President Obama: Will Reduce American Forces In Afghanistan (But Not Substantially)

President Obama, at the National Counterterrorism Center outside Washington on Tuesday, cited successes against Al Qaeda. Pool photo by Brooks Kraft

Obama Rules Out Large Reduction in Afghan Force -- New York Times

WASHINGTON — President Obama told Congressional leaders on Tuesday that he would not substantially reduce American forces in Afghanistan or shift the mission to just hunting terrorists there, but he indicated that he remained undecided about the major troop buildup proposed by his commanding general.

Meeting with leaders from both parties at the White House, Mr. Obama seemed to be searching for some sort of middle ground, saying he wanted to “dispense with the straw man argument that this is about either doubling down or leaving Afghanistan,” as White House officials later described his remarks.

Read more ....

My Comment: The key phrase in this article is the first sentence ....

.... he would not substantially reduce American forces in Afghanistan.

I guess this means that U.S. forces are going to be reduced .... but not substantially (so much for General McChrystal's request for 40,000 additional).

With the exception of Lucianne.com, no one else has focused on this statement. Is this Obama speak? (just like George Bush and his abuse of the English language), or is this a statement of policy .... that there is going to be a "small" reduction of U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

This question was not asked in todays White House press briefing .... and no one else is bringing this up in the media.

It is no surprise that U.S. policy towards Afghanistan is mixed up, and media coverage is completely lacking.

Update: Barack Obama may send just 10,000 troops to Afghanistan -- The Telegraph