« Ehrlich and Kane file candidacy, leave day jobs | Main | Obama back at Camp David after long hiatus »

July 2, 2010

Steele tries to clarify Afghanistan remarks

Worth noting in the controversy around Michael S. Steele’s comments about the war in Afghanistan is that he was addressing a Republican fundraiser in Connecticut. The state, home to many workers who commute to New York, lost 65 residents on Sept. 11, 2001.

Maryland’s former lieutenant governor on Friday is explaining remarks from the fundraiser this week in Noank, Conn., in which he described U.S. action in Afghanistan as “a war of [Democratic President Barack] Obama’s choosing,” and said it was not “something the United States had actively prosecuted or wanted to engage in.”

The U.S. initiated the war in Afghanistan in late 2001 in direct response to the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Northern Virginia. While the action, which was aimed at rooting out the leadership of Al Qaida and their Taliban hosts, enjoyed broad bipartisan support both among elected officials and the public at large, it was ordered by Republican President George W. Bush, three years before Obama was elected to Congress.

Steele goes on to say that Obama "was trying to be cute by half," by "flipping a script demonizing Iraq, while saying the battle really should be in Afghanistan."

"Well, if he's such a student of history, has he not understood that, you know, that's the one thing you don't do – is engage in a land war in Afghanistan?" Steele asks. "Everyone who has tried, over a thousand years of history, has failed. And there are reasons for that. There are other ways to engage in Afghanistan."

The best guess is that Steele is referring to Obama’s troop surge in Afghanistan, following his campaign promises to shift military focus away from Iraq and toward Afghanistan. This approach has also won the broad support of Republicans in Congress, whose main concern has been whether Obama is committed to seeing it through.

Whatever Steele meant – he also described the events surrounding the resignation last week of Gen. Stanley McChrystal “comical” – his comments have drawn quick criticism, mostly from Democrats, but also from at least one prominent conservative. William Kristol, the editor of the conservative Weekly Standard, has called for Steele’s resignation.

“Your tenure has of course been marked by gaffes and embarrassments, but I for one have never paid much attention to them, and have never thought they would matter much to the success of the causes and principles we share,” Kristol writes. But this time, he writes, is different:

Needless to say, the war in Afghanistan was not "a war of Obama’s choosing." It has been prosecuted by the United States under Presidents Bush and Obama. Republicans have consistently supported the effort. Indeed, as the DNC Communications Director (of all people) has said, your statement "puts [you] at odds with about 100 percent of the Republican Party."

And not on a trivial matter. At a time when Gen. Petraeus has just taken over command, when Republicans in Congress are pushing for a clean war funding resolution, when Republicans around the country are doing their best to rally their fellow citizens behind the mission, your comment is more than an embarrassment. It’s an affront, both to the honor of the Republican party and to the commitment of the soldiers fighting to accomplish the mission they’ve been asked to take on by our elected leaders.

There are, of course, those who think we should pull out of Afghanistan, and they’re certainly entitled to make their case. But one of them shouldn't be the chairman of the Republican party.

Steele has now issued a statement:

As we enter the Fourth of July weekend, I proudly remember standing with Maryland National Guardsmen on their way to the Middle East and later stood with the mothers of soldiers lost at war. There is no question that America must win the war on terror.

During the 2008 Presidential campaign, Barack Obama made clear his belief that we should not fight in Iraq, but instead concentrate on Afghanistan. Now, as President, he has indeed shifted his focus to this region. That means this is his strategy. And, for the sake of the security of the free world, our country must give our troops the support necessary to win this war.

As we have learned throughout history, winning a war in Afghanistan is a difficult task. We must also remember that after the tragedy of September 11, 2001, it is also a necessary one. That is why I supported the decision to increase our troop force and, like the entire United States Senate, I support General Petraeus’ confirmation. The stakes are too high for us to accept anything but success in Afghanistan.

Posted by Matthew Hay Brown at 3:48 PM | | Comments (3)


I quite certain this may be his last gaffe as head of the RNC.

Michael Steele gives hip hop tailors a bad name.

Hopefully he'll be available to campaign for Bob Ehrlich in the upcoming gubernatorial election right here in good ole Maryland. Steele is hilarious. Without Obama in the White House the republican knee jerk reaction that led to his chairmanship would've never occurred. Now the republicans are stuck with him because they cannot run the risk of replacing him before the mid-term elections lest they disenfranchise voters of color. How does this end? Steele becomes a democrat. I tell you it will happen.

Post a comment

All comments must be approved by the blog author. Please do not resubmit comments if they do not immediately appear. You are not required to use your full name when posting, but you should use a real e-mail address. Comments may be republished in print, but we will not publish your e-mail address. Our full Terms of Service are available here.

Verification (needed to reduce spam):


Headlines from The Baltimore Sun
About the bloggers
Annie Linskey covers state politics and government for The Baltimore Sun. Previously, as a City Hall reporter, she wrote about the corruption trial of Mayor Sheila Dixon and kept a close eye on city spending. Originally from Connecticut, Annie has also lived in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, where she reported on war crimes tribunals and landmines. She lives in Canton.

John Fritze has covered politics and government at the local, state and federal levels for more than a decade and is now The Baltimore Sun’s Washington correspondent. He previously wrote about Congress for USA TODAY, where he led coverage of the health care overhaul debate and the 2010 election. A native of Albany, N.Y., he currently lives in Montgomery County.

Julie Scharper covers City Hall and Baltimore politics. A native of Baltimore County, she graduated from The Johns Hopkins University in 2001 and spent two years teaching in Honduras before joining The Baltimore Sun. She has followed the Amish community of Nickel Mines, Pa., in the year after a schoolhouse massacre, reported on courts and crime in Anne Arundel County, and chronicled the unique personalities and places of Baltimore City and its surrounding counties.
Most Recent Comments
Sign up for FREE local news alerts
Get free Sun alerts sent to your mobile phone.*
Get free Baltimore Sun mobile alerts
Sign up for local news text alerts

Returning user? Update preferences.
Sign up for more Sun text alerts
*Standard message and data rates apply. Click here for Frequently Asked Questions.
  • Breaking News newsletter
When a big news event breaks, we'll e-mail you the basics with links to up-to-date details.
Sign up

Blog updates
Recent updates to news blogs
 Subscribe to this feed
Charm City Current
Stay connected