Question: – With David Petraeus running the show in Afghanistan, you can forget about US troops beginning to withdraw as promised in July of next year, writes Andrew Sullivan. Obama's pledge is "now kaput," he writes at his Daily Dish blog at the Atlantic. "It won't happen. I doubt it will happen in a second term either." Petraeus, remember, is the architect of the Afghan strategy. Though the general tells CNN that he supports Obama's plans, Sullivan says he won't "concede the impossibility of success in Afghanistan just as he still retains the absurd notion that the surge in Iraq somehow worked in reconciling the sectarian divides that still prevent Iraq from having a working government." The Afghan war is a huge mistake, "an imperialism of self-defense, a commitment to civilize even the least tractable culture on earth because Americans are too afraid of the consequences of withdrawal." The irony is that the war will actually make things worse as a Jihadist recruiting tool.

Expand this summary.
Answer: « "Do Intelligent Arguments Make A Difference?" | Main | Face Of The Day II » 
  
 Those of us who hoped for some kind of winding down of the longest war in US history will almost certainly be disappointed now. David Petraeus is the real Pope of counter-insurgency and if he decides that he needs more troops and more time and more resources in Afghanistan next year, who is going to be able to gainsay him? That's Thomas P. Barnett's shrewd assessment. Obama's pledge to start withdrawing troops in 2011 is now kaput. It won't happen. I doubt it will happen in a second term either. Once Washington has decided to occupy a country, it will occupy it for ever. We are still, remember, in Germany! But Afghanistan? 
  
 Obama's gamble on somehow turning the vast expanse of that ungovernable "nation" into a stable polity dedicated to fighting Jihadist terror is now as big as Bush's in Iraq - and as quixotic. It is also, in my view, as irrational, a deployment of resources and young lives that America cannot afford and that cannot succeed. It really is Vietnam - along with the crazier and crazier rationales for continuing it. But it is now re-starting in earnest ten years in, dwarfing Vietnam in scope and longevity. 
  
 One suspects there is simply no stopping this war machine, just as there is no stopping the entitlement and spending machine. Perhaps McChrystal would have tried to wind things up by next year - but his frustration was clearly fueled by the growing recognition that he could not do so unless he surrendered much of the country to the Taliban again. So now we have the real kool-aid drinker, Petraeus, who will refuse to concede the impossibility of success in Afghanistan just as he still retains the absurd notion that the surge in Iraq somehow worked in reconciling the sectarian divides that still prevent Iraq from having a working government. I find this doubling down in Afghanistan as Iraq itself threatens to spiral out of control the kind of reasoning that only Washington can approve of. 
  
 This much we also know: Obama will run for re-election with far more troops in Afghanistan than Bush ever had - and a war and occupation stretching for ever into the future, with no realistic chance of success. Make no mistake: this is an imperialism of self-defense, a commitment to civilize even the least tractable culture on earth because Americans are too afraid of the consequences of withdrawal. And its deepest irony is that continuing this struggle will actually increase and multiply the terror threats we face - as it becomes once again a recruitment tool for Jihadists the world over. 
  
 This is a war based on fear, premised on a contradiction, and doomed to carry on against reason and resources for the rest of our lives. 
  
 Maybe this is why you supported Obama - to see the folly of nation-building extended indefinitely to the least promising wastelands on earth, as the US heads toward late-imperial bankruptcy. It is not a betrayal as such. But it is, in my view, a huge and metastasizing mistake. 
  
 (Photo: Mark Wilson/Getty.) ||||| For complete coverage of Afghanistan, go to the Afghanistan Crossroads blog. 
  
 Washington (CNN) -- Gen. David Petraeus told CNN on Thursday that he supports President Barack Obama's July 2011 deadline to start withdrawing U.S. troops from Afghanistan, a key point of contention between the president and many of his Republican critics in Congress. 
  
 Petraeus -- tapped to replace Gen. Stanley McChrystal as the U.S. commander in Afghanistan -- expressed his respect and appreciation for McChrystal's work and said the circumstances surrounding the change in command are "sad." 
  
 Obama relieved McChrystal of his duties Wednesday after the general and his staff were quoted in a Rolling Stone magazine article making comments that appear to mock top administration officials. 
  
 Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen endorsed Obama's decision during a Pentagon news conference Thursday. Mullen said he was nearly physically "sick" when he read the Rolling Stone story. The comments in the article constituted an unacceptable challenge to civilian authority, the men said. 
  
 "We do not have the right, nor should we ever assume the prerogative to cast doubt upon the ability or mock the motives of our civilian leaders, elected or appointed," Mullen said. "We are and must remain a neutral instrument of the state." 
  
 Petraeus' remarks to CNN's Dana Bash and Ted Barrett were his first public comments since being chosen as the new U.S. military chief for the Afghan conflict. The Senate Armed Services Committee is set to begin his confirmation hearings Tuesday morning. 
  
 "I support the president's policy, and I will also provide the best professional military advice as we conduct assessments," Petraeus said. 
  
 The general said it's a privilege to serve. "It's obviously a hugely important mission," he said. 
  
 "It's very sad that I have to assume it in this manner," he said. We "all have enormous respect and gratitude to Gen. McChrystal for all that he did. He's played a key role in helping get the inputs right in Afghanistan." 
  
 Petraeus declined to immediately say whether he would fire the unnamed officers on McChrystal's staff who are quoted in Rolling Stone making disparaging remarks. 
  
 "You have to understand an officer -- a commander -- cannot prejudge a situation because that crosses the line into what is called 'command influence,'" he said. "So we'll need to sort out the facts and take the appropriate action once we've done that." 
  
 Mullen emphasized that Petraeus will have the authority to make changes to McChrystal's battle plans and tactics. Obama also reinforced the notion of both tactical and strategic flexibility at the top levels of U.S. command, stressing Thursday that the July 2011 date is only for the start of the process under which U.S. forces will be removed from Afghanistan. 
  
 The decision to replace McChrystal with Petraeus was hotly debated by top administration officials. While Gates and Mullen both publicly defended Obama's decision to remove McChrystal, Gates initially backed keeping McChrystal on the job because top Pentagon brass considered the general vital to the Afghan war effort, a senior Pentagon official told CNN's Barbara Starr. 
  
 But in a 35-minute meeting in the Oval Office on Tuesday, Obama said he wanted to replace McChrystal with Petraeus, Gates said. 
  
 "It was the president's idea," Gates told reporters Thursday. "It was the president who first raised Petraeus' name." 
  
 The appointment of Petraeus is the "best possible outcome to an awful situation," Gates said. 
  
 Military officers both in Washington and on the ground in Afghanistan have continually stressed Obama's assertion that the switch in leadership does not represent a change in policy. 
  
 "Nothing changes about our strategy," said Mullen, who is departing for Afghanistan and Pakistan on Thursday night. 
  
 "We remain absolutely focused on our tasks and the operational tempo will not miss a beat," Lt. Gen. Sir Nick Parker said Thursday. Parker, who is British, has assumed command pending Petraeus' confirmation by the U.S. Senate. 
  
 Petraeus, who also led the U.S. military surge in Iraq, expressed gratitude toward his wife Thursday, saying he had asked about her feelings on his new assignment 
  
 "She's a great wife, army daughter and army mother," he said. 
  
 CNN's Ted Barrett, Dana Bash, Barbara Starr and Alan Silverleib contributed to this report. |||||