Three months ago, I joined a number of Americans in urging President
Obama to provide the resources necessary to achieve our goals in
Afghanistan. Tonight, I am glad he mostly heeded that advice (Palin, 2009, ¶1).

At long last, President Obama decided to give his military commanders
much of what they need to accomplish their mission in Afghanistan. In
the end, he decided to endorse a “surge” for Afghanistan, applying the
counterinsurgency principles of “clear, hold and build” that worked so
well in Iraq. Given that he opposed the surge in Iraq, it is even more
welcome that he now supports a surge in Afghanistan (Palin, 2009, ¶2).

This approach means, as Senator John McCain has noted, that “We now
have an opportunity to build a bipartisan consensus in support of a
vital national security priority: defeating Al-Qaeda and its violent
extremist allies in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and ensuring that these
countries never again serve as bases for terrorist attacks against
America and our allies” (Palin, 2009, ¶3)

We should be clear, however, that fewer troops mean assuming more risk.
Talk of an exit date also risks sending the wrong message. We should be
in Afghanistan to win, not to set a timetable for withdrawal that
signals a lack of resolve to our friends, and lets our enemies believe
they can wait us out. As long as we’re in to win, and as long as troop
level decisions are based on conditions on the ground and the advice of
our military commanders, I support President Obama’s decision (Palin, 2009, ¶4).

– Sarah Palin