Originally Posted by Candace de Russy

New Army surveys, reports the Wall Street Journal, show that morale has fallen sharply among soldiers fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan and confirm an unusually high suicide in their ranks.

Perhaps this has something to do with doubts about their commander-in-chief's commitment to win this war by standing staunchly with them in spirit and providing the necessary troop levels and other resources. With fatalities and injuries surging among them, the president's prolonged and frazzled indecision on how to wage this struggle must leave these soldiers with a sense of being cast adrift in limbo, if not hell itself. Having first, very belatedly, consulted directly on strategy with the man in charge of the war, General Stanley McChrystal, President Obama then proceeded for months to pore over, appear to accept, throw out, and then start all over examining, various options.

In an act of deep interpersonal significance, as Claudia Rosett observes, the president has not bothered to pay a visit to Afghanistan to bolster morale. Yet, to buck up his foreign policy credentials, he managed to make a campaign stop there while running for president. Once elected, he found time to extend a friendly hand to Muslims in Cairo, lobby for Chicago's Olympics bid, vacation in Martha's Vineyard, and have a "date night" in New York City with his wife. Soon he'll be off to Oslo to accept a Nobel Peace Prize, which he has done nothing yet to deserve, in Afghanistan, at home, or elsewhere in the world.

It could also have not done much to fortify our soldiers to learn of the president's obfuscations and omissions in his recent Fort Hood tribute to their slaughtered 13 comrades. He could not bring himself, as Michael Goodwin and others noted, to call the massacre what it clearly was: treason and terrorism, visited by an Army officer on his defenseless comrades. While failing to acknowledge that Nidal Malik Hasan had shouted, "Al lahu akbar" (God is great) as he fired his weapons, the president also commented, "No just and loving God looks upon them with favor." The president declared the nation to be "in a time of war," but then downgraded the killings to the level of a mere "tragedy." He alluded to 9/11, warning that "the same extremists who killed nearly 3,000 Americans continue to endanger America," but neglected to say that the same militant Islamism led to the recent slaughter. He was silent about the shooter's contacts with al Qaeda, but stated, "No faith justifies these murderous and craven acts."

Rosett urges the president to betake himself without further delay to Afghanistan and deliver "a soaring speech" to our troops, such as to "display for their benefit and the world's, that as commander-in-chief of these men and women who are risking their lives under his command, he is not AWOL."

But one wonders just how soaring such a message could possibly be, coming from one who cannot muster the leadership to decide how, and indeed if at all, to proceed on their battleground. So geared to mollify his leftist political base has this president's every action seemed so far in his tenure that our courageous soldiers have every reason to fear themselves but chess pieces in his long game of political calculation.

Can the hearts of our troops yet be touched by a commander-in-chief who has for so long failed to show his face, and left them alone, on the battleground? By now they, like many among us, must acknowledge that this is the same commander-in-chief who, during his bid for the presidency cynically - then, too, for rank political reasons -- trumpeted the war in Afghanistan to be the most "necessary" one in the fight against terrorism.

But, above all, the drag that this president exerts on our soldiers comes from his unwillingness even forthrightly to name the enemy with whom they are locked in deadly combat.

If President Obama's lack of leadership and alienation from our troops continue, he may go down in history as America's great demoralizer-in-chief. But, vastly more momentous than his place in history, his failure to lead this nation, and the world, during these hazardous times may well precipitate a series of crises that will plague us for generations.

Originally Posted by Dozer523 (Post 296723)

You are a busy guy, Howard.
4 months, 241 posts, 29 (>10%) new threads.

Originally Posted by ryno (Post 296739)

I think fear of making a mistake is paralyzing the man's decision-making abilities, if he has any. He does not want to lose the popularity contest that he does not realize he has already lost. A good leader has to be willing to lay his ass on the line and take responsibility if things go wrong. Alternatively, you could always just continually blame your predecessor for the problems you are too inept to handle. :p

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant (Post 296744)

I feel a deep sorrow for my leaderless brothers in arms standing in harm's way for an administration/government/ country that doesn't give a shit. I have little doubt military morale is bad and will only get worse.

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant (Post 296744)

Embrace socialism, it's on its way.

Originally Posted by Billy L-bach (Post 296814)

without a good fight?

There will be no fight: it will be subtle and slowly ushered in right under everyone's nose until mainstream Amerika wakes up one morning and realizes its too late.

...just my two cents.