Steele, Afghanistan, And Reality

I’ve been watching the nonsense over GOP Chair Steele’s comments on Afghanistan, with a somewhat jaundiced eye.

Look, the DNC may like to claim that Steele is “betting against our troops and rooting for failure in Afghanistan”, but  what’s really happening here is that Steele is demonstrating the ability to see reality… something Democrats almost invariably lack at the leadership level and more often than not in the rank and file.  He sees Obama’s policies making this an unwinnable situation.  One can argue about if or not that is the official GOP position.   But that’s the point Steele was making and he’s right insofar as that point is concerned.

Steele has reportedly said:

“This was a war of Obama’s choosing.”

“This is not something United States had actively prosecuted or wanted to engage in.”

Oh, really?    This is what they’re objecting to? Does anyone recall the Democrats who made the same case in Iraq?  Gee… were they rooting against our troops, do you suppose? And what shall be said about the Democrats who now make the same case as Steele does now?  (And looking across the sphere,  I see quite a number of them)

Say what you will about this ‘officially ‘ having started after 9/11, as a Bush policy. The fact is Obama ratcheted up the Afghanistan situation by his own choice.  He made Afghanistan the central part of the military effort calling it’ the good war’ and one we must win.  Steele himself alludes to this in a Fox News posting:

Steele sought later to clarify his comments by noting that Obama said on the presidential campaign trail that the U.S. should concentrate fighting the war on terror in Afghanistan, not Iraq.

“Now, as president, he has indeed shifted his focus to this region,” he said in a written statement. “That means this is his strategy. And, for the sake of security of the free world, our country must give our troops the support necessary to win this war.”

Problem of course is, his policies make that impossible.

Something else the GOP needs to consider: Do we really want to remove all controversy from the political arena?  Is there anyone who doesn’t understand that doing so cedes the argument to the Democrats by default?