Is it fair to call Afghanistan, “Obama's war?” I think not. Anyone who hopes Obama will suffer defeat is guilty of un-Americanism.
With the presidential campaign long over, President Obama sounded like his predecessor last Friday, as he outlined his reasoning for continued prosecution of this war: “Nearly 3,000 of our people were killed on Sept. 11, 2001, for doing nothing more than going about their daily lives. Al-Qaida and its allies have since killed thousands of people in many countries.”
The president has said that among his objectives is to locate “moderate” members of the Taliban He'd have better luck finding pork chops on the menu at a kosher restaurant. Other objectives seem more realistic. In addition to sending an additional 4,000 troops to train Afghan security forces, he also wants to dispatch “agricultural specialists and educators; engineers and lawyers. That's how we can help the Afghan government serve its people and develop an economy that isn't dominated by illicit drugs.”
Conservatives are more likely to support Obama on Afghanistan than liberals supported Bush on Iraq, as long as victory over the Taliban remains his objective.
Radical Islam in all its forms – whether it is Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah, or one of a dozen other monikers – has no intention of signing a surrender document with the West. Most terrorists would rather die than surrender or make peace with infidels.
President Obama, like President Bush before him, should hasten that objective.