To the Editor:
Re “Obama Will Speed Military Pullout From Afghan War” (front page, June 23):
Thank you, President Obama, for starting to bring our troops home from Afghanistan. Another promise kept. The president told us that he would end combat in Iraq (check!) and refocus on Afghanistan (check!) in order to make real progress against terrorism (check!) and get Osama bin Laden (check!) so we can start bringing troops home from Afghanistan, too (check again!).
He promised to repair our relations with our allies (check!) and encourage them to take greater responsibility where needed. They have done so in Libya.
The president’s national security team has succeeded brilliantly, but I agree with the president that “America, it is time to focus on nation-building here at home.”
JOAN JACOBSON
Lakewood, Colo., June 23, 2011
To the Editor:
Your front-page article’s choice of descriptive words speaks volumes: “fragile” gains, “elusive” transfer of responsibility, “unprepared” Afghan troops, “rampant” corruption in Afghan government “sapping” the confidence of locals, “disenchantment” among Americans over “ballooning” national debt, the “whopping” price tag of the Afghan conflict.
As President Obama wrestles over the responsible way to make an exit, the language of your article only reinforces the obvious: there is no gentle way to articulate the mess that remains.
ROBERT S. NUSSBAUM
Fort Lee, N.J., June 23, 2011
To the Editor:
President Obama proposes a discouragingly modest drawdown of troops, while a peace-starved nation and world desperately need an end to the war. The fact that even this minimal troop reduction is met with skepticism by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and the military elite may be a testament to the difficulty of implementing change in a system under the thumb of the military-industrial complex.
While any shift toward peace is welcome, it is offset by concerns regarding the focus on “clandestine counterterrorism operations.” The covert-actions plan reeks of a murky world rife with maneuvers that operate outside the bounds of justice. It threatens to pitch us from one slippery slope to another.
We need instead to put an end to hostilities, whether they are in the form of drone attacks, bombs or heavy machine guns fired in darkness and stealth, and to summon the tools of diplomacy.
NANCY DICKEMAN
Seattle, June 23, 2011
To the Editor:
President Obama’s speech did not fulfill the commitment he made in December 2009, when he announced the surge but said that meaningful troop withdrawals would begin in July 2011. In fact, the president is just buying more time, dangling the proverbial carrot by making even more promises.
The drawing down of a mere 10,000 troops by the end of this year is not substantial when you consider the context of 100,000 men. While he pledged that 23,000 more troops would be withdrawn next year, that would leave almost 70,000 American troops.
I’m disappointed in the president’s failure to introduce a new strategy. After the spectacular success demonstrated by the counterterrorism strategy that netted Osama bin Laden, it puzzles me why the White House sticks to the failing counterinsurgency blueprint and nation-building that will continue to cost American lives and billions of dollars we can ill afford.
CHASE WEBB
Gresham, Ore., June 23, 2011
Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D. 