Cheney: Obama Projects Weakness

The Politico reported December 1 that former Vice President Dick Cheney said President Barack Obama projects weakness to enemies of the United States. The comment came during an interview at Cheney's home in Virginia.

The story says, "In a 90-minute interview at his suburban Washington house, Cheney said the president's 'agonizing' about Afghanistan strategy 'has consequences for your forces in the field.'" He is quoted as saying, "I begin to get nervous when I see the commander in chief making decisions apparently for what I would describe as small 'p' political reasons, where he's trying to balance off different competing groups in society. Every time he delays, defers, debates, changes his position, it begins to raise questions: Is the commander in chief really behind what they've been asked to do?"

I expect the President to weigh all arguments and all options before committing forces to combat, but Cheney sort of has a point: it's been some three months since President Obama's hand-picked commander, General Stanley McChrystal, asked for reinforcements. Three months is a long time when your general in the field tells you that he needs more troops or the country will fact defeat.

The Politico continues: "Obama administration officials have complained ever since taking office that they face a series of unpalatable - if not impossible - national security decisions in Afghanistan and Pakistan because of the Bush administration's unwavering insistence on focusing on Iraq. But Cheney rejected any suggestion that Obama had to decide on a new strategy for Afghanistan because the one employed by the previous administration failed. Cheney was asked if he thinks the Bush administration bears any responsibility for the disintegration of Afghanistan because of the attention and resources that were diverted to Iraq. 'I basically don't,' he replied without elaborating."

Okay, I'm not buying off on that one. There's little doubt, I think, that critical resources were diverted from Afghanistan for the invasion of Iraq. But that has no bearing on a 3-month old troop request from the President's hand-picked general. Criticism of the previous administration for withholding resources from Afghanistan loses some of its credibility when the current administration has in effect done the same thing for the past three months.

The story says, "...Cheney said the average Afghan citizen 'sees talk about exit strategies and how soon we can get out, instead of talk about how we win. Those folks ... begin to look for ways to accommodate their enemies. They're worried the United States isn't going to be there much longer and the bad guys are.'"

And this: "During the interview, Cheney laced his concerns with a broader critique of Obama's foreign and national security policy, saying Obama's nuanced and at times cerebral approach projects 'weakness' and that the president is looking 'far more radical than I expected.'"

Any criticism of President Obama's foreign and national security policy has to be specific and not broad or vague. I say this because many of the policies being employed by the Obama administration are in fact continuations or expansions of policies employed by Bush: indefinite detention without charge; warrantless wiretapping; military tribunals; drone attacks in Pakistan; demanding Iran cease the enrichment of uranium; conditions on the ground withdrawal plan for Iraq; renditions of terrorist suspects to third countries for questioning; support for the Patriot Act; and the operation of short term overseas detention facilities by the CIA, to name a few.

Cheney is quoted as saying, "Here's a guy without much experience, who campaigned against much of what we put in place ... and who now travels around the world apologizing. I think our adversaries - especially when that's preceded by a deep bow ... - see that as a sign of weakness."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/30024.html