Published: Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Reps. Larsen, Inslee split on Obama's plans for war in Afghanistan
The two Democratic congressmen representing Snohomish County disagreed Tuesday on whether beefing up the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan is the right move to thwart terrorists operating in that country.
The differing views of U.S. Reps. Jay Inslee and Rick Larsen expose the challenge faced by President Barack Obama in garnering public and political support for sending in 30,000 more troops at a cost of about $30 billion a year.
“I have very serious concerns about this proposal. I just don’t think it is headed in the right direction,” Inslee said following the speech at the United States Military Academy at West Point.
“I don’t have a magic solution for the difficulties in Afghanistan,” said Inslee, whose district runs from Mukilteo south to the county line. “I believe there is a strategy that will be much less punishing to our troops and our treasury.”
Rep. Rick Larsen, D-Wash., who serves Everett and the north part of the county, lauded Obama for reminding the public of the “national security interests” in keeping terrorists from continuing to operate in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
It’s why the U.S. went there in 2001 following the attacks of Sept. 11.
“The real debate is whether or not Afghanistan can stand on its own and not become a safe haven for al-Qaida and in my estimation the answer is no,” he said.
Rep. Dave Reichert, R-Wash., agreed with Obama’s decision.
“With reserved optimism, I am pleased the president has heeded the advice of our military leaders to send additional troops needed to accomplish our mission,” he said in a statement. “This is a complex issue, and I believe it is in America’s vital security interest to win.”
He disagreed with announcing a timetable for withdrawal.
It sends the signal that the U.S. is not fighting to win “but that we are only biding our time and looking for a way out,” he said.
U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., expressed some concerns in a prepared statement.
“I still have many questions about the cost of this effort. I am concerned about the toll of this war in lives and in dollars,” the statement read. “While I still have many questions about the specifics, the President made a compelling and responsible case for redoubling the fight against terrorism in Afghanistan in order to protect the American people and bring our troops home.”
Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., watched the speech and would comment in detail after learning more about the plan, said her spokesman, John Diamond.
Aside from the military policy, she continues to push a bill to boost economic development in Afghanistan and Pakistan where extremists have thrived in part because of those nations’ poverty, he said.
Reporter Jerry Cornfield: 360-352-8623; jcornfield@heraldnet.com.
The differing views of U.S. Reps. Jay Inslee and Rick Larsen expose the challenge faced by President Barack Obama in garnering public and political support for sending in 30,000 more troops at a cost of about $30 billion a year.
“I have very serious concerns about this proposal. I just don’t think it is headed in the right direction,” Inslee said following the speech at the United States Military Academy at West Point.
“I don’t have a magic solution for the difficulties in Afghanistan,” said Inslee, whose district runs from Mukilteo south to the county line. “I believe there is a strategy that will be much less punishing to our troops and our treasury.”
Rep. Rick Larsen, D-Wash., who serves Everett and the north part of the county, lauded Obama for reminding the public of the “national security interests” in keeping terrorists from continuing to operate in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
It’s why the U.S. went there in 2001 following the attacks of Sept. 11.
“The real debate is whether or not Afghanistan can stand on its own and not become a safe haven for al-Qaida and in my estimation the answer is no,” he said.
Rep. Dave Reichert, R-Wash., agreed with Obama’s decision.
“With reserved optimism, I am pleased the president has heeded the advice of our military leaders to send additional troops needed to accomplish our mission,” he said in a statement. “This is a complex issue, and I believe it is in America’s vital security interest to win.”
He disagreed with announcing a timetable for withdrawal.
It sends the signal that the U.S. is not fighting to win “but that we are only biding our time and looking for a way out,” he said.
U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., expressed some concerns in a prepared statement.
“I still have many questions about the cost of this effort. I am concerned about the toll of this war in lives and in dollars,” the statement read. “While I still have many questions about the specifics, the President made a compelling and responsible case for redoubling the fight against terrorism in Afghanistan in order to protect the American people and bring our troops home.”
Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., watched the speech and would comment in detail after learning more about the plan, said her spokesman, John Diamond.
Aside from the military policy, she continues to push a bill to boost economic development in Afghanistan and Pakistan where extremists have thrived in part because of those nations’ poverty, he said.
Reporter Jerry Cornfield: 360-352-8623; jcornfield@heraldnet.com.
Comments
(
