know it when we see it," said Holbrooke.
We've already seen it and we already know what it is: defeat. Obimbo will never get out of Afghanistan. The Democrats desperately need a 21st century version of Gene McCarthy. Feingold may be that person but, in the end, probably won't.
Agree that the Democrats need something to become a progressive and constructive agent of change, but would suggest a 21st Century George McGovern rather than Gene McCarthy. In fact, the progressive left in 1968 led a campaign at the convention with its rallying cry being: "George McGovern Is The Real Gene McCarthy."
See the documentary film "ONE BRIGHT SHINING MOMENT: The Forgotten Summer of George McGovern" - an outstanding film that could also be titled "Back to the Future."
In fact, Obama and his empty-hearted marketing minions are laughable (in a substantive sense) in comparison to George McGovern and his grassroots army.
BO responds to RF:
"No problem, my good friend. America will begin pulling out of Afghanistan around September, 2011, coincidentally, right before the next Prez election."
"And let me be clear: when I say 'pulling out,' I mean moving them back to Iraq, or somewhere else maybe. But the bottom line is this: private military contractor profits will continue to be outrageous. Make no mistake."
RF responds to BO: "You're lucky Americans would never elect a Jewish President."
Feingold is right, but his voice is one that shouts in the wilderness.
If Obama really did want to 'win' Afghanistan he'll have to boost troop levels not by a mere 25-35k, but by 300-500k. He'd have to bring back the draft and flood the mountains of Afghanistan with soldiers, even then the chance of a 'victory' would be slim. The only way you're actually going to find Osama bin-ladin(if he's still alive) is by sending out small teams of operatives, soldiers aren't going to find him or his friends.
But the above posters are right, pulling out isn't an option. The dems would be savaged by the idiot neo-cons. Unfortunately, neither is deploying enough troops to do the job. The draft isn't going to be used to get enough troops, and even in these economic times you can't get enough people willing to do the job of being a footsoldier...
It's bad enough that the future of Americans depends on U.S. politics. If the future of Afghans also depends on it, theirs is a bleak outlook indeed. They don't even get a "lesser evil" option.
How could Feingold survive a media blitz in a country that can swallow the "death panel" crap without blinking? Obama had to sell his soul to the corporations to drum up enough money to fight back against the rightwing swiftboating attacks. And how many people still think Saddham was behind 9/11? It appears we have a reality crisis in this country.
RV, that was a good comment about the difficulty of defending objectives you're only pretending to pursue. And I would say in the case of the Obama administration that applies to more than war.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
It might not be entirely inappropriate to suggest that the pretense applies throughout the entire electoral campaign process, or at least that part to which the public is exposed.
Feingold 2012.
Unfortunately, I think there is little doubt (except for a miracle) that the Republicans will take back the White House in 2012.
They might STEAL it back like they did in 2000 and 2004 but they won't win any more elections except in Honduras, Thomas Moore.
Normally, given the failure of Obama and the gormless Democrats to actually govern and/or accomplish what they were ostengibly elected to do, I would agree. But which of their loons would the Republicans find to run? Meaning, who would be acceptable to both the absurdly small but loud fringe groups and enough independents to swing the vote? Depending, of course, on an honest election; without which all bets are off.
More than likely, if nothing changes, the Republicans will chop down the Democrat's majority in Congress in the interim election. Though what difference it will make given the Democrats refusal to use their majority for anything but heading committees to insure greater bribes from lobbyists is beyond me.
So, at West Point, is there a class on how to start BS wars so you can win procurement contracts and secure back-door deals to, say, sell weapons to Somalia?
Sun-Tzu sez winning is not the point. The true leader has a McMansion and an antique pistol collection on the wall next to his table of scotch.
I'll know a good president when I see one.
Xe cute
There is NO-EXIT stratgey because the war is not about rooting out Al Queda or Taliban, but the development of the
SOUTH CAUCASUS PIPELINE, thus controling the supply of oil and gas to Turkey, Europe, China, India and Japan.
MONOPOLY and POWER are the goals from which there is no retreat, NO-EXIT.
"The economy is worse than he tought" said Obama.
As soon as he realizes that it was his new buddies,
"the Bill Clintons", who outsourced our industrial base
to China and other countries, will he realize that there
is no turning back. Our Economy has been ruined by the
Walmart Clintons. How can we recover from this depression
when we produce nothing, zilch, zero, nada..
The Stimulus is designed to divert attention away from
the public so they will never find out the truth about
the Clinton give-away, Nafta, WTO,Gatt etc.etc.
AS for the dumping of good running cars, to create a phony
demand, it was a stimulus for Toyota and other Japanese
Cars. If there were any loyalty to this country, a clause would have been put in the Dumping Law, stipulating that they must buy American Cars. Why is Bill Clinton still collecting millions of dollars from Foreign countries?
With mind-numbing regularity, it seems impossible for anyone to write a comment about any president since Clinton, without some half-wit seeing to it that Bill Clinton is demeaned and insulted. The anti-Clinton mentality is so deep-seated and ingrained, his detractors resemble automatons, programmed to make hateful remarks about the former president; remarks which are short-sighted, oversimplications, intended to have no other effect, than ridiculing and debasing Clnton.
I take it you are in favor of outsourcing the industrial base to China; supporting NAFTA and other extra-legal organizations overriding our legislative prerogatives, bullying countries financially to lose their individual sovereignty and independence and creating a new class of poor; deregulating the telecommunications industry, nailing down corporate consolidation thereby exponentially dumbing down the citizenry; starving hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children and other Iraqi citizens and degrading their medical system; bombing innocent people to make a point; repealing the Glass Steagall Act to deregulate the financial industry, in so doing playing a large part in the current economic collapse; consolidating Reaganism...I'm sure, as a fan, you can think of many other wonderful accomplishments.
I don't think I've ever written an anti-Clinton comment before but I think I'll take this opportunity to point out that it was Clinton's job to dismantle the Cold War Military-Industrial complex and he declined to do it. Instead he appointed Lockheed VP Bruce Jackson to head a "Committee for NATO" that oversaw the re-arming of Eastern Europe and expanded NATO into Eastern Europe and thus guaranteed the revival of the Russian Cold War Military-Industrial complex in response. We will be paying for this for many years.
He left the Cold War Military-Industrial complex intact so that it was ready for Bush when he began his "War on Terror."
I voted for the guy in '92, not in '96.
A Jewish, non-Zionist, progressive President? That I'd like to see.
Once again, Russ Feingold demonstrates the meaning of the term, "actual mainstream liberal".
And of course the Drudge Report is quick to yell that Feingold says no health care plan until after CHRISTMAS. These PR types are sly.
Hey Matt Drudge, I know you come here. You are due for hellthcare real soon, pal.
In addition to the loss of lives of our troops and civilians we continue to pour our treasure into wars that cannot possibly be won. Iraq and Afghanistan together are worse than Vietnam. I have always believed the purpose was oil or pipelines. No other reason makes sense.
Here is a novel idea. Bring them home and use the billions saved to provide healthcare for Americans.
The tragedy is that for every Feingold there are 100 who just love to blow up things in little countries.
out now! unless, of course, we're there for the oil and gas routes....