This article hits it on the head:
Where George W. Bush saw the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan as his central mission and opportunities to transform critical regions, Mr. Obama sees them as “problems that need managing,” as one adviser put it, while he pursues his mission of transforming America. The result, according to interviews with three dozen administration officials, military leaders and national security experts, is an uneasy balance between a president wary of endless commitment and a military worried he is not fully invested in the cause.
This is how I've long felt. About a year ago, I finally focused it in a post:
I've figured our president is so totally focused on his domestic agenda that foreign policy and wars are only of interest depending on how he figures they'll hurt or help his domestic agenda.
Iraq? Afghanistan? Is it more trouble to win or lose? On Iraq, he'd have to go out of his way to lose--so complete the victory it shall be.
On Afghanistan, three months of debate and the jury is still out on whether we want to win. Will losing or fighting to win hurt his domestic vision more?
It has felt to me in many ways that the president has been buying time abroad by retreating before problems wherever he can. I'm hopeful that the president has seen the limits of retreat and that recent spine stiffening regarding China and Iran are signs we can halt the image of retreat before foes can exploit our inward focus the last couple years.
Perhaps in his speech this Tuesday on the war in Iraq, we'll see if President Obama still really, deep down, fails to see himself as a war president leading a nation at war.
The speech could go either way, I think. Which is a shame, since whether the president believes it or not, his nation is at war.
