skip to main |
skip to sidebar
In the coming months the president will have to make a difficult decision on how deep the draw down of forces will be in Afghanistan. In July, military forces are to begin withdrawing from the country, but the question remains-how many forces will exit that country. The administration is split between military leaders who want a gradual reduction without it affecting recent gains. Other administration officials want a larger draw down.
The president has a tough decision to make! Not only with Afghanistan, but replacing his Secretary of Defense and a good portion of the military leadership on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, including General Petraeus in Afghanistan, all with a smaller majority in the Senate.
With all the attention centered on Libya, Afghanistan has fallen to second tier status, but now you can view a video of U.S. Marines in Marjah and their impact on Afghanistan.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/topic.cfm?topic=Letter%20from%20Iraq%20Afganistan
Today, the president spoke at Georgetown University outlining his energy plan which called for a cut of one third of imported oil by 2020. Currently the nation has experienced rising cost of oil mainly stemming from the instability in the Middle East and other developing nations, such as China and India requiring more fuel for their expanding economies.
The president is correct in our focus on alternative fuels and not be so dependent on fossil fuels. President Obama stated that, "Meeting this new goal of cutting our oil dependence depends largely on two things: finding and producing more oil at home, and reducing our dependence on oil with cleaner alternative fuels and greater efficiency."
The puzzling aspect of the president's remarks are that they are inconsistent with a statement he made while visiting Brazil two weeks ago.
On March 19th, the president, speaking at a CEO Business Summit in Brasilia, Brazil, stated, "The second place we want to partner with Brazil is on the issue of energy, which is why President Rousseff and I also agreed to launch a Strategic Energy Dialogue. By some estimates, the oil you recently discovered off the shores of Brazil could amount to twice the reserves we have in the United States. We want to work with you. We want to help with technology and support to develop these oil reserves safely, and when you're ready to start selling. we want to be one of your best customers."
Today, President Obama commented he wants to reduce imported oil, but wants to partner with Brazil to develop their energy capabilities, then import their oil to America. Second statement- he wants to produce more oil at home, but his administration has made it difficult to develop our own energy capabilities, it seems rhetoric is different than policy.
Why not invest in the U.S., create jobs in America, instead of Brazil; only the president can answer that question.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/topic.cfm?topic=Energy
Last night the president spoke to the nation providing his rational for launching military operations against Libya, preventing a humanitarian catastrophe. In his address to the nation the president made numerous references to the brave men and women of the armed forces who are carrying out the mission over Libya with courage and professionalism.
Get the chance and view for yourself the video of the destroyer USS Stout launching cruise missiles into Libya.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/topic.cfm?topic=Letter%20from%20Iraq%20Afganistan
Tonight, President Obama will speak to the nation in a nationally televised address regarding the use of American military as it enforces the U.N. no-fly zone over Libya. This will be the first time the president has spoken directly to the American people since combat operations began over Libya little more than a week ago.
The United Nations Security Council authorized a no-fly zone over Libya in response to Col. Muammar Gaddafi's attack on his own civilian population and on rebel forces. U.S. and N.A.T.O. began military operations, by attacking Libyan military positions and supporting Libyan rebels.
The president faces an American population who are skeptical over another conflict in a Muslim country, especially one that has begun with dubious strategic goals. Since the crisis began in Libya, the administration has sent out confusing signals on the strategic rational of U.S. policy.
The president needs to firmly address strategic goals the U.S. is trying to pursue in Libya. Why did the U.S. intervene in Libya? Are we trying to remove Gaddafi, if not then at what scenario will we accept to see him remain in power? Remember, this is after the president and his administration stated Gaddafi must go.
Who are the rebels? If the rebels force the ouster of Gaddafi, who will govern the country? Will the U.S. support this new effort, or will the U.S. be forced to intervene to establish a government in Libya? What is the U.S. strategy in the broader Middle East?
There are numerous unanswered questions that the president will have to address tonight. Tune in, it promises to be a good show ether way.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/browse.cfm?category=Africa&subcategory=North%20Africa
Since the allies launched military operations in Libya, confusion has begun to seep into the alliance over strategy, tactics and most importantly, who will run the operation once the U.S. relinquishes control. This is the prevailing conversation- who will run the operation once the United States cedes control.
Currently, there has been infighting among NATO members on who would lead the operation, it looks like the consensus has been reached that the operation would be run by committee. Right now it is unclear who will make up the committee, France objected to NATO taking command of dad to day operations and proposed a "political steering committee," made up of foreign ministers from the United States, European, and Arab states, to oversee the war.
Many unanswered questions still remain, with one of them being, does this mean U.S. forces could be under the command of a foreign military commander, whether that be from Europe, or of the Arab League?
What is our strategy? Is it to topple the Libyan government, or is it to protect civilians? The president has left the question ambiguous.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/browse.cfm?category=Africa&subcategory=North%20Africa
United States Africom, the U.S. military command, which is leading the allied forces in its assault on Libya, posted images on its website detailing the effort. This new military command, activated in 2008, is now leading all military operations against Libya.
Get the chance to view images of the U.S. military as it conducts military operations.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/topic.cfm?topic=Letter%20from%20Iraq%20Afganistan
The allied offensive against Libya continues, which began last week after the United Nations Security Council authorized a military no-fly zone to protect Libyan civilians from attacks by forces of leader Moammar Gadhafi. The situation and the strategic goals of the operation have been murky from the onset, as proponents and those opposed to military operations have been asking administration officials what is the end state and the strategic goals of "Operation Odyssey Dawn."
On March 3rd, President Obama stated that "Colonel Gadhafi needs to step down from power and leave. That is good for his country. It is good for his people. It's the right thing to do." Statements made by senior national security strategists and various administration officials have been stating that we are not targeting Gadhafi, that any change in government is up to the Libyan people.
This contradiction in statements has left many puzzled on what strategy the Obama administration is trying to pursue with regard to Libya. Today, the president will be addressing this issue in Chile as he continues to make a trip through South America.
Hopefully he will address the confusion of U.S. aims toward Libya.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/browse.cfm?category=Africa&subcategory=North%20Africa
Libya declared an immediate cease fire after yesterday's vote by the United Nations Security Council, which authorized a no-fly zone and the use of "all necessary measures" to protect civilians.
The United States and its allies reacted with tepid caution, waiting to judge the Libyan government by its action. The cease fire places the United states in a precarious situation, the first being now that there is a cease fire, does the U.S. and its allies attack Libyan military positions around the rebel stronghold of Benghazi and other parts of Libya?
The president and Secretary of State have repeatedly called for the removal of Gaddafi. What is the strategy of the U.S. for his ouster? If the cease fire holds, what is the long term implication, how long will the no-fly zone last, and what other actions will the U.S. take in Libya to ensure his ouster? What happens to the Libyan people in other parts of Libya under government control? Does the U.S. and our allies intervene if Gaddafi, punishes them for supporting the rebellion?
These are only a few questions, as there are still many unanswered questions and perhaps the president's remarks today will clarify U.S. strategy.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/browse.cfm?category=Africa&subcategory=North%20Africa
In his testimony before the House Armed Services Committee, General David Petraeus revealed that his son had served in Afghanistan. In response to a question from a member of the committee, Gen. Petraeus replied: " I may not be at this table, probably won't be, in 2015, but I'll tell you that my son is in uniform, an Lieutenant Petraeus just completed a tour in Afghanistan, which thankfully we were able to keep very quite, and left in November after serving as an infantry platoon leader."
Many have begun to question U.S. continued presence in Afghanistan and polls have shown that large segment of the population in the United States believe it's time to pull out.
General Petraeus believes in the mission, and why the U.S. continued presence is necessary, but more to the point- his son had served last year in harm's way in Afghanistan. He easily could have influenced a far different assignment for his son then serving in a front line infantry role, as his son served as a member of the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team.
One has to remember that many of our senior military leaders have had son's serving in both Iraq and Afghanistan, Lt. Gen John Kelly lost his son in Afghanistan last year.
Many of our military leaders know what sacrifice means and live it each and every day, many times knowing that their son's are in harm's way implementing their military strategy, fully aware that they could lose their life.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/topic.cfm?topic=U.S.%20Politics
For the past week the world's attention has been focused on the disaster in Japan and the catastrophic meltdown of its nuclear reactors in the damage region. Before the disaster struck Japan, the media had been focused on the situation in Libya, but since then little has been mentioned or of what U.S. strategy is in regard to Libya.
On March 3, President Obama said that "Colonel Gaddafi needs to step down from power and leave. That is good for his country. It is good for his people. It's the right thing to do." Since the president made this statement weeks ago, Col. Muammar Gaddafi has launched a major counteroffensive against rebels in Eastern Libya, and now is closing on the rebel capital of Benghazi. So far the west and the U.S. have done nothing.
The failure of U.S. strategy toward Libya will have disastrous consequences for the United States in the region. The president has repeatedly stated that Gaddafi must go, but the president has not articulated a strategy of what that is. The message the president is sending to the region and to the world is, if you stand up for democracy and are attacked for it, the U.S. will not be behind you.
One only has to remember the U.S. reaction in Iran after the Iranian people stood up for democracy, only to be brutally attacked. The lesson is, if any pro-democracy demonstrations flare up in a given country, repress it brutally, because the U.S. will look the other way.
It's a sad state of American foreign policy, and catastrophic for the U.S. around the globe.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/browse.cfm?category=Africa&subcategory=North%20Africa
Today, a controversial hearing on the radicalization of American Muslims is taking place in Washington, put forth by Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) who chairs the House Committee on Homeland Security. The focus of the hearing is to understand and gauge why and how individual Muslims have become radicalized in the U.S.
Currently, radical Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who was born in New Mexico, and spent many years as an imam is now currently in hiding in Yemen, has been linked and encouraged attacks on the United States. In 2009, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, serving as a Army psychiatrist is accused of shooting and killing 13 soldiers at Ft.Hood, Texas.
Al-Qaeda, has been actively encouraging and recruiting American Muslims to carry out terror attacks against the U.S. The U.S. has seen an increase of individuals who have become radicalized over the past few years.
The hearings have become a political lighting rod, as many individuals have portrayed them as another McCarthyism style hearing which questions the loyalty of Americans. Supporters against the hearings believe this can only further alienate Muslim-Americans, and the real purpose is solely based on religion.
Passion on both sides runs high and only time will tell how this developes.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/topic.cfm?topic=U.S.%20Politics
