Obama's Defense Policy

[GAP]

Is there a full moon tonight, or are the weirdo's just out in force?

 

[CougarKing]

Obama is visiting the Afghanistan front as we speak.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25745500

Obama visits Afghanistan to tour war zone
Campaign-season trip to include Iraq, Mideast and European countries
The Associated Press
updated 10:07 a.m. PT, Sat., July. 19, 2008
KABUL, Afghanistan - Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama started a campaign-season tour of combat zones and foreign capitals, visiting with U.S. forces in Kuwait and then Afghanistan — the scene of a war he says deserves more attention and more troops.

The Illinois senator arrived Saturday in Kabul as part of an official congressional delegation and then flew to eastern Afghanistan. Staff. Sgt. David Hopkins said Obama and two other senators made a brief stop in Jalalabad airfield, in Nangarhar province, to visit with soldiers stationed there.

The province's governor, Gul Agha Sherzai, also was present. Jalalabad lies near the Tora Bora mountains where al-Qaida leaders fled to and faced a U.S. bombardment during the U.S.-led invasion that ousted the Taliban regime in late 2001 after the Sept. 11 attacks.

The U.S. military said the delegation was also briefed by senior officers at

Bagram Air Field, the main U.S. base in Afghanistan.

"Following the briefing, the senators were able to meet service members from their respective states at Bagram," the military said in a statement.

Obama's first visit to Afghanistan, coming less than four months before the general election, was rich with political implications. Republican presidential rival John McCain has criticized Obama for his lack of time in the region. Obama is also expected to stop later in Iraq.

Robert Gibbs, a campaign spokesman, said Obama arrived in Kabul around noon. En route from Washington, he made a stopover in Kuwait to meet with U.S. forces stationed there, Gibbs said.

Sultan Ahmad Baheen, spokesman for Afghanistan's Foreign Ministry, confirmed the senator was in Afghanistan and that he would meet with President Hamid Karzai.

"I look forward to seeing what the situation on the ground is," Obama told a pair of reporters who accompanied him to his departure from Andrews Air Force Base on Thursday. "I want to, obviously, talk to the commanders and get a sense both in Afghanistan and in Baghdad of, you know, what the most, their biggest concerns are, and I want to thank our troops for the heroic work that they've been doing."

Underscoring the challenges in Afghanistan, authorities reported Saturday that a roadside bomb killed four policemen in the volatile south of the country where the Taliban-led insurgency is intensifying nearly seven years after a U.S.-led invasion ousted the militant movement from power.


Troop shift urged
Obama advocates ending the U.S. combat role in Iraq by withdrawing troops at the rate of one to two combat brigades a month. But he supports increasing the military commitment to Afghanistan, where the Taliban has been resurgent and Osama bin laden is believed to be hiding.

Obama recently chided Karzai and his government, saying it had "not gotten out of the bunker" and helped to organize the country or its political and security institutions.

Also on his itinerary later in the trip is a meeting with Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi leader. On the campaign trail, Obama has said one benefit of withdrawing U.S. troops is that it would pressure al-Maliki to shore up his government as well.

Nonetheless, he said he did not plan to reiterate those messages in person.

"I'm more interested in listening than doing a lot of talking, and I think it's very important to recognize that I'm going over there as a U.S. senator," he said. "We have one president at a time."

The duration and details of Obama's stay in Afghanistan have not been formally disclosed, and media access was limited.

Traveling with Obama were Sens. Chuck Hagel, a Nebraska Republican and Jack Reed, a Democrat from Rhode Island. The senators, both military veterans, have been mentioned as potential Obama vice presidential running mates, but Reed has said he's not interested in the job.

In a speech this week, Obama said the war in Iraq was a distraction, unlike the fighting in Afghanistan.


"This is a war that we have to win," he said. "I will send at least two additional combat brigades to Afghanistan, and use this commitment to seek greater contributions — with fewer restrictions — from NATO allies.

"I will focus on training Afghan security forces and supporting an Afghan judiciary, with more resources and incentives for American officers who perform these missions."

By contrast, his opposition to the war in Iraq — and call for an end to the U.S. combat role — helped him overcome his rivals in the battle for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Lately, his efforts to explain how he will use what he learns from U.S. commanders to refine his proposals have brought charges from Republicans and complaints from Democratic liberals that he seems to be shifting his Iraq policy toward the political center. But Obama maintains his basic goal of ending the U.S. combat role soon remains unchanged and that he's always said the U.S. withdrawal must be done carefully.
More stops in Mideast, Europe
Obama also arranged to visit Jordan, Israel, Germany, France and England, traveling aboard a jet chartered by his presidential campaign, before his return to the United States. The weeklong trip marks his only foreign excursion as a presidential candidate; McCain has visited Canada, Colombia and Mexico, in part to highlight Obama's opposition to trade deals with those allies.

Few citizens in impoverished Afghanistan were aware of Obama's unannounced visit, and few have been following the U.S. presidential race, being too busy eking out an existence amid soaring violence and with limited access to news media.

But some interviewed Saturday said they would welcome an Obama presidency if he could help their country end the fighting, corruption and poverty that have crippled it for so long.

"Obama is a good person," said Abdul Basir, 40, a former army officer. "During his campaign I heard he was saying that if I become president I will withdraw the U.S. troops from Iraq and bring them to Afghanistan and I will attack on the terror center on other side of border (in Pakistan). It is very important and I appreciated that."


Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25745500/

 

[MarkOttawa]

Bomb, bomb, bomb--bomb Pakistan!  I wonder what the great majority of Canadians who say they support Barack Obama think about this:
http://bourbonroom.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/07/20/obama-never-has-doubts-about-foreign-policy-experience/

...Well, what I’ve said is that if we had actionable intelligence against high-value Al Qaida targets and the Pakistani government was unwilling to go after those targets, that we should...

And, for the life of me, I cannot figure out why a surge in Iraq was not a Good Thing but a surge in Afstan is a Good Thing:

...I believe U.S. troop levels need to increase. And I for at least a year now have called for two additional brigades, perhaps three...

Mark
Ottawa

 

[tomahawk6]

Obama is simply restating the left's position on the GWOT Iraq = bad and Afghanistan is where we should have been all along.

 

[MarkOttawa]

tomahawk6: Yet the Canadian left doesn't even want us in Afstan!

Mark
Ottawa

 

[OldSolduer]

When Obama is the President of the USA and demands that the US military increases its presence in Afghanistan....what will Jack and the NDP say about that?
The left accuses Harper of being a puppet of the current administration....so will we be able to accuse Jack and his merry band of "good deed doers" puppets of Obama?

Let me re-phrase.....the NDP acutally haven't done any good deeds...maybe they should be called "Would like to do good deeds doers".

 

[MarkOttawa]

A Torch post:

Obamalot
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2008/07/obamalot.html

Mark
Ottawa

 

[a_majoor]

Limiting the weaponization of space is closing the door long after the horse has left the barn, the USSR conducted military space experiments since the 1960's (including arming satellites and space stations with cannons and missiles, as well as conducting some of the first ASAT tests), and the American military has dreamed up  an amazing array of space born systems as well (although few systems have ever gone much beyond the concept or mockup stage) Encyclopedia Astronautica is a great on line resource to research these issues.

Even if some sort of agreement could be worked out, the advantages to disrupting enemy space assets is far to great to ignore, so look for "hidden" systems on ostensibly civilian satellites, "pop-up" weapons and ground based systems like lasers or pulse microwave devices to redress the balance.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE50O15X20090125?sp=true

Challenges loom as Obama seeks space weapons ban
Andrea Shalal-Esa - Analysis

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama's pledge to seek a worldwide ban on weapons in space marks a dramatic shift in U.S. policy while posing the tricky issue of defining whether a satellite can be a weapon.

Moments after Obama's inauguration last week, the White House website was updated to include policy statements on a range of issues, including a pledge to restore U.S. leadership on space issues and seek a worldwide ban on weapons that interfere with military and commercial satellites.

It also promised to look at threats to U.S. satellites, contingency plans to keep information flowing from them, and what steps are needed to protect spacecraft against attack.

The issue is being closely watched by Lockheed Martin Corp, Boeing Co, Northrop Grumman Corp, the biggest U.S. defense contractors, and other companies involved in military and civilian space contracts.

Watchdog groups and even some defense officials welcomed the statement, which echoed Obama's campaign promises, but said it would take time to hammer out a comprehensive new strategy.

Enacting a global ban on space weapons could prove even harder.

For instance, it was difficult to define exactly what constituted a "weapon" because even seemingly harmless weather tracking satellites could be used to slam into and disable other satellites, said two U.S. officials involved in the area who were not authorized to speak publicly.

Michael Krepon, co-founder of the private Henry L. Stimson think tank on space, cited recent reports that the Pentagon was using two smaller satellites launched in 2006 to fly near a dead missile-warning satellite and investigate what happened. The Defense Support Program satellite, DSP-23, built by Northrop, failed on orbit in mid-September.

"This incident clarified how important it is to have rules of the road for technologies that could have many different applications," Krepon said. "There are lots of benign reasons to have a closer look at an object in space. But we all know that when satellites make close passes they could also do things that are not benign."

Two years ago, China used a missile to destroy one of its own satellites in a test that raised worries about a new arms race in space. The incident may have created thousands of pieces of debris. Last year, the United States also destroyed one of its own satellites, saying its toxic fuel tank could pose a danger if it fell to Earth.

MORE COOPERATION?

A defense official, who also asked not to be named, said the Obama administration had not yet held briefings for top officials working on military space issues, but it was clear that the focus would shift toward more diplomatic initiatives.

Work on classified projects involving an "active" military response to attacks against U.S. satellites might be halted in favor of more monitoring and passive protection measures, he said. He declined to give any more details.

The Obama administration also faces tough decisions on many multibillion-dollar satellite programs facing cost overruns and schedule delays, particularly at a time when rapid increases in military spending are grinding to a halt.

"There's still a lot of wiggle room" in the administration's statement on military space, said analyst Victoria Samson with the private Center for Defense Information. "But just the sheer fact that they are discussing it represents a real shift from the Bush administration."

"It's not going to happen immediately, but it seems as though the wheels are in motion to initiate some sort of cooperative measure," Samson said.

Another defense official, who asked not to be named, said the new administration would work through the complex military space issues during a defense review to be completed by September, and as part of a space report due in December.

The new policy language used by the Obama administration was "impossibly broad," the official said. It also failed to acknowledge recent work by U.S. officials on guidelines for space debris and conduct by nations active in space.

Even Obama acknowledged during his election campaign that achieving a global treaty banning weapons in space could be a daunting challenge. A simpler and quicker solution, he suggested at that time, might be a "code of conduct for responsible space-faring nations."

In response to questions from the Council for a Livable World, Obama said one key element of any such code would be "a prohibition against harmful interference against satellites."

(Editing by Tim Dobbyn)