December 1st, 2009
07:33 PM ET

Evening Buzz: Pres. Obama's New Afghanistan Strategy

[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/POLITICS/11/30/afghanistan.faqs/story.troops.afghanistan.gi.jpg caption="U.S. troops search for militants in the mountainous Taliban stronghold in Paktika Province in Afghanistan." width=300 height=169]

Maureen Miller
AC360° Writer

Pres. Obama says the war in Afghanistan is not lost. But he says for several years it has "moved backwards." He has a new strategy that he hopes will change that course.

The commander-in-chief announced tonight at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, New York he is deploying 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan in the first part of 2010.

Pres. Obama is also seeking more support from NATO allies.

The boost will mean about 100,000 U.S. troops will be in the region, along with about 45,000 NATO troops.

Pres. Obama is ordering the Pentagon to have the new troops in Afghanistan within six months. Pres. Obama said the additional forces "will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011."

Pres. Obama's Senior Adviser David Axelrod discussed the new approach this evening on CNN's "The Situation Room".

"We feel that the sooner that we get in there we can stop the momentum of the Taliban, train up Afghan troops and begin to transfer authority or responsibility for the security there, and that's - that's our goal," said Axelrod.

A Pentagon official admits the six month timeline to get the new troops on the ground is "very aggressive". Though, the official is confident the military can get the job done.

What do you think of Pres. Obama's decision? Share your thoughts below.

Adding 30,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan could be a political liability for Pres. Obama. Already some members of Congress, on both sides of the aisle, are voicing their concerns over the Afghan war strategy.

"At a time of great economic crisis here in the United States, I would respectfully suggest that rather than nation-building in Afghanistan we should do a little more nation-building here at home," said Rep. Jim McGovern, (D) Massachusetts, at a news conference on Capitol Hill.

"I am here today because of my concern that we are about to wear out and break the military," said Rep. Walter Jones, (R) North Carolina, at the same event.

Since the war in Afghanistan began following the September 11th terrorist attacks more than 900 Americans have been killed in the region.

We'll have all the angles on Pres. Obama's speech tonight on 360°. We hope you can join us for our special coverage. See you then!

Filed under: Maureen Miller • The Buzz
soundoff (65 Responses)
  1. Dev

    Let me spit some reality to you all questioning Obama's move. This was not a war he started but a war he is determined on ending. You all screamin and carryin on rediculous because he gives a timeline?HELLO its bout freaking time. Isnt that what we all been screaming for about this war and the Iraq war? Listen Al-qaeda with the help of the taliban attacked the US from Afghanistan/Pakistan region. It wasnt Obama who took his eye of the ball n ran to start a new war in Iraq. Truth and reality is Al-qaeda and their friends are starting to regain momentum and Obama has no other choice but to send more troops n take out this known enemy. This is not about nation building in Afghanistan n it sure isnt political because if it were obviously he wudnt go against public opinion. The man is trying to do the right thing which is deal with the people who killed 3000 americans and put America in a state of panic. I bet most of you were the same set cheering Bush on to attack Iraq.

    December 2, 2009 at 9:02 am |
  2. PAT

    There always was, is, and will be wars...somewhere on this Earth. The human race has always had those who crave power. No reasonable person wants war. This enemy is not reasonable. We fight to live as we want. They fight for an afterlife and don't mind dying. It is said that there are only 100 of the enemy in Aghanistan. It only took 12 of the enemy to kill over 3,000 people on our soil.

    If the American people want to continue to live their lives without fear, it is imperitive that the USA does not back down or hesitate to eliminate those who want to exterminate us. Hesitation invites the enemy to continue.

    SUPPORT OUR ""VOLUNTARY" TROOPS! They should come first before any stimulus package.

    December 2, 2009 at 5:21 am |
  3. Jen

    Pres. Obama's speech was another puff of fluff. To send 30,000 troops to Afghanistan to help their army and government to stand on their own? How will that happen when the entire country is corrupted? The US army will go in and teach them a few lessons, within a "timeline", on moral and tactical strategies and pat them on the head, and say "go on, now you walk". Bull***t. The minute US trroops leave, the terrorists will take over. The strategy for the 30,000 troops should be to go and find and kill Osama Bin Ladin PERIOD. leave, and let the world know that the "REASON" for this war has been accomplished. It's time for Obama to stop blowing smoke up the American people's behind.

    December 2, 2009 at 1:33 am |
  4. Gordon S Marsh

    I guess these days we still use brunt force to solve problems. If the United States wants to help the innocent people there, then send people to build cities, along with hiring people from there country to help build there lives,with help from the government. While building have our best troops Gard the work site within a safe range. At some time we are going to have to realize with the population growing, we might need the opportunity to be welcomed into there country. It would also add jobs. If we can handle the crimes here in the US, why not the ones there.

    December 2, 2009 at 1:27 am |
  5. KHAN

    I can bet on it if US sits down with the tribal leaders they can come at some conclusion and once the tribal leaders say something they will fulfil it what so ever.
    why we dont understand that the war has also costed a lot to the Taliban and probably 100-500 times more people killed in Afgahnistan than september 11th incident.
    The problem is US needs victory only and no other middle solution. US will send mor troops, taliban will disappear for a while and come back again or move somewhaere else. Question remain, Will we go behind them and invade more countries or we make a deal with them right at this time and save thusands of lives and money

    December 2, 2009 at 1:22 am |
  6. Daoud

    I listen to Mr. Obama's speech regarding Afghanistan’s new strategy and did not see anything to tell me that we are going to solve the problem.
    I do listen to other point of views too but do not see anything to solve the problem. The win is not in fighting and killing. The best way to solve this problem is to set and talk to you enemy and see if you can turn them from bad, dark and so-called uncivilized to a good and a acceptable member of our world.
    Not be force or fight or killing but by examples. This dose not needs our solders life or life of ordinary Afghans and wasting Millions of $$$$$. I hope we start thinking right to solve it not makes it messier.

    December 2, 2009 at 12:59 am |
  7. A. Smith, Oregon

    Using a generally accepted amount of American Taxpayer dollars per soldier in a war zone of 1 Million dollars per year.

    100,000 American Soldiers = 100 Billion US Taxpayer dollars per year to prop up a very corrupt foreign leader in Afghanistan.

    Imagine how grateful a extra 2 Billion US Dollars given to each of 50 US States that are close to bankruptcy would be?

    December 1, 2009 at 11:34 pm |
  8. AracelyR

    Don't make this about our support of our troops. This is about the "CHANGE" that was suppose to happen. I think President Obama forgot his speeches about HOPE and CHANGE. Maybe, we were wrong. Maybe, his HOPE was for senseless spending at our expense and CHANGE for more soldiers fighting.
    Maybe, I just had a different HOPE and CHANGE.

    December 1, 2009 at 11:27 pm |
  9. Doris

    How would you like to inherit the muck that the George Bush administration left? Let's have a bit of sense here. Obama added the 18 month withdrawal to push the government of Afganistan to toe the line and create a decent honest government. Hopefully, we will burn the poppy fields and give farmers an alternative less lucrative crop to grow.

    I heard this horse pucky when a civilian in Vietnam and it hasn't changed in 40 years. We need to get out, but we have to send the troops to support our current force. Yes, we do! We also need to have an exit strategy because there is no gain to be had here. We can be altruistic and make an impact on Afganistan over a period of time like – 30 years, but we can't invest that time with the conditions as they are.

    I'd like to see a victory declared and troops withdrawn and let the chips fall where they may. Hopefully, we can be less disgraced this time and not be airlifting our troops and civilians off the roof of our Embassy.

    December 1, 2009 at 11:25 pm |
  10. bob ferguson

    Has you panel forgot that Canadian soldiers have been carrying the one of the heaviest loads in Afghanistan. The French and Germans reside in the safe provinces while we fight. Think there should be a little acknowledgment of our 130 troops and the first country with the guts to welcome them home publicly.

    December 1, 2009 at 11:12 pm |
  11. Thomas

    The afgan ppl need to step up to plate so that we can come home. if these senator's & congress persons have a better idea that does mean spending trillions more and allows are GI's to come home tn lets here it. if not then stop grandstanding and get behind the pres. they are more than welcome to take the place of our GI's while trying to figure this war out.

    December 1, 2009 at 11:11 pm |
  12. Libby

    'One man or woman lost in war is one woman or man too many.' When men and women go into battle for what they believe, they go willingly fully realizing their possible personal sacrifice for the greater good that they freely choose to preserve. All Americans should honor all women and men who choose to go to war to preserve America. We should honor all soldiers going into battle because they go knowing that their feet may never again touch the homeland that they so obviously love and wish to preserve for all peoples of America.

    December 1, 2009 at 11:04 pm |
  13. alex armas

    You can change your mind and your beliefs and support what you are given. Its people like you kim who make this so much harder on the US forces. And the gangs in america are fueled by the middle classes need for drugs. Don't blame obama for that.

    December 1, 2009 at 10:55 pm |
  14. Larry

    Obama is campaigning for 2012, nothing else matters.

    December 1, 2009 at 10:51 pm |
  15. Kim Lilo

    We are worried about what is going on in other countries, but we don't care about the gangs that are taking over the country that we all live in. The way that the people are over ther is a way of life to them and have been doing it that way for years. Obama needs to worry about the country that he is to run!!!! Haven't liked him from day one but what can I do?!

    December 1, 2009 at 10:47 pm |
1 2