
Senior administration officials are briefing the press about President Obama's speech tonight detailing the 30,000 more troops he'll be sending to Afghanistan.
They say he will outline a "new window of opportunity" and a "new approach" to the region.
But another talking point emerged, with language we've heard before.
An official told reporters that tonight at West Point Military Academy Obama will announce he will "surge American forces" to reverse the momentum of the Taliban and with the main goal of training Afghan forces.
The official repeated a bit later that "this surge, if you will, will be for a defined period of time" and said it again later in the call.
More coverage here.
tosh
December 1, 2009 3:36 PM
Surge... fuck... there are times when you just want to bang your head against the wall until you pass out.
John
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JeffB
December 1, 2009 4:57 PM in reply to tosh
Is Obama now a one term President?
http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=6565
.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcc
December 1, 2009 3:45 PM
An official told reporters?
Zounds
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
December 1, 2009 4:19 PM
In the public mind--as opposed to the minds of left of center bloggers and commenters--Bush's "Surge" worked, period. And if "Surge" is used to describe the strategy pitched to Bush by Patreus, troop increase and the accompaning changes in tactics and deployment and the political side encompassing the Sunni Awakening, it did, in fact, accomplish something that can reasonably be described as "working" in the sense of bending the curve on escalating violence and instability and giving us room to engineer an exit that wasn't a fighting retreat.
Lot's of people on the left--me included--sneered at Bush's choice to duck the exit strategy engineered by Poppy's Mr. Fixit and doubling down in Iraq and we were justified in doing so given his near perfect record of making the wrong choice. But stubborn unwillingness to admit that we were, in any respect, wrong then is unseemly and a barrier to clear thinking now.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
martis
December 1, 2009 5:14 PM
Obama and the beyond-inept Dem congress edge closer and closer to a 2010 route and a 2012 change of POTUS. Count me as Obama supporter that is thoroughly disgusted with results to date and outlook for the next year. Healthcare reform looks to be a joke and now the latest troop surge. WTF
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rick
December 1, 2009 6:56 PM
'And if "Surge" is used to describe the strategy pitched to Bush by Patreus, troop increase and the accompaning changes in tactics and deployment and the political side encompassing the Sunni Awakening, it did, in fact, accomplish something that can reasonably be described as "working" in the sense of bending the curve on escalating violence and instability and giving us room to engineer an exit that wasn't a fighting retreat.'
Where I come from, this is called "damning with faint praise".
"Did you win the war?"
"No, but we bent the curve on escalating violence and instability and gave ourselves room to engineer an exit that wasn't a fighting retreat!"
"Huzzah!"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
December 1, 2009 7:33 PM in reply to Rick
Things came out a hell of a lot better than I ever thought they would long about 2006. When you're fighting an insurgency, that's as close to "win," as you're going to get. If you want a pretty surrender ceremony followed by parades and fireworks, stick to fighting nation states exclusively.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?