Grieving Mom To Obama: ‘It Is Time To Make A Decision!’
Benjamin Sherman is another brave American hero who gave up his life for his country. While on a mission in Afghanistan he lost his life when trying to save a comrade who had fallen into a river. Sherman jumped in to save his fellow soldier only for both of them to be swept away.
In an interview with WCBV-Boston, Sherman’s grief-stricken mother and sister talked of their lost son and brother – describing the kind of person and soldier he was and how he would do anything for his country and his brothers-in-arms.
But at the end of the interview, Sherman’s mother had some words for President Obama.
“It is time,” she said. “It is time to make a decision. This has gone on too long. They either need to come home or we need to end it.”
You can watch the video of the interview here.
Of course, if this were George W. Bush in office the lamestream media would have been showing this video ad nauseum in order to undermine the President. They would have tried to make Mrs. Sherman the next Cindy Sheehan. But now that Obama is in office, there is no such effort.
Hypocrisy aside, no matter where you stand on the Afghanistan question Obama’s ‘dithering’ on this matter has indeed gone on far too long. It has been two months – two months! -since General McChrystal ’s request for more troops. The men and women we send into battle deserve far, far better. And not one more family should have to experience the grief the Sherman family because their President can’t figure out whether the battle is worth fighting any longer. In fact, the indecision is simply unconscionable and beneath the office. It is time for the President to show some leadership on this issue and prove himself even the least bit worthy of the title Commander-in-Chief.
My thoughts and prayers go out to the Sherman family, especially his wife and his unborn child who will never know him.
Mike:
Good story, and my heart goes out to that poor family.
The evidence on Obama is uncontrovertible though. It’s not that he cannot figure out if the war is worth fighting, it’s that he cannot figure out a way to extract the troops without being charged by the Right with being too soft.
Let’s not play politics with the safety of our troops any longer. Let’s tell Obama to just bring the troops home already, and not send 20,000 or 30,000 or however many thousand more he thinks need to be sent to their deaths before he thinks the chorus to bring the troops home will be loud enough for him to justify a full withdrawal.
We know he does not seek victory because he said so. It’s time to bring the troops home and not have any more grieving mothers and fathers and spouses who have to wonder why the hell they lost their loved ones.
November 13th, 2009 at 10:54 amI liked you until today, Mike. You’re a despicable person. You’re cynically using a dead serviceman to bash a politician (one whom I hate, admittedly) for political reasons only. Not only that, but you’re bashing Obama for the fact that Obama rightly decided to slowly, carefully deliberate the Afghan issue BEFORE deciding whether or not to send additional troops to that worthless country.
Obama is NOT dithering. Obama is deliberating all the pertinent facts and all the options he can choose BEFORE making a decision. Such a process is NECESSARY. Of course the military brass don’t like that process.
2 months is a very short timespan for such a decision.
November 13th, 2009 at 10:55 amTo Mike and Ed:
The fact that Obama is slowly deliberating the Afghan issue, and the fact that he’s probably opposed to the McChrystal surge proposal, does NOT mean that Obama doesn’t believe the war is worth fighting. What it DOES mean is that Obama needs to deliberate this issue carefully so as not to make a stupid decision.
The McChrystal surge plan will not work. The Soviet Union once stationed 150,000 soldiers in Afghanistan, yet it was defeated by the mujahedeen.
November 13th, 2009 at 10:57 amRespectfully Zbigniew, I disagree.
Obama is trying to figure out a way to pull the troops out where he won’t suffer politically from the re-ascendancy of the Taliban. He is also trying to figure out a way to pull the troops out that can be reconciled with his having called Afghanistan the good war – which we know he only did as a political ploy in order to attack the Iraq War as the bad war.
There are reasons to support sending more troops there, and there are reasons why a rational commander in chief would be circumspect in sending more troops over there. But Obama’s words about not seeking victory prove that he is not considering such reasons and that he is not such a commander in chief.
Also, there is no need to personally attack Mike on this, even if you disagree with him. You have much stronger arguments that are based on the facts – even though I do not agree with them. But it does not bolster your case to call him names. Nor do I agree with you that Mike was cynically using a dead serviceman to bash Obama: he was using the story of a dead serviceman to argue that people are dying while Obama contemplates, and that the chief executive of a state or of the country needs to have a gameplan in mind from the time he takes office. Nothing dramatic has changed in Afghanistan that warrants such further deliberations on a subject that should have been decided in Obama’s head during last year’s campaign – and if there IS some new fact, he should share it with us.
November 13th, 2009 at 11:02 amZbigniew:
Obama has said that he does not believe in victory because in conjures up images of the Japanese surrender at the end of WWII (as if the surrender of militant Islamists in that fashion is somehow undesirable).
He also had an Afghanistan policy developed during the campaign. Why not implement it? What facts have changed? If facts have changed, why not tell us?
You are underestimating the extent of Obama’s evil.
November 13th, 2009 at 11:08 amDuring his presidential campaign, THE GREAT OBAMA told the American public that Afghanistan was the war that should take precedent over all else. He has had almost 10 months to decide what he wants to do. Up to now he has done NOTHING!
THE GREAT OBAMA is following the same battle plan that Lyndon Johnson followed in Viet Nam, listen to a bunch of political hacks, instead of the military. Since THE GREAT OBAMA has taken over, the ROEs (Rules of Engagement) have been changed such that the overwhelming firepower that the American military has cannot be used, if there is even a remote possibility of a civil casualty. That is just plain crap! In any war, there will always be civil casualties. In fact, with the advent of modern warfare, civilian casualties have been one of methods to win a war.
After eight years, Pakistan has had enough of the same religious fanatics that are fighting our troops in Afghanistan, who now carry out terrorist attacks in their cities. Right now, America’s battle plan should be to act as the hammer that works against Pakistans’s anvil to destroy, and I mean destroy any and all of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda fighters, along with their supporters.
General William Tecumseh Sherman, during the civil war summed up what war truly is; “War is Hell”. You have to make the enemy feel that he and his supporters are in hell. Fight like you mean it, or get the hell out. Let are solders and marines do what they do best, kill the enemy!
“I have never advocated war except as a means of peace.” Ulysses S. Grant
November 13th, 2009 at 11:54 amAbsolutely correct, Mr. Zuendt!
November 13th, 2009 at 12:45 pmEd, you’re wrong on 2 counts.
Number 1: “There are reasons to support sending more troops there” – nope, there aren’t any. There aren’t even any reasons for the current heavy footprint. Additional troops would only make the situation worse by 1) increasing the cost of the war 2) burdening the US military with that cost 3) painting the ISAF as an occupation army (which it isn’t, but that’s how it would be viewed by almost all Afghans if a surge occurred) 4) entangling America in a worthless bog (the very scenario that the Bush Administration (initially) tried to avoid!).
Number 2: Mike deserves the name I called him. He’s using a dead soldier, a fallen hero, for political benefits only, to bash a politician he dislikes and to prop up a ludicrous policy that would be a deja vu of the failed Soviet troop surge advocated by Marshal Sergei Sokolov.
One more issue: you said that Obama is trying to devise a political justification for a withdrawal. There’s no evidence to back your claim, but I WISH Obama prepared an exit strategy. According to the Powell Doctrine (written by General Colin Powell) the US government should devise a plausible exit strategy (to avoid endless entanglement) BEFORE a war starts. Powell wrote his doctrine in 1991, 2 years after the Soviet Army (not the Red Army) withdrew from Afghanistan. His doctrine was based on the Soviet Afghan War AND America’s Vietnamese experience. Both countries failed to prepare plausible exit strategies BEFORE they started the Afghan war and the Viet war.
November 13th, 2009 at 12:46 pmBeing called a despicable person by Zbig is kinda like Beelzebub calling the deity evil. I will take it with a grain of salt.
I suppose Dick Cheney and this soldier’s mother are also despicable people for challenging Obama as well.
The fact is Obama is indeed dithering on this issue. He has not shown the American people that he is seriously deliberating the issue. Heck, he doesn’t even consistently talk to his general in the field. Ed, is right. He is taking a political approach to this issue.
When the Republicans lost the 2006 elections, it was a clear signal to W to change course on Iraq. He immediately took steps to address the problem and to come up with a plan. By January 10, he made a decision and addressed the nation about the surge.
Obama is showing no such inclinations even after his commanding general has made it abundantly clear it is necessary to win the war. Meanwhile, our troops are in the war theater – not knowing whether their efforts are in vain. And that is simply unethical and immoral in my eyes.
November 13th, 2009 at 12:59 pm“I suppose Dick Cheney and this soldier’s mother are also despicable people for challenging Obama as well.”
I don’t know about this soldier’s mother, but Dick Cheney became a despicable person long before he even became the US Vice President.
“The fact is Obama is indeed dithering on this issue.” – No, that’s not a fact, that’s your opinion. Afghanistan is a lethally serious issue, and decisions on that issue should not be made too quickly. It’s not an easy issue to deal with, contrary to, for example, tying up one’s shoelaces. Obama is currently considering all the options he has, and should not make a decision too quickly.
“He has not shown the American people that he is seriously deliberating the issue.” – Gibberish. Since early October, Obama has conducted EIGHT meetings with his foreign policy team on the Afghan issue. The most recent meeting was organized last Wednesday. Proof:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/11/dear_mr_president_please_make.html
“Obama is showing no such inclinations even after his commanding general has made it abundantly clear it is necessary to win the war.”
It’s not necessary to win the war. Quite the contrary, a surge would only cause a war failure. What is necessary to win the war is the Krulak strategy: a drawdown coupled with a massive wave of UCAV airstrikes. What McChrystal says is irrelevant – generals always paint the most dire possible picture to get additional troopers. If he can’t achieve the necessary goals with the troopers he currently has, he will not achieve those goals with any troopers. If he cannot win with the contigent he currently has, he’s simply not up to the task and should retire.
November 13th, 2009 at 1:30 pm“During his presidential campaign, THE GREAT OBAMA told the American public that Afghanistan was the war that should take precedent over all else. He has had almost 10 months to decide what he wants to do. Up to now he has done NOTHING!”
Patently incorrect. He appointed a new commander, (McChrystal), significantly increased the American contingent (to 68,000 troopers), authorized McChrystal to pay off the moderate Taleban, and convinced a few European countries to send additional troopers to Afghanistan.
The FUNDAMENTAL question that Obama should answer now – one which should be answered BEFORE he adopts a strategy for Afghanistan – is whether America should be permanently entangled in Afghanistan as Afghanistan’s permanent nanny, or not. If Obama answers that question, he will then easily decide what strategy to adopt.
November 13th, 2009 at 1:34 pmHey Di Marco:
Mr. Zuendt was my father, my name is Rich as you well know.
November 13th, 2009 at 2:01 pmIt’s a term of respect. Accept it as I meant it.
November 13th, 2009 at 2:05 pmNow, this is what we call irony. To make his case Zbig references an article in which the author – apparently another despicable person at American Thinker named Rick Moran – says the following:
“I actually sympathize with the president’s dilemma. Hard choices are in front of him, none of them very palatable.
But it is unconscionable that it should take this long. There comes a point where caution becomes indecision, and indecision becomes paralysis. At this point, it appears the president is unable to decide. He wants things perfect – every “i” dotted, every “t” crossed.
In this respect, he reminds us of General George McClellan, Lincoln’s indecisive general. That analogy is not new and will be repeated more and more often the more the president dithers in deciding what to do in Afghanistan.
No decision is expected for weeks. I guess this is another example of our “smart” foreign policy – so smart we are outsmarting ourselves.”
——-
I have to admit, though, I am cynical of THE GREAT OBAMA. Perhaps it is because he lies about everything else and always seems to be out for himself.
If I were to put my cynicism aside, I would have to agree with Mr. Moran. If Obama isn’t being motivated by politics, then he is simply being indecisive. Hardly a quality befitting of the commander-in-chief.
Finally, FWIW, I did not question Obama’s motives in the OP. The intent was not to bash Obama but to show support for our troops who are in harm’s way. Those young men and women who are putting their lives on the line do in fact deserve a decision – one way or the other.
As Moran’s piece shows, as well as Mrs. Sherman’s comments and Dick Cheney’s speech, I am not alone in feeling this way.
November 13th, 2009 at 2:55 pmThat was me in #14, of course!
November 13th, 2009 at 2:56 pmMore for you Zbig: http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2009/11/president-dither-and-waffle-looks-for-escape-hatch-from-afghanistan/
November 13th, 2009 at 3:12 pmZbigniew,
How can you say that there aren’t any good reasons to support sending more troops to Afghanistan, and then say that “Afghanistan is a lethally serious issue, and decisions on that issue should not be made too quickly. It’s not an easy issue to deal with, contrary to, for example, tying up one’s shoelaces.” ?
If there aren’t any good reasons to send more troops, then the decision is an easy one: announce that you will not send more troops and that you are planning to bring the remaining troops home.
I did cite evidence for the proposition that Obama is seeking a politically palatable way to bring the troops home without victory. I cited his quote earlier in the year that he is not in favor of victory in Afghanistan because it conjured up images of Japan’s surrender (as if that would be a bad thing). A quick google search turned up the following clip (I could not listen to it because my speakers are not working):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bk7scgN-37E
Even your comments indicate that the answer is in fact an easy one. Don’t send more troops. Tell the American people we are bringing the troops home. That’s what is also in Obama’s heart – he should have the courage of his convictions and act.
And yes, he is dithering.
November 13th, 2009 at 6:23 pm[...] CWA-NJ Conservatives with Attitude! » Blog Archive » Grieving mom … [...]
November 15th, 2009 at 1:00 amThe Afghan so called war was never really started. It is the same as Iraq in that it is a democracy building wilsonian projectionist pipe dream that one can force civilized western values on people who do not want it and have not earned it.
It is time to bring the troops home. They are currently getting killed at an alarming rate because just like under the Bush administration shooting back and killing the enemy will get you put in prison (Haditha anyone!?).
This war is not not over because we never actually fought one, it is in NO WAY the fault of our soldiers, who are given operating procedures they can of course not win with. But we need to get out of there, and do so immediately.
November 15th, 2009 at 6:26 pmMore despicable people – this time it’s a Brit!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/6646179/Bob-Ainsworth-criticises-Barack-Obama-over-Afghanistan.html
November 24th, 2009 at 9:27 pm