CNN Poll: Majority Now Sees Afghan Conflict As Obama’s War
Some interesting new polling from CNN just landed in the old inbox, and it makes it pretty clear that, from the public’s perspective at least, Afghanistan is now Obama’s War.
First, the topline: CNN finds that Obama’s approval rating has slipped below 50% for the first time. It’s now at 48%, versus 50% who disapprove.
The poll was taken on December 2 and 3 — after Obama’s speech. What’s more, 51% still disapprove of the war, though when respondents were asked whether they back Obama’s surge, regardless of their overall views of the war, a solid majority, 61%, supports it.
But here’s the really interesting part.
When asked whose policies people currently blame for the Afghaninstan mess, 64% blame Bush, versus only 17% who blame Obama. That’s understandable.
But when asked whose policies would be to blame if the current situation does not improve by the summer of 2011, Obama’s target for withdrawal, a majority, 54%, picks Obama. Only 34% say Bush.
In the public mind, this is Obama’s War.
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
@ethan: I wrote one of the few!
There’s no question that drones are effective.
Right winger “sbj” concedes he’s part of the Republican Deadbeat Daddy Party, he fails to be willing to pay for the wars he claims are needed.
Republicans: Con-artist Chickenhawk Deadbeats.
SBJ, I know you want to concentrate on 1979 and after, because you want to avoid the truth about what happened after the Taliban fled, and Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld allowed them to return stronger than ever.
We took care of the 1979 aftermath when we chased the Taliban out of Afghanistan, so now can we deal with the current truth. Bush/Cheney repeated the very same thing that you are whining about having happened after 1979.
The completely neglected Afghanistan again, and that is why the Taliban are back, stronger than ever.
Of course, it does not hurt to point out that It was Republican Reagan who let Afghanistan go to hell after the Soviets pulled out.
@liam: “so now can we deal with the current truth?”
Yes, let’s please do that.
Lets see now about that Bush disaster in Afghanistan, there were 800 deaths in 7 years of American personnel. So where is the Bush disaster? It only got worse there because of the victory in Iraq. The Al Qaeda had no where else to go. And all of you lefties know what a disaster Iraq turned out to be. If it wasn’t for Gates this empty suit would have voted Present on the war.
Inspectorrudy,
You are a complete Moron. Afghanistan is where Al-Qaeda attacked us from. I take it if some one from down the block attacks your house, you think that you need to go after some other house, instead of the one that the attack came from.
Beyond Republican Bush’s failures in Iraq, a short list of
REPUBLICAN BUSH’S FAILURES IN AFGHANISTAN:
Republican Bush failed to address terrorism until after the 9/11 attack (an attack which Republican Bush failed to stop).
Republican Bush ignored warnings in the seven and half months before 9/11. Bush ignored warnings of terrorism’s ‘blinking red lights’ that were carefully and repeatedly explained to him by the outgoing administration (and ignored by Bush). Bush ignored the explicit warning the month before the 9/11 attacks that ‘Osama bin Laden determined to attack US’, which did include actionable intelligence with the clear warning that the attacks might include hijacking planes.
Republican Bush failed to provide the troops needed to accomplish the mission. Particularly egregious was Bush’s failure to provide the troops required to capture or kill Osama bin Laden in the hills of Afghanistan, instead Bush allowed Osama bin Laden to escape. And to make Bush’s miserable failure even worse, Bush allowed Osama bin Laden to escape into a nuclear armed Muslim dictatorship.
And instead of pursuing Osama bin Laden into the country that actually had WMD, Republican Bush LIED US INTO IRAQ a country that had no WMD and wasn’t a threat.
Republican Bush failed to respect the military’s assessment that an Iraq War would require ‘on the order of several thousand troops’ and instead Republican Bush shortchanged American troops.
And because of Republican Bush’s failures, Afghanistan was taken back over by the Taliban and under Republican Bush the Taliban metastasized into the nuclear armed Muslim nation of Pakistan.
Afghanistan is a disaster because of Republican Bush’s failures.
“Lets see now about that Bush disaster in Afghanistan, there were 800 deaths in 7 years of American personnel. So where is the Bush disaster?”
There is disaster inside your little head.
Ethan,
I do not believe that guy. I saw that BBC report. It is very convenient for Pakistan to trot that guy out, just when they are being pressed to do more about finding Bin Laden and Mullah Omar.
That guy is a Pakistan plant, to try and get us to go chasing a wild goose in Afghanistan, and take the pressure off of them.
Let us get the guy away from them, and into international hands, and have him take a lie detector test. His story is absurd. He was telling about how he heard something from some one else, but he has no first hand knowledge.
One thing we know for certain is that Bin Laden is not allowing himself to be seen by a bunch of low ranking visitors like that guy claims.
Those Taliban types do not spill their guts after they are captured, and start talking freely to foreign journalists. Also, if there was a shred of value to it, why the hell would Pakistan be using this guy to tell his story to the whole world, including Bin Laden. Wouldn’t that be a top secret piece of vital information that would never be revealed, in order to avoid tipping of Bin Laden? It is a crock of shite, being planted by Pakistan.
we must not let Afghanistan again become a safe haven for terrorist training camps
While letting them flourish in other countries, including some that are countries in name only, that there’s no hope of invading them all?
This is not a long-term strategy for success if the plan is to deny Al Qaeda places to train. I’m not sure what the successful plan would be, but it won’t involve rolling invasions in a permanent world-wide war like the neoconservatives envision. They may as well drop their pretensions and just start calling for an emperor now.
Basically I feel it’s like this – We cannot let Al Qaeda and/or the Taliban, get ahold of one of Pskistan’s nukes.
That’s the difference with Afghanistan and the other places Al Qaeda hangs out and uses as bases.
And the reason this is such a problem now is that Bush let it deteriorate to this point – where things are dangerous if we walk away right now.
The threat to the Pakistan Nukes is from Inside Pakistan.
We can make Afghanistan the most secure region in the world, and it will still not make the Pakistan Nukes more secure from the Militants inside it’s border.
We have to stop falling for all those Red Herrings.
Iraq was supposed to make Afghanistan more secure. How did that work out. Now we are being told that we must win in Afghanistan in order to make Pakistan more secure.
If we want to make the nukes in Pakistan more secure from the bad guys in Pakistan, shouldn’t we be fighting them in Pakistan, instead of in a place where there are no nukes.
It is just another variation on the old WMD scare ploy.
“While letting them flourish in other countries, including some that are countries in name only, that there’s no hope of invading them all?”
Who’s suggesting that we let them flourish elsewhere? Who’s suggesting that we invade all of these other countries? Where’s your nuance?
We have attacked terrorists all over the world – the Philippines, Indonesia, Somalia – without invading. But we DID invade Afghanistan – at the request of congress. We are there – let’s finish the job. No one has ever suggested that invasion is the ONLY way to fight this threat.
Liam, that could certainly be true (that the guy is a Pak plant)… I hope they really follow it up as it seems they deem worthy. It is certainly imho worth checking ANY lead to OBL regardless of the source. But really in this piece I was most interested in the bit about the drones. I think he’d have less reason to lie about that. And certainly, if he was a Pak plant saying the AQ/Taliban in Pak have fled to Afghanistan — with the hopes of reducing drone attacks — that plight has failed as the NYT article showed that Obama is ramping up remote strikes in previously off-limits areas in Pak. All this points me to believe that we are not only disrupting and killing extremists, but even better, we are specifically making progress in the tribal areas.
“We can make Afghanistan the most secure region in the world, and it will still not make the Pakistan Nukes more secure from the Militants inside it’s border.”
I disagree there. Imho it’s all about the AQ Sandwich. Pressed AQ meat in between two slices of military pressure in Afgha and Pak respectively.
“Who’s suggesting that we invade all of these other countries?”
Right wing neo-cons, were you asleep these last eight years?
“No one has ever suggested that invasion is the ONLY way to fight this threat.”
Again, are you seriously this uninformed? Right wing neo-cons have been saying exactly that for the last eight years.
There’s a point, “sbj”, where your apparently feigned ignorance is just deliberate deception. Either you aren’t informed enough to speak on these subjects, “sbj”, or you are just a liar.
let’s finish the job
Because that, and that characterization in particular, is insanity itself.
News Ref – “There’s a point, “sbj”, where your apparently feigned ignorance is just deliberate deception. Either you aren’t informed enough to speak on these subjects, “sbj”, or you are just a liar.”
It’s sbj’s MO = this feigned disingenuousness.
Initially “the job” was to capture Bin Laden. Given that he’s in the border area, and doubtless on the Pakistan side of it, and given that he’s living in an area famous for a culture in which providing sanctuary is regarded as a sacred duty that you fail at peril of your own life, maintaining an army there now isn’t likely to result in any meaningful success, aside from saving face for a bit.
If saving face is how you want to finish, I can understand that, but if by finishing you mean to capture Bin Laden I am highly skeptical a military surge will do that.
Liam – you could be 100% correct about everything, but if you were president and acutely aware that 8 and a half years ago 3000 Americans were killed in a terrorist attack tied to Afghanistan, and your intell told you that the situation was dangerous because the extremists were on the verge of taking control, would you take that chance?
I’m not being snarky or argumentative – honest. I’m trying to see this from the viewpoint of someone inside the White House to the extent that I”m able.
“No one has ever suggested that invasion is the ONLY way to fight this threat.”
“Again, are you seriously this uninformed? Right wing neo-cons have been saying exactly that for the last eight years.”
Okay reefer – I will wait for your citation showing all right winger neocons claimed the ONLY way to combat terrorism was to INVADE every country where they train.
Even Bush said that fighting terrorism would be a multipronged effort that would not always involve the military. He was using drones in Pakistan operated by the CIA.
“Let’s finish the job”
“Because that, and that characterization in particular, is insanity itself.”
So I take it, then, that Obama, who wants to bring this to a successful conclusion, is insane?
“if by finishing you mean to capture Bin Laden”
By finishing I mean to reach a successful conclusion as outlined by our President in his recent speech. Have you read it yet? Did you ever read his original goals/strategy for Afghanistan?
Right wing neo-cons have been saying exactly that for the last eight years.
As I suggested, they’d be a lot more refreshing to listen to if they just fessed up and started demanding we do away with everything and get ourselves an emperor.
He was using drones in Pakistan operated by the CIA.
And torture chambers elsewhere.
Ethan,
I know that the drones are picking off a lot of the top bad guys in Pakistan. In fact I have some info on how we are now able to pinpoint the strikes to hone in on the houses where the bad guys are, but I will not divulge how it is being done. It is very accurate and effective. Of course if the bad guys have chosen to meet up among family members or in safe houses, then of course other members in the houses get killed, but they are not really innocent bystanders. They are part of the network that is running the safe houses.
Pakistan’s gov. is getting a lot of domestic heat over the attacks, so they might be looking for a way to get us off the scent, by diverting us into Afghanistan, instead of continuing our drone attacks in their border regions.
I would love if Pakistan and the USA are putting out a disinformation campaign, in order to make Bin Laden think that we are going off chasing him where he is not, and he just might let down his guard enough for us to nab him.
That is what I hope they are up to, but I am afraid that it really is just Pakistan playing there old double game.
Every time we raise a stink with Pakistan about they are not doing enough to capture the terrorists, shortly after they offered us up a token capture, or piece of information.
Recall how Hillary, on her recent visit openly complained about how she did not believe that the Pakistan authorities could not determine where Bin Laden is hiding out.
And sure enough, like always before, here comes Pakistan with this convenient Taliban secrets spiller, and of course Pakistan just had to make him available to Orla Guerian, to make sure that the Whole World, including Bin Laden got the word.
“Pakistan’s gov. is getting a lot of domestic heat over the attacks, so they might be looking for a way to get us off the scent, by diverting us into Afghanistan, instead of continuing our drone attacks in their border regions.”
The way I see it, the Pak govt is taking domestic heat over the drone attacks like Obama is taking heat from the Teabaggers.
Every extremist terrorist attack in Pak — basically a weekly event these days — is another week the Pak army stays in the tribal areas and another week we can knock off another 5-15 AQ/Taliban by drones.
Obv you’re right to question the legitimacy of this character, what with the sources being Pakistani “security official” and former CIA. But imho there’s enough THERE there to make it an interesting bit of news, worth following.
My last comment on this – since I’m not deep in the argument over what the situation is from the standpoint of people who have no access to intel (just keeding y’all) -
The very last thing I want to hear people say is: Obama let the extremists take over in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
I’m upstairs for good now.
Perspectives from both sides amaze me. As I recall, this was AMERICA’s war on 9/12/01. What the hell happened?
What the hell happened?
Eight years of arrogance at our allies, “planning” so fanciful it can only be put in quotes, war crimes, dismissal of the rule of law, and general incompetence & intransigence, mixed with hubris so great it would be terrific comedy if it had been put on stage instead of actually enacted in real life.
In what cave have you been hibernating for the last eight years?
The very last thing I want to hear people say is: Obama let the extremists take over in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
That’s the one thing you can be certain the GOP will say, no matter what the outcome of Obama’s decisions is.
Congrats Greg. You’ve lead the pack with your poor framing earlier. You must be so proud of your beltway crowd cred. Never mind the clu$terfvck by shrub’s admin for 8 years.
@oddjob: “… mixed with hubris so great it would be terrific comedy if it had been put on stage instead of actually enacted in real life.”
You know, I’m a playwright, and that sounds like a good idea.