As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

Woodward: Obama Wanted Out of Afghanistan

President Obama was “urgently” looking for a way out of Afghanistan last year and demanded an exit plan advisers wouldn’t give him, according to Bob Woodward’s new book, “Obama’s Wars.” The book has all sort of inside info on Obama’s deliberations, including tensions between Obama’s civilian advisers and the military.

The Washington Post has some details which you can read here.

UPDATE: The White House doesn’t dispute the book, spins back to the Washington Post: “The President comes across in the [Afghanistan] review and throughout the decision making process as a Commander in Chief who is analytical, strategic, and decisive, with a broad view of history, national security, and his role,” says a senior administration official.

The book will be released September 27. You can pre-order a copy from Amazon by clicking on the link below.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on LinkedInEmail this to someone

11 Responses to Woodward: Obama Wanted Out of Afghanistan

  1. You will notice just from the cursory comments made so far, that:

    A. Obama nixed talk of “victory.”
    B. Obama never oriented advisors to a mission-specific goal;
    C. Obama’s NS advisors were against Afghanistan while he supported it;

    Once again, a President, White House and National Security Staff that are voting present . . .

  2. There’s no surprise that the O administration had/has conflicting ideology about the wars. O appears to make military decisions on personal political considerations and has no background in foreign or military affairs.
    The surprise is allowing Woodward access to anyone, everyone without any expectation of a negative description of the actors in the decision making arena. Surely, they weren’t naive to think he was planning a to write a best-seller by praising O and his people; there’s no market for a puff piece.
    The other surprise is that O’s people were willing to expose the inner conflicts that turn personal and into the CYA mode.
    Mr Woodward shouldn’t be looking for any invites from the WH in the near (or far) future.

  3. I oppose both wars, as I have said–and fully support our troops, which are the president’s tool to protect our country…he must use it wisely. I am mixed on whether I consider this man to be “my” president. I guess, literally, he is.

  4. Star, good point.

    We are, essentially, re-building two Islamic Republics with American money, labor and lives. And when were done, we will be thanked with millions funnelled to Islamic terrorists. Before and after we liberated Kuwait, the Kuwait government spent millions funding Hamas, Fatah, and even possibly Al Queda.

    Pull the troops out — let the Arabs rebuild both countries.

  5. This war thing seems to futile to me…the “enemy” lives there and is staying there. These yelling, upset people hate us. I used to wonder what it would be like to try to pass everyday through a checkpoint near my house in Chandler AZ–manned by people who did not speak English, had guns, might shoot my sister’s car car full of holes and kill my family by mistake or if my sister pulled away in fear ( I can’t drive). What also made it personal, for me, for some reason, was early on in Iraq when I learned they were shipping over TONS of hundred dollar bills–pallets of them–which then melted away into someplace as walking around money, bribes, graft, I don’t even know. My family was hurting for even one hundred dollar bill! It made me cry, It went downhill from there for almost a decade now.

  6. re Update: what else could they do but embrace the book and push the spin button(and the MSM goes round and round).
    We have a CIC who thinks of war as a golf game; 18 rounds and it’s over.
    Only an idiot or an incompetent would tell the enemy that we’re leaving at such and such a date. O’s Generals have said as much (in a politic way) insisting that a “exit date” gives our enemies an advantage.

  7. The question that we should ask ourselves is: When did America become pro-Arab and why?

    The reason I beleive were in Iraq and Afghanistan is based on the actions of one very powerful man: James A. Baker III. Jim Baker’s viciously anti-Semitic / pro-Arab stance when he was made SECSTATE by Reagan in 1985 is now well documented in both print and online. Baker was another elite, rich, country-club Republican whose hatred of Israel was masked by a Texas twang and cowboy boots (my apologies) and because he ran four major Presidential Campaigns since the 1970’s.

    Baker’s anti-Semitic credentials were clarified when he wrote a senior thesis at Princeton University, extolling British anti-Semitism in the Middle East under Ernest Bevin just after the Second World War:

    http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53280

    It should come as no suprise that Mr. Baker is now one of several lead counsels for the Saudi Kingdom with his law group (Baker Botts, LCC) in a $1,000,000,000,000 lawsuit waged by 9-11 survivors and family members:

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=James_Addison_Baker_III

    He’s also known as James “Fu-k the Jews they wont vote for us anyway” Baker and is listed on Pamela Geller’s website Atlast Shrugged 2000:

    http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2006/12/james_fuck_the_.html

    Another angle from RedState.com:

    http://www.redstate.com/jeffdunetz/2010/03/14/usisrael-relations-at-worst-point-since-james-baker-said-f-the-jews-they-wont-vote-for-us-anyway/

    Thanks Republicans!

    Thanks Mr. Baker!

  8. Keith, I was sitting in church in the mid 80’s (when Reagan was the height of his powers) and my pastor (extremely pro-Israel) made an off the cuff comment about James Baker and anti-Semitism. Ten years later I began studying up on Baker and realized he was one of the reasons we provided Saudi Arabia (and other Islamic nations) with arms, aircraft and weapons systems while “insisting” [ translation: bribing and extorting ] Israel “stop her building projects on the West Bank.” Queen Noor makes some very telling comments in her book, Leap of Faith.

    Baker stated earlier this year that Obama had “caved in” to Israeli demands for more settlements in connection to the Iraq Study Group (ISG). Read the comments from the “Getting to the Territorial Endgame of an Israeli-Palestinian Peace Settlement” and Baker’s remarks:

    http://www.lobelog.com/baker-accuses-obama-of-caving-in-on-israel-palestine/

    Baker is more severe in his criticism of Israel than Obama (which shocked the hell of out of a lot of people) when he blasted Obama for “not fighting back against Israel.” Baker’s love affair with the Saudi’s, oil money, the PLO and he and Frank Carlucci’s link to the Bin Laden Group would make for a good documentary. This connection stinks to high heaven but its sad no one on the right will touch it.

    Jim Baker is the symbol of what is wrong within the Republican Party: rich, elite, “educated” cocktail-country-club Republicans who would, if the price was right, sell Israel, lock, stock and magen david, to the devil if the price were right.

    • Perhaps it’s because of the closeness that previous administrations had to the Saudis that we were so shocked – I know I was – to find out that they’re funding the most virulent form of Islamic radicalism and schooling all around the world. Right down to anti-Israeli textbooks in the Islamic academy in northern Virginia where I live, if I remember correctly.

  9. One thing I learned from my yrs in the aerospace industry and in DC is there is a whole world underneath what you see in Washington. We never have the real story–or the whole story.