PRESIDENT TRUMP: Thank you very much. Thank
you. Please be seated. Vice president Pence,
Secretary of State Tillerson, members of the
cabinet, General Dunford, Deputy Secretary
Shanahan, and Colonel Duggan. Most
especially, thank you to the men and women
of Fort Meyer and every member of the United
States military at home and abroad. We send
our thoughts and prayers to the families of
our brave sailors who were injured and lost
after a tragic collision at sea as well as
to those conducting the search and recovery
efforts.
I am here tonight to lay out our path
forward in Afghanistan and South Asia. But
before I provide the details of our new
strategy, I want to say a few words to the
service members here with us tonight. To
those watching from their posts, and to all
Americans listening at home. Since the
founding of our republic, our country has
produced a special class of heroes whose
selflessness, courage, and resolve is
unmatched in human history.
American patriots from every generation have
given their last breath on the battlefield -
for our nation and for our freedom. Through
their lives, and though their lives - were
cut short, in their deeds they achieved
total immortality. By following the heroic
example of those who fought to preserve our
republic, we can find the inspiration our
country needs to unify, to heal and to
remain one nation under God. The men and
women of our military operate as one team,
with one shared mission and one shared sense
of purpose.
They transcend every line of race,
ethnicity, creed, and color to serve
together and sacrifice together in
absolutely perfect cohesion. That is because
all service members are brothers and
sisters. They are all part of the same
family. It’s called the American family.
They take the same oath, fight for the same
flag, and live according to the same law.
They are bound together by common purpose,
mutual trust, and selfless devotion to our
nation and to each other. The soldier
understands what we as a nation too often
forget, that a wound inflicted upon on a
single member of our community is a wound
inflicted upon us all. When one part of
America hurts, we all hurt.
And when one citizen suffers an injustice,
we all suffer together. Loyalty to our
nation demands loyalty to one another. Love
for America requires love for all of its
people. When we open our hearts to
patriotism, there is no room for prejudice,
no place for bigotry, and no tolerance for
hate. The young men and women we sent to
fight our wars abroad deserve to return to a
country that is not at war with itself at
home. We cannot remain a force for peace in
the world if we are not at peace with each
other.
As we send our bravest to defeat our enemies
overseas, and we will always win, let us
find the courage to heal our divisions
within. Let us make a simple promise to the
men and women we ask to fight in our name,
that when they return home from battle, they
will find a country that has renewed the
sacred bonds of love and loyalty that unite
us together as one.
Thanks to the vigilance and skill of the
American military, and of our many allies
throughout the world, horrors on the scale
of September 11, and nobody can ever forget
that, have not been repeated on our shores.
But we must acknowledge the reality I am
here to talk about tonight, that nearly 16
years after September 11 attacks, after the
extraordinary sacrifice of blood and
treasure, the American people are weary of
war without victory.
Nowhere is this more evident than with the
war in Afghanistan, the longest war in
American history - 17 years. I share the
American people's frustration. I also share
their frustration over a foreign policy that
has spent too much time, energy, money, and
most importantly, lives trying to rebuild
countries in our own image instead of
pursuing our security interests above all
other considerations. That is why shortly
after my inauguration, I directed Secretary
of Defense Mattis and my national security
team to undertake a comprehensive review of
all strategic options in Afghanistan and
South Asia.
My original instinct was to pull out, and
historically I like following my instincts.
But all my life, I have heard that decisions
are much different when you sit behind the
desk in the oval office. In other words,
when you are president of the United States.
So I studied Afghanistan in great detail and
from every conceivable angle. After many
meetings over many months, we held our final
meeting last Friday at Camp David with my
cabinet and generals to complete our
strategy. I arrived at three fundamental
conclusion about America's core interests in
Afghanistan.
First, our nation must seek an honorable and
enduring outcome worthy of the tremendous
sacrifices that have been made, especially
the sacrifices of lives. The men and women
who serve our nation in combat deserve a
plan for victory. They deserve the tools
they need and the trust they have earned to
fight and to win. Second, the consequences
of a rapid exit are both predictable and
unacceptable. 9/11, the worst terrorist
attack in our history, was planned and
directed from Afghanistan because that
country by a government that gave comfort
and shelter to terrorists. A hasty
withdrawal would create a vacuum that
terrorists, including ISIS and al Qaeda,
would instantly fill, just as happened
before September 11. And as we know, in
2011, America hastily and mistakenly
withdrew from Iraq.
As a result, our hard-won gains slipped back
into the hands of terrorists enemies. Our
soldiers watched as cities they had fought
for bled to liberate and won were occupied
by a terrorist group called ISIS. The vacuum
we created by leaving too soon gave safe
haven for ISIS to spread, to grow, recruit
and launch attacks. We cannot repeat in
Afghanistan the mistake our leaders made in
Iraq.
Third and finally, I concluded that the
security threats we face in Afghanistan and
the broader region are immense. Today, 20
U.S.-designated foreign terrorist
organizations are active in Afghanistan and
Pakistan. The highest concentration in any
region anywhere in the world. For its part,
Pakistan often gives safe haven to agents of
chaos, violence, and terror. The threat is
worse because Pakistan and India are two
nuclear-armed states, whose tense relations
threat to spiral into conflict, and that
could happen.
No one denies that we have inherited a
challenging and troubling situation in
Afghanistan and South Asia, but we do not
have the luxury of going back in time and
making different or better decisions.
When I became president, I was given a bad
and very complex hand, but I fully knew what
I was getting into. Big and intricate
problems. But one way or another, these
problems will be solved. I am a problem
solver. And in the end, we will win. We must
address the reality of the world as it
exists right now, the threats we face, and
the confronting of all of the problems of
today, an extremely predictable consequences
of a hasty withdrawal. We need look no
further than last week's vile, vicious
attack in Barcelona to understand that
terror groups will stop at nothing to commit
the mass murder of innocent men, women, and
children.
You saw it for yourself. Horrible. As I
outlined in my speech in Saudi Arabia, three
months ago, America and our partners are
committed to stripping terrorists of their
territory, cutting off their funding and
exposing the false allure of their evil
ideology. Terrorists who slaughter innocent
people will find no glory in this life or
the next. They are nothing but thugs and
criminals and predators, and, that’s right,
losers. Working alongside our allies, we
will break their will, dry up their
recruitment, keep them from crossing our
borders, and yes, we will defeat them, and
we will defeat them handily. In Afghanistan
and Pakistan, America's interests are clear.
We must stop the resurgence of safe havens
that enable terrorists to threaten America.
And we must prevent nuclear weapons and
materials from coming into the hands of
terrorists and being used against us or
anywhere in the world, for that matter. But
to prosecute this war, we will learn from
history.
As a result of our comprehensive review,
American strategy in Afghanistan and South
Asia will change dramatically in the
following ways: A core pillar of our new
strategy is a shift from a time-based
approach to one based on conditions. I’ve
said it many times, how counterproductive it
is for the United States to announce in
advance the dates we intend to begin or end
military operations.
We will not talk about numbers of troops or
our plans for further military activities.
Conditions on the ground, not arbitrary
timetables, will guide our strategy from now
on. America's enemies must never know our
plans or believe they can wait us out. I
will not say when we are going to attack,
but attack we will. Another fundamental
pillar of our new strategy is the
integration of all instruments of American
power, diplomatic, economic, and military,
toward a successful outcome. Someday, after
an effective military effort, perhaps it
will be possible to have a political
settlement that includes elements of the
Taliban and Afghanistan, but nobody knows if
or when that will ever happen. America will
continue its support for the Afghan
government and the Afghan military as they
confront the Taliban in the field.
Ultimately, it is up to the people of
Afghanistan to take ownership of their
future, to govern their society, and to
achieve an everlasting peace. We are a
partner and a friend, but we will not
dictate to the Afghan people how to live or
how to govern their own complex society. We
are not nation building again. We are
killing terrorists.
The next pillar of our new strategy is to
change the approach in how to deal with
Pakistan. We can no longer be silent about
Pakistan's safe havens for terrorist
organizations, the Taliban, and other groups
that pose a threat to the region and beyond.
Pakistan has much to gain from partnering
with our effort in Afghanistan. It has much
to lose by continuing to harbor criminals
and terrorists. In the past, Pakistan has
been a valued partner. Our militaries have
worked together against common enemies. The
Pakistani people have suffered greatly from
terrorism and extremism. We recognize those
contributions and those sacrifices, but
Pakistan has also sheltered the same
organizations that try every single day to
kill our people. We have been paying
Pakistan billions and billions of dollars,
at the same time they are housing the same
terrorists that we are fighting. But that
will have to change. And that will change
immediately. No partnership can survive a
country's harboring of militants and
terrorists who target U.S. service members
and officials. It is time for Pakistan to
demonstrate its commitment to civilization,
order, and to peace.
Another critical part of the South Asia
strategy or America is to further develop
its strategic partnership with India, the
world's largest democracy and a key security
and economic harbor of the United States. We
appreciate India's important contributions
to stability in Afghanistan, but India makes
billions of dollars in trade with the United
States, and we want them to help us more
with Afghanistan, especially in the area of
economic assistance and development. We are
committed to pursuing our shared objectives
for peace and security in South Asia and the
broader Indo-Pacific region.
Finally, my administration will ensure that
you, the brave defenders of the American
people, will have the necessary tools and
rules of engagement to make this strategy
work and work effectively and work quickly.
I have already lifted restrictions the
previous administration placed on our war
fighters that prevented the secretary of
defense and our commanders in the field from
fully and swiftly waging battle against the
enemy. Micromanagement from Washington,
D.C., does not win battles. They are won in
the field drawing upon the judgment and
expertise of wartime commanders and
frontline soldiers, acting in real time with
real authority and with a clear mission to
defeat the enemy. That is why we will also
expand authority for American armed forces
to target the terrorists and criminal
networks that sow violence and chaos
throughout Afghanistan.
The killers need to know they have nowhere
to hide, that no place is beyond the reach
of American might and American arms.
Retribution will be fast and powerful. As we
lift restrictions and expand authorities in
the field, we are already seeing dramatic
results in the campaign to defeat ISIS,
including the liberation of Mosul in Iraq.
Since my inauguration, we have achieved
record-breaking success in that regard. We
will also maximize sanctions and other
financial and law enforcement actions
against these networks to eliminate their
ability to export terror. When America
commits its warriors to battle, we must
ensure they have every weapon to apply
swift, decisive, and overwhelming force.
Our troops will fight to win. We will fight
to win. From now on, victory will have a
clear definition. — attacking our enemies,
obliterating ISIS, crushing al Qaeda,
preventing the Taliban from taking over
Afghanistan, and stopping mass terror
attacks against America before they emerge.
We will ask our NATO allies and global
partners to support our new strategy, with
additional troop and funding increases in
line with our own. We are confident they
will.
Since taking office, I have made clear that
our allies and partners must contribute much
more money to our collective defense, and
they have done so. In this struggle, the
heaviest burden will continue to be borne by
the good people of Afghanistan and their
courageous armed forces.
As the prime minister of Afghanistan has
promised, we are going to participate in
economic development to help defray the cost
of this war to us. Afghanistan is fighting
to defend and secure their country against
the same enemies who threaten us. The
stronger the Afghan security forces become,
the less we will have to do. Afghans will
secure and build their own nation and define
their own future. We want them to succeed.
But we will no longer use American military
might to construct democracies in faraway
lands or try to rebuild other countries in
our own image. Those days are now over.
Instead, we will work with allies and
partners to protect our shared interests.
We are not asking others to change their way
of life but to pursue common goals that
allow our children to live better and safer
lives. This principled realism will guide
our decisions moving forward. Military power
alone will not bring peace to Afghanistan or
stop the terrorist threat arising in that
country.
But strategically-applied force aims to
create the conditions for a political
process to achieve a lasting peace. America
will work with the Afghan government as long
as we see determination and progress.
However, our commitment is not unlimited,
and our support is not a blank check. The
government of Afghanistan must carry their
share of the military, political, and
economic burden. The American people expect
to see real reforms, real progress, and real
results.
Trump’s Base Goes Ballistic Over His ‘Unlimited
War’
The president has escalated fights in six
countries. Now his supporters are wondering what
happened to ‘America First.’
By Lachlan Markay & Sam Stein
August
22, 2017 "Information
Clearing House"
- President
Donald Trump acknowledged on Monday night that
the
new Afghanistan strategy
he unveiled is a reversal of his long-held
objection to the very idea of having a U.S.
military presence in the country.
But in announcing
a ramp up of U.S. forces
with no defined timeline for their departure,
Trump tailored and mangled and obscured the
policy to such a degree so as to make it both
difficult to understand and—he hopes—palatable
to his base. At one point, he asserted that his
strategy was to have no publicly-stated strategy
at all.
“We
will not talk about numbers of troops or our
plans for further military activities,” Trump
told a crowd of servicemen at Virginia’s Fort
Myer on Monday.
President’s have made abrupt foreign policy
reversals before, often breaking with campaign
pledges when presented with a new set of
geopolitical realities. Trump’s reversal stands
out not just for the outright vehemence with
which he previously argued that America needed
to put an end to its 16-year-long war—Trump has
called for total US withdrawal from Afghanistan
and for handing the country over to an army of
mercenaries—but also because of what it says
about his foreign policy at large. In the seven
months since taking office, Trump has expanded
military operations in
Yemen,
Syria,
Iraq,
Somalia,
Libya and, now,
Afghanistan. And that’s in addition to an
escalated nuclear standoff with North Korea.
And so,
when pitching the notion that the time had come
to enlarge America’s military presence, the
president used a variety of different selling
points to re-frame the context. This was, he
stressed, an agenda based on counter-terrorism
principles and devoting American blood and
treasure purely to the country’s first-order
military interests.
"We are
not nation-building again,” he said. “We are
killing terrorists.”
It was
“America First” rhetoric plastered atop a
military-oriented interventionist policy. And it
was done, ostensibly, to ensure that Trump’s
base, disillusioned with decades of
Republican-led foreign policy adventurism, heard
someone who remained skeptical.
Alas,
many didn’t.
Who's going to pay for it? What is our
measure of success? We didn't win with
100K troops. How will we win with 4,000
more?
https://t.co/XHj9GpJzaZ
“Why did we even have an election?”
wondered Mike
Cernovich, a popular far-right internet media
personality generally supportive of Trump. He
mockingly tweeted
a photo of a flak jacket-clad Jared Kushner, the
president’s senior adviser and son-in-law,
during a trip to Afghanistan this year, with the
caption “General Jared.” In
another tweet,
he wrote, “Congratulations to President
McMaster!” a derisive reference to White House
National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster, who
pressed the president to boost troop levels in
Afghanistan.
The
pushback that came after Trump’s speech was
apparent in the process leading up to it as
well. Inside the White House, the draw-down and
ramp-up camps battled over the president’s plan,
in an internal debate that contributed to the
departure last week of White House chief
strategist Steve Bannon, the West Wing’s most
vocal critic of escalation in Afghanistan.
Bannon
returned to Breitbart News,
the prominent right-wing website that has
favorably covered Trump for years. And in the
run-up to Trump’s speech on Monday evening, as
details of the troop surge announcement trickled
out, Breitbart’s coverage ranged from skeptical
to hostile. “America First? With Steve Bannon
Out, Globalists Push For More War Abroad” read
one headline.
No
Advertising
- No
Government
Grants
-
This
Is
Independent
Media
After
Trump’s speech concluded, the lead story on
Breitbart’s homepage braced readers for
“UNLIMITED WAR.” (The site later took that
headline down).
Bannon, Cernovich, and other elements of Trump’s
less interventionist political base hoped for
foreign policy more in tune with the president’s
pre-White House rhetoric, when he
dubbed the war
in Afghanistan “a total disaster” and “a
complete waste” and repeatedly called on
President Barack Obama to withdraw U.S. forces
completely. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), one of the
few elected Republicans to echo this hope, was
critical of Trump even before he spoke.
"The mission in Afghanistan has lost its purpose
and I think it is a terrible idea to send any
more troops into that war,” Paul said in a
statement.
In a
rare bit of self-reflection, Trump explained
that the reason he changed his tune on
Afghanistan was precisely because of the weight
of his office. “[A]ll my life I have heard
decisions are much different when you sit behind
the desk in the Oval Office,” he said. And he
tried to couch the shift by repeatedly invoking
the possibility of another attack homeland.
Twice, Trump referenced the attacks from
September 11, 2001. “A hasty withdrawal would
create a vacuum that terrorists—including ISIS
and Al Qaeda—would instantly fill,” he said.
But
instead of placating his base, Trump ended up
drawing plaudits from an unfamiliar crowd.
Sen. Marco Rubio, a GOP defense hawk and 2016
campaign rival, defended Trump’s apparent
reversal. The president “has made a decision
based on information now available to him in
office & on advice of wide array of experts,”
Rubio
wrote on Twitter.
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), one of the more
pro-interventionist voices in the GOP and
someone who has repeatedly butted heads with
Trump in recent weeks, called the new policy “a
big step in the right direction.” Trump, he
added, “is now moving us well beyond the prior
administration's failed strategy of merely
postponing defeat.”
And
then there was Marc Thiessen, one of the more
prominent neoconservatives in media and a former
speechwriter to George W. Bush, a man whose
foreign policy record Trump has called an
unmitigated disaster. Reacting to Trump’s pledge
that U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan be hinged
on “conditions on the ground, not arbitrary
timetables” Thiessen wrote: “How many times did
I write that?”
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)