Almost 10 years after the first American troops landed in Afghanistan, Obama faces a bipartisan war weariness, which would force him to turn two different military missions.
Obama completes plans to reduce troop numbers in Afghanistan, the group members, both Republicans and Democrats sought to appeal to a significant conclusion that tens of thousands more than 100,000 Americans there. Meanwhile, a coalition of legislators, which covers the political rights (Senator Paul Rand, R-Ky.) Center (Senator Richard Lugar, R-Ind.) And left (Rep., D-Ohio) criticized Obama's policy for Libya, which includes the use of American unmanned aircraft to attack Libyan targets.
Mayors from both parties are expected Monday to approve a resolution calling for reduction of involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq, freeing up more money to be spent on creating jobs and other needs of American cities.
Events intricate traditional political alliances. Paul and Kucinich, who is unlikely to agree on anything, both blasting Obama for not receiving formal approval from Congress before interfering in Libya. The president, whose political rise came partly because of his early anti-Iraq war, is joined by his policy of Libya's two main supporters of this war: Senators(RS.C.) and (R-Ariz.)
The tension reflects the American public is not as committed to having troops abroad, even in the fight against terrorism, as it was before, as well as more attentive to the fight of the economy than foreign affairs. In 2004, Presidenthas based almost his entire campaign on protecting the country from terrorism, seven years later, the "bounce" Obama's poll numbers from capturing and killing had already came and went.
Opinion polls show declining support among Americans for maintaining troops in Afghanistan, and most people have never embraced the mission of Libya.
Anti-war faction has long existed among Democrats, many of them against Bush sending troops to Iraq. But over the past year, the faction has expanded to include more and more Republicans in the party grassroots and on Capitol Hill.
Up-and-coming Republicans allied with the "tea party" activists, Rep. of Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), Paul, joined those questioning purpose of American intervention, as a former governor of Utah and Ambassador to China, one of the Republican nomination to run for the weight in the presidential party.
Obama close to each conflict individually. He turn the war in Iraq, said that he would do the same thing in Afghanistan and tried to downplay the role of U.S. troops in Libya. But Graham, McCain and other Republicans in the "national security wing" of the party say they are worried about "isolationism" in his hand, a term that would never have been used to describe the Republican Party during the Bush years.
This shift in sentiment could push the legislator Barack Obama in two ways. First, he may be forced to reduce the already limited U.S. role in Libya. Congress calls for Obama to get permission for war, and the unwillingness of the president, suggests that a vote in Congress on Libya can not find support for Obama's position.
As for Afghanistan, while the president and his team have stated that they would play down internal problems, Obama should still consider them.
More and more Democrats, in particular, development expenditure in Afghanistan in a zero-sum way, to argue any dollar spent abroad is one not spent on helping improve the U.S. economy. (It is not clear, this statement is true, as the Congress of Republicans will likely not support another major stimulus bill, even if the U.S. turned the war in Afghanistan.)
Every time Obama announced his plan to Afghanistan, he will have to explain how he plans to balance the costs there with his broader concept of the U.S. economic recovery.
The President will meet with mayors in the White House and at two campaign fundraisers in Washington.