November 23, 2014 1:00 pm -

In an unheralded and under-reported move, President Obama has authorized a more expansive military mission in Afghanistan.


Mr. Obama’s order allows American forces to carry out missions against the Taliban and other militant groups threatening American troops or the Afghan government, a broader mission than the president described to the public earlier this year, according to several administration, military and congressional officials with knowledge of the decision. The new authorization also allows American jets, bombers and drones to support Afghan troops on combat missions.

U.S. Troops to Leave Afghanistan by End of 2016MAY 27, 2014
In an announcement in the White House Rose Garden in May, Mr. Obama said that the American military would have no combat role in Afghanistan next year, and that the missions for the 9,800 troops remaining in the country would be limited to training Afghan forces and to hunting the “remnants of Al Qaeda.”

The decision to change that mission was the result of a lengthy and heated debate that laid bare the tension inside the Obama administration between two often-competing imperatives: the promise Mr. Obama made to end the war in Afghanistan, versus the demands of the Pentagon that American troops be able to successfully fulfill their remaining missions in the country…

Mr. Obama’s decision, made during a White House meeting in recent weeks with his senior national security advisers, came over the objection of some of his top civilian aides, who argued that American lives should not be put at risk next year in any operations against the Taliban — and that they should have only a narrow counterterrorism mission against Al Qaeda.

But the military pushed back, and generals both at the Pentagon and in Afghanistan urged Mr. Obama to define the mission more broadly to allow American troops to attack the Taliban, the Haqqani network and other militants if intelligence revealed that the extremists were threatening American forces in the country.

The president’s order under certain circumstances would also authorize American airstrikes to support Afghan military operations in the country and ground troops to occasionally accompany Afghan troops on operations against the Taliban.[su_csky_ad]

D.B. Hirsch
D.B. Hirsch is a political activist, news junkie, and retired ad copy writer and spin doctor. He lives in Brooklyn, New York.

11 responses to Obama Extends Combat In Afghanistan

  1. mea_mark November 23rd, 2014 at 1:16 pm

    Real world situations sometimes dictate actions we don’t like. I would assume that the POTUS didn’t want to do this but sees this as a necessity to ensure Americans lives. This is the presidents job and I hope he executes it appropriately and gives it all due thought.

    • Obewon November 23rd, 2014 at 2:04 pm

      As al-Qaeda merges with ISIS any regional instability becomes a power vacuum quickly filled by any opposing world peace. Having just 9,800 U.S. troops remaining in Afghanistan isn’t like 2 million U.S. soldiers deployed in Vietnam.

  2. StoneyCurtisll November 23rd, 2014 at 1:33 pm

    This song was playing in the back ground in 1969..(Vietnam)
    And they are still hearing in Afghanistan today..
    Iggy Pop and the Stooges..

  3. Foundryman November 23rd, 2014 at 2:37 pm

    I look at all these states AG’s, sheriff’s, national political party (republican) and individuals filing lawsuit after lawsuit against Obama and I’m wondering what if the Dems start filing suits against Cheney/Bush for getting us into this trillion dollar mess with no way out?
    The republicans are doing all they can to make us a laughingstock, why not go the distance?
    Because of Cheney/Bush bungling this from the beginning, we are left with little choice today, they should be held accountable.

    • Spirit of America November 24th, 2014 at 10:11 am

      POTUS himself called afghan war the just war.

  4. Spirit of America November 23rd, 2014 at 3:06 pm

    “…allows American forces to carry out missions against the Taliban and
    other militant groups threatening American troops or the Afghan
    For good or for bad, due to this phrase it means the mission hasn’t changed at all, just the numbers involved.
    However, the change mission/change back to mission does/did have political aspects.

  5. cookietester November 23rd, 2014 at 3:36 pm

    Because freedom, I guess, or something…

  6. Kick Frenzy November 23rd, 2014 at 4:16 pm


    I hate war and wish no country ever had a need (or want) for sending children, men and women into battle.
    However, this sounds like a good decision that will help prevent an outcome similar to Iraq.
    It won’t help anyone if the Afghanistan forces just drop weapons/armor/vehicles when a scary group comes knocking.

  7. neworleans878 November 23rd, 2014 at 6:03 pm

    We never learn, do we?

    Get out. GET OUT NOW!

    We can’t even save ourselves.,,,how can we save others?

    • Cosmic_Surfer November 23rd, 2014 at 10:35 pm

      Perpetual war perpetuated by perpetual war mongers….all while the center and right of center still deludes themselves with “Obama is not a neocon”

  8. fahvel November 24th, 2014 at 10:44 am

    and these young soldiers are going to die for what? What are they protecting?