Three stories underline an unsettled issue discussed in an earlier post (The Real Thing): what is the administration up to in Afghanistan. The New York Times reports that General Stanley McChrystal rejected, in a speech before the International Institute for Strategic Studies, the notion of scaling down the war before achieving the desired goals. You can hear his speech here. The NYT reported:
The top military commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, rejected calls for scaling down military objectives there on Thursday and said Washington did not have unlimited time to settle on a new strategy to pursue the eight-year-old war. In a speech to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, a private policy group here, General McChrystal said that the situation in Afghanistan was serious and that “neither success nor failure can be taken for granted.” …
General McChrystal was asked by a member of an audience that included retired military commanders and security specialists whether he would support an idea put forward by Mr. Biden to scale back the American military presence in Afghanistan to focus on tracking down the leaders of Al Qaeda, in place of the current broader effort now under way to defeat the Taliban. “The short answer is: no,” he said. “You have to navigate from where you are, not where you wish to be. A strategy that does not leave Afghanistan in a stable position is probably a short-sighted strategy.”
The sense that things are waiting on events was conveyed in Michael Yon’s latest post, Securing Helmand. Yon wrote, “The war is intensifying month by month while support for this mission plummets. Your help is crucial to my staying in the war. 2010 will almost certainly prove to be the bloodiest even as coverage dries up. More troops are coming in. The fighting for those who are here is already as tough as any seen in Iraq. Do you trust the Government to tell the truth?”
As a previous post, The Real Thing, argued, “One reason why President Obama may be reluctant to give General McChrystal more troops is that it would force the differences with Pakistan into the open. Islamabad has been trying, for some time, to run America’s war for its own benefit. An article by David Ignatius implies that the ISI wants to manage the Taliban, not destroy it. From the Pakistani point of view the danger in giving McChrystal surge forces is that the US military might get ideas.” Indeed, the line which separates certain elements of the Pakistani government, which is an American ‘ally,’ from terrorist groups is a thin one indeed. Earlier, Roggio described how Pakistan opposed US strikes against the Quetta Shura, from which attacks on Afghanistan were planned.
General Ashfaq Kiyani, Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff, has weighed in on the debate over the potential for the US air campaign against the Taliban and al Qaeda to expand into Baluchistan province, according to the Daily Times. During a meeting of the Tripartite Commission, Kiyani reportedly warned the US against conducting strikes in the province.
Last week, US military and intelligence officials told me that an expansion of the US air campaign into Baluchistan would likely lead to an internal revolt in the Pakistani military. General Kiyani knows the impact a wide-reaching US air campaign would have on his military.
Kiyani’s statements come as Anne Patterson, the US Ambassador to Pakistan, said that the Quetta Shura, the Afghan Taliban command led by Mullah Omar, has risen to the top of the US target list. But Pakistan has refused to operate against the Quetta Shura as it is hedging its bets that the Taliban will return to power in Afghanistan. Patterson’s charges are explosive; previously most of the criticism on the Taliban operations in Quetta have come from the US military. She even questions if Pakistan is in control of its own territory.
Today he quotes an NYT story indicating that the links between the Mumbai attackers and the ISI are closer than one might think. “While Pakistan’s Inter-Service Intelligence agency refuses to admit it backs the radical, al Qaeda-linked Lashkar-e-Taiba, US intelligence officials and even Lashkar-e-Taiba operatives beg to differ. … Former ISI officials, such as retired Lieutenant General Hamid Gul, the intelligence service’s former director, openly support groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Taliban, and al Qaeda, yet they are untouchable in Pakistan. For more on the ISI’s links to terror groups, see ‘Pakistan’s Jihad,’ written by Tom Joscelyn and me in December last year.”
International relations are problems which are beyond McChrystal’s remit. What he has been charged with is winning in Afghanistan. If the administration has changed its mind or has defined victory differently, then it ought to make that clear. But right now the requirement is to win and the man on the ground says, ‘if you want me to do that, give me the tools’.
Whether the issues at stake are going to be fully aired is still anyone’s guess. The AP is reporting that the Senate voted to delay General McChrystal’s scheduled testimony before it until President Obama had made up his mind. Senator Reid believed it was “inappropriate” for McChrystal to make the case that more resources were required before the President had considered them. Since the General’s views on resources are common knowledge by now it raises the possibility that the delay may simply be intended to avoid subjecting McChrystal to a question and answer session about process. Questions like, ‘did the President ever read your report, did he ever speak to you’ etc are potential dynamite. It’s far better to wait until McChrystal is handed a songsheet from which he must dutifully sing, prior to letting him face the Senate. This may serve the political interests; it may even spare McChrystal the ordeal of having to answer awkward questions. But it will leave questions unanswered; and maybe that’s the point.
Tip Jar or Subscribe for $5
Obama is not listening. He is already tired of all the boring and not fun stuff that a president must do. Like any short attention span person, he wants to do “fun” things – like advocate for the Olympics in Chicago.
Mark Steyn noted when we lifted up the coconut shell entitled “Afghanistan” the “good war pea” was not under it as promised. I had to laugh at that but it is spot on.
Pakistan is a hugely complicating factor here, and all of this talk of the ISI wanting to manage & shepherd the Taliban is correct — after all — who set them up in the first place? The problem in counting on that relationship to do anything is if the Taliban were to return to Afghanistan as the ruling power than that would give them an air of invincibility — that would cause them to probably even get more out of line than what the events that brought this all on in the first place.
We don’t trust Pakistan because of their coziness with the Taliban, however in this case, the enemy of our enemies is not an option either in Iran.
The President buying hookers & booze for the IOC is of middling interest to me (It would be neat to have the Olympics right next door — too bad it couldn’t be the Winter games) and I’m okay with him doing that, but instead of all of his attempts at interfering in private matters I’ld like to see him show at least a bit of leadership on this matter and try to steer things himself rather than letting events steer him — which is probably what will happen.
His indifference and foot dragging on this is not befitting of him as CnC — something he is clearly and uncontroversially in charge of.
Nations have no permanent friends, only permanent interests–right?
Pakistan’s interest: ‘control’ over the regime in Afghanistan so as to maintain a buffer state there.
Our interest: eliminate AQ from the Af-Pak area so as to enhance our security, perhaps deploy forces to other area where they are active, eg Somalia, Yemen.
Ergo: cooperate with the ISI in tightly controlling the Taliban in exchange for the Paks and the Talibs wiping out AQ for us.
Problem: 1) abandoning the Afghans to the same brutes we kicked out in 2001; 2) probably big squawk from India, who will not like us helping the ISI do anything.
Would it work? Naw, probably not.
If I recall correctly, none of the bombshells in this report are surprises to Belmont Club regulars. The ties between the ISI and the Mumbai plot were well known here within 48 hours of the attack. Pakistan’s intention to restore the Taliban to power in Afghanistan has been obvious ever since the government started ceding them territory in Pashtunistan along the only US land-route to Afghanistan. Democratic fecklessness when it came to the “good war” in Afghanistan was exactly what we expected after watching the party of International Answer. The Pakistani government has never had any control over the frontier regions. The downward spiral of the Afghan campaign was obvious once we learned about the restrictive caveats on most NATO troops, and then learned there was no unified command. The prosecution of the drug war against the Opium poppy was never going to help things.
And though I don’t recall this being discussed explicitly on BC, the refusal of the US to deal realistically with its position in the war became stark when the US never even considered breaking the Balochs off from Iran and Pakistan to have a friendly land-route to Afghanistan.
So… ho hum. It’s turning to crap just like we knew it would. Too many mistakes have been made for it to be running smoothly. It could be rescued, if McChrystal were heeded. But with the Narcissist in office, Afghanistan can’t compete with certified organic Tuscan kale, staff basketball games, and jaunts to Denmark.
it is – perhaps -as History indicates – not possible to win – in terms understandable by us, in our view of time.
what to do, if that is the case –
i can only see containment, of their, external projections.
we may have to live with that.
it will take much time, generations, for them to change, at best –
we cannot change them quickly by force – time, it will take time.
this is a very ancient war
#5 bits:
You have confused lack of ability with a lack of will. We can change the Taliban’s minds along with Pakistan’s. We don’t have the will.
At the end of the Third Punic War, Rome changed the Carthaginians minds…. permanently.
We could do the same with the Taliban, Pushtuns and Jihadi sympathetic Pakistanis in Baluchistan, NWFP, etc. High infertile mountains dominate the entire region. What little arable soil and potable water is available through much of the year is limited to several dozen fertile valleys and narrow river-valley corridors. Nearly the entire population of the areas in question dwell in, or are heavily dependent upon these few dozen virtual oases. Just a handful of the thermo-nuclear devices Obama is planning to discard could reduce our current problems with the whole lot of them every bit as effectively as Rome dealt with Carthage. I don’t recall a fourth Punic war, do you?
To some extent what we have here is a failure to communicate. When the BHO was still a candidate, he gave the impression that Afghanistan was to be a sternly fought “war of necessity”, a place where he would hunt down Osama bin Laden, banish the Taliban, etc, etc. And now it turns out that this is not what the contents of the box are. It’s like one of these things you see on a store shelf. The package is fine enough: it shows a product in an action setting, with dramatic colors and implied certain functionality, which after unboxing, turns out to be largely missing. What you find inside is a plastic made-in-China something and even the instructions are in Taiwanese.
That’s not to say that if one were to examine the problem de novo that Barack Obama’s strategy wouldn’t make sense. Maybe it does; maybe it doesn’t. That’s one set of issues. The other is that many people probably misperceived his promise on Afghanistan and now think they’ve been sold a pig in a poke. And maybe to some extent McChrystal doesn’t want to get caught holding the bag.
Perhaps one of the most frightening words you can hear in certain settings are “I’ll take care of you”. That can be comforting or menacing, depending on how you regard the person speaking them. So in the case of Afghanistan, the jury is still somewhat out on what the President intends. The import of the words he said then and is saying now is still unclear. McChrystal’s request is in some sense clarificatory; it’s like asking for a downpayment or deposit on the President’s former promises. In God we Trust. All others must pay cash.
I have to note the General McChrystal was placed in the command slot in Afghanistan at the direct behest of Buraq Hussein. Now he is a)demanding the tools to do the job he was given by Buraq, and b) placing pressure on him to make a decision soon, said decision not being the word “present”. As such he is NOT helping the narrative. McChrystal is not long for his command. Either he is going to be politely or impolitely telling the administration to fold it until it is all corners and thereafter surprise their proctologist; or he is going to be fired. Either act will serve the regime, because the “search for a replacement” will allow Obama to basically suspend any decisions until it is done, and then for some time afterwards as the new commander surveys the situation and makes his report, to be ignored.
As I understand it, 43 American soldiers have died while we are waiting for Buraq Hussein Obama to get around to reading the report that has been in his hands for weeks. It is a worthwhile cost to Obama, so long as he can either guarantee an American loss, or avoid taking sides that he can be blamed for.
Odimus duces nostros improbos pravosque!
Subotai Bahadur
In my humble opinion, this is bad juju, dudes. Did McChrystal over promise while drinking beer with the President or Vice President to get this job? Or was he hornswoggled? This is NOT the time for the President, et al. to be calling in every swinging Rick with an opinion to dither around and come up with a new strategy. The enemy is surging. The command in Afghanistan needs more assets. In Programmer’s opinion, they ain’t got enought ammo, metaphorically speaking. Someone has either really (to the fifth power) screwed up, or this is a deliberate setup. Are we that far gone? An old general once told a spanking brand new battery commander the secret of command is to make a decision, then make it work. Someone better tell the President. Or maybe he has made a decision,…and he is now making it work. May God be on our side, if that is the case, for hades is coming for breakfast.
Gee, I thought this thread was going to be about Cream’s greatest hits?
Whom the gods would destroy, first, they make mad.
I can’t decide if this is about Obama or McChrystal.
Seriously, I thought the starting essay by the Colonel on Pressfield’s blog was pretty interesting. Creating a loose command of special operatives to work independently with the tribes. Surely, most of them loathe the Taliban, and the unpleasantness that they will bring upon their return. Would they fight together, under some kind of loose, non-centralized federation?
I think the biggest weakness in our concept of how to proceed in Afghanistan, is trying to create that which that country will not support; that is, a conventional Westphalian nation-state. Even the Russki’s stumbled in mis-understanding on that count. They were able to wreck large parts of the country, and kill a lot of Afghans, but in the end, they could not rule the country (or have their puppets rule) from Kabul.
A centralized government could work many boons for the people, but the tribes are too fractious and would see a relatively strong central government as a harbinger of a tyranny directed at their tribal notions. They will reject it, whether guided by the Soviets, the UN, NATO or the Taliban.
A kind of COIN strategy worked in Iraq, but I think it would be a mistake to try to apply the very same strategy to Afghanistan. It will take something very different to succeed there. Perhaps it will be for the best if McChrystal’s plan is not implemented, if it is modeled too closely on the kind of plan that worked for Petraeus in Iraq.
The Copenhagen summit was both an order from Chicago, which owns the Oval Office for the moment, and a distraction from the decisions to be made about Aghanistan.
The three releases from Gitmo (on the weekend) are another distraction.
Obama throughly annoyed the French with his UN speech — another cave.
This man is in retreat. It’s not a full, bugle-led rout yet. More like a step-by-step backing off without actually turning around to face what’s behind him.
I look for Gates to leave soon. And the General will either leave or be canned — on a weekend.
Obama doesn’t do things he doesn’t want to. Hasn’t met with McChrystal since…when, exactly. Hasn’t met with the Republicans since May or earlier.
There’s not a bone of military strategy or tactics in his whole body. This is war by an invertebrate who was raised to believe as an article of faith — and retains that doctrine to this day — that war isn’t cool.
Look for his absence from the field and the collapse of morale among the troops. I think he has stranded them.
At the center of the American war is the President. And the President is a weakling. It doesn’t matter how smart he is or how he ‘understands’ the nuances of the problems before the US. He remains a weakling. World leaders know this, and the West will reap the coming whirlwind.
The good general is talking all over the place because he is NOT AFRAID OF OBAMA. Pakistan, Russia, Iran, N Korea, they all know that there is no there there. So, the world will frolic towards the abyss.
He is a true lefty, the campus metrosexual kind, loaded with all the muck he gathered while climbing the Chicago ladder to the White House.
It is amazing: the US public still seems to have a high regard for the man.
I say, bring the troops home. Their Commander in Chief is incompetent, who will throw them under the bus just as soon as he can write a speech and put it up on his teleprompter.
I just opened the Weekly Standard page and found this from Michael Goldfarb:
Rumint: Hagel to Replace Gates By End of Year
As Think Progress notes, last night the boss floated a very well-sourced rumor that Secretary Gates will be out by the end of the year and replaced by Chuck Hagel, who the boss described as an “advocate of retreat everywhere.” Indeed Hagel is not only an advocate of retreat everywhere, he is set to be the keynote speaker at J Street’s Israel-bashing conference at the end of the month. If Kristol’s intel is on target, watch for Hagel to skip the J Street confab in favor of something more respectable…like a Van Jones seminar on the collapse of World Trace Center 7.
Hagel to Replace Gates.
This hardly bears thinking about. Ugh.
“to focus on tracking down the leaders of Al Qaeda, in place of the current broader effort now under way to defeat the Taliban”
-from the article
They really don’t have a clue, do they?
As if Islamic fundamentalism is restricted to card-carrying members of officially recognised “man caused disaster” organisations.
Anyone who takes Islam seriously is Al Quaeda.
Anyone who demands we all submit to Sharia Law is Taliban.
How can Western Civilisation survive with such imbeciles in charge?
Listen to McChrystal’s speech. It really puts forward a particular strategic point of view, which suggests a debate is going on within the context of the “process” that has been set up and McChrystal is fighting his corner against other, and possibly conflicting alternatives. One of the more interesting phrases he used was “You have to navigate from where you are, not where you wish to be. A strategy that does not leave Afghanistan in a stable position is probably a short-sighted strategy”; and this phrase was uttered in the context of other remarks in the speech in which he argued Afghanistan had a role to play in South Asia.
Maybe one of the debates taking place is about which way the influence was being played. A semi-stable Afghanistan could arguably reduce US dependence on Pakistan, but an unstable Afghanistan would increase American reliance on Islamabad. From a certain point of view an American dominated Afghanistan would be a threat, not only to Iran but to Pakistan, because it would give Washington freedom of action in the region. Certain elements in Pakistan must know that they are part of the problem, not part of the solution. They are safe for so long as Washington needs them, but if the US were somehow less dependent on them — what with India now friendly and McChrystal eyeing a win in Afghanistan — then the rogue Pakistani elements would eventually be on the agenda of things to solve; a prospect they don’t relish.
I would be surprised if the policy debate inside the White House did not turn, in large part, on what President Obama intended to do with Pakistan as much as what he planned to achieve in Afghanistan. Going for “victory” in Afghanistan would ruffle feathers in Islamabad, I think. Going for the Big Kahuna would be a gamble, because it would in the short term increase reliance on Pakistan while increasing tensions with parts of its government and there is no guarantee it will work. McChrystal’s characterization of neither failure nor success being taken for granted is an interesting phrase. You can understand it in the context of Afghanistan purely, but it is much more logical to interpret it in the regional context.
In fine, McChrystal’s request for more resources forces Washington to make a big strategic commitment they have hitherto not been prepared to make. The request forces the hand. I am not sure that the Obama White House has really made up their mind about which way to go. But it seems fairly certain that they are as nervous about making the wrong move as a cat in a porchful of rocking chairs.
“In my humble opinion, this is bad juju, dudes.”
Absolutely right, dude.
General McC is probably a fine general and perhaps the right commander for AF. But I am definitely unhappy about his public speeches, interviews, and the fact that his AF assessment to O was leaked to the media almost immediately. Shut up McC.
It isn’t so much that I dislike what he says, I just don’t want war options to be argued by Generals in public. As Americans we are supposed to despise secrecy but frankly I want our top people to be figuring it out in private and not booked on Larry King.
I consider the AF strategy so important that I don’t want O in Europe dealing with the Olympics or a Climate Treaty until the direction is set. I don’t want Gates worrying about C-17s. I don’t want Harry and Nancy calling conservatives NAZIs. Or tinkering with health care for now.
I do want Jimmy Carter to shut up. The old disgrace is aging badly and he wasn’t good to begin with. Ditto for Madelaine who was just over in Moscow knocking America for dollars, I think she got $40,000 for the speech.
Hagel seems the worst possible choice for DOD. He isn’t an administrator and if he has a brain at all I never noticed it. Also very much to the left. His selection would signal huge defense cuts and weakness.
Can’t say I am surprised. I thought O would pull out of AF and make tremendous defense cuts. The sad thing is no spending cuts will be made, the money will be wasted elsewhere.
It looks to me as if federalizing the schools is the next drive. Pay the teachers unions enough and they will back that in a heartbeat. The Dems also have to get reelected in 2010, but they act as if they can’t lose.
Well if I registered the voters and counted the votes I wouldn’t lose either.
Obama picked Afghanistan as the war to focus as a campaign tactic to bash Bush and to make him look like a tough CINC.
It was a false image and now that Obama is CINC he would like to get rid of the tangle web of Afghanistan. That is why he said victory was not the goal. He is preparing to abandon the effort.
Gates and McChrystal are too aggressive for Obama and he will get rid them. A dedicated pacifist and appeaser as Obama can not have a DOD that has not been neutered.
Elections have consequences and we are reaping them now. With freedom being restrained with takeovers in the GM and Chrysler and the agenda of socializing American industries and health care system.
The President has a lot of powers, this one even take powers he does not have constitutionally. We have to hope that the system of checks and balance will start to correct and restrain President Obama.
Taliban was an ISI creature that they nurtured. The Taliban child revolted and was slapped down in Pakistan when it threatened the parent, but it is still their child. Just as Lashkar-e-Taiba is another of their children as a weapon aimed at India.
ISI does not want Afghanistan to be a strong country but a weak buffer country. They may not want the US Army to upset their plans but allies come at issues with their own national interests. Omar is still a popular figure of note and the may be a popular uprising and backlash if ISI approved a military strike inside Baluchistan.
The interesting aspect is that Baluchis are not Pashtuns and not supporters of the Pakistan army or government.
The problems with military options are that they generally are proscribed inside neutral or allied nations. That is why counter intelligence agencies were created to be used where outright strikes are not feasible.
Pakistan’s ISI has always been the problem. The allowed the fundamentalists to flourish and be indoctrinated in the madrassases.
But Pakistan wisely decided to be a putative ally after 9/11. This war is going to evolve into a more Cold War type with operations to destabilize and act against anti American interests. The direct military approach cannot be used against allies.
The US military should know that and it was slight chance they could get Pakistan to approve strikes inside Baluchistan.
Obama will probably be more comfortable with using the tools of the cold war. But he foolishly allowed Holder to antagonize the main tool, the CIA. I can’t see any CIA operative doing a black operation without specific written approval from the President himself.
So by foolishly allowing the rabid left go after the CIA he has damaged another tool.
One of the big flaws of our current President is his inability to accept the he is President and the tools are not to be damaged but to be used to further Americans interests. Obama public utterances are all seem to be the puerile idiocies of the 1980’s anti American radicals.
Obama inability to accept that he is to represent America and not tear us down is a fatal flaw.
Regrettably it will take decades to correct the weakness he is creating in the American economy and the mistakes in foreign policy. The consequences is that more and more organizations and countries will target and work against America. The risk of terrorist attacks will rise against Americans overseas and inside the US.
The natural order of a power for a leader of a pack is when the leader starts to fail; the pack tears him to pieces. The failure to understand this reality will be felt by Americans for many years.
Putin understands this better and he never shows himself as weak. He is the symbol of a strong and proud Russia and he and Medeyev work to further Russian interests with attempting to control the gas supplies to Russia and frustrate American goals.
Putin may be an oppressive old KGB man, but at least the Russians know that he supports Russian interests. We knew Bush was for American interests, but Obama is still a victim of his radical ideology of an anti American of the 1980’s.
Will Obama grow into his role? I doubt it. His ego will not allow him to see, as Sarkozy said.
Europe will regret its flirtation and childish urge to cut down America and the signs of that with the German election and the election of Sarkozy shows that some in Europe already realize that.
But they have also started on a path of diminishing returns with the EU and today is the Irish vote on the treaty of the EU. Like Obama’s inward focus the EU determination to control the energy and economies of Europe will have grave consequences for the ability to have an economic structure that can sustain and defend Europe.
K # 17,
I normally would agree that foreign military policy should not be played on the public stage. Obama is refusing to make decision and is showing all the sign of ADHD flitting all over, even with this trip to Copenhagen on the Olympics.
If Obama does decide to back McChrystal he will need the support of the American public. It is better to air this to get a better feel on what the public will support.
The current government has squandered the public trust with TARP, the stimulus bill and attempt to ram nationalized heath care down our throats before we knew what it was.
So keeping the foreign policy deliberations dark rather than public will just waste any support for an aggressive Afpak policy.
Most of us refuse to have another Vietnam. Where the government deliberately refused to win and we just wasted our soldiers. If Afghanistan is going down that road, then I want out and be fortress America if need be.
#19 RAH – Good observation. This administration is really big on trial balloons. They never work out well, of course. They always end up backpedalling.
Normally, I, too, would be annoyed at seeing this played out on TV, but it is the only way we’d ever hear anything. Without it, we’d not know what brought on the failure. Now, we know.
Obama does not want to make a decision. He cannot. He is a Beta-male, not Alpha. He’ll delay and delay until the situation deteriorates, and then he’ll withdraw while making excuses. He’ll wait until the situation forces his hand, like too many casualties. He’ll wait until a sufficient number of soldiers die….
Wretchard,
Obama in the campaign was not a failure to communicate. He communicated exactly what he wanted. Obama has consistently used the tactic of conveying one thing while meaning another. His problems is when generalities get into actual details.
Case in point is his health care, he says one thing while the facts are another. He did squander the public trust.
McChrsytal is wise to have a public promise or cash down. If not granted, then he can resign and we can withdraw.
An MSNBC story gives some indication of the way the policy battle lines are being drawn. The story says:
In the context of my post, the mooted policy shift would mean an attempt to “manage” the Taliban; where they’ll be left intact, at a level which poses no danger to Pakistan and if possible, no danger to Kabul. The MSNBC piece interestingly describes the split in the debate: Biden on the one side and the uniformed service people on the other.
Personally, I wonder to what extent Biden speaks for Biden, and to what extent he is the deniable mouthpiece for certain parties who want to see how proposals will fare without attaching their names to them. The shadow of Pakistan was evident if you knew where to look for it. The elephant in the room continued to eat peanuts and it was the consumption of the peanuts which proved its presence. The MSNBC piece said:
My translation is that the worse things looked in Pakistan the more imperative a victory in Afghanistan had to be; because a friendly Afghanistan would be one place the US could have freedom of action. A few months back Afghanistan was looking like the only game in town if Islamabad went bust. But with Pakistan supposedly on the mend, it looks safe to go back into the water again. There would be a natural reluctance to completely take away the Taliban toy of what is once again a valued and trusted “ally” and more confidence in the possibilities of managing things via Islamabad. So the “certain senior White House officials” are saying, let’s go back to running the show from Pakistan. In crude terms, the odds on which horse to bet on changed.
But of course the odds can change again; and the real weakness of the Biden plan is a possible loss of diversification in the security portfolio. Washington will be back to depending on Pakistan; indeed it will be compelled to hold their hands in order to get them to keep their pet Jihadis on a leash. September 11 forced Pakistan to allow America take on their pets; with the Biden policy shift described above, things will be right back where they started, with Washington dependent on Pakistani goodwill.
But Andy McCarthy at the NRO doesn’t think a rational calculus works any more. He’s convinced Obama is going to throw the fight. “Deep down, national-security conservatives know President Obama will not wage a decisive war against America’s enemies in Afghanistan.” So in McCarthy’s view, the McChrystal plan is DOA, and there’s no pretending it isn’t. Given McCarthy’s assumptions some sort of withdrawal is probably foreordained and even desirable. If Obama is going to cut and run, might as well beat him to it.
However, McCarthy himself points out that the President has painted himself into a corner by campaigning on Afghanistan as the good war. So in some sense, it isn’t just McChrystal who’s in a bind, so is the President. “He has boxed himself in”, McCarthy says. And maybe that’s why McChrystal, against all odds, is seemingly forcing the President into taking an agonizing look at the problem. The MSNBC piece says “it’s too early” to know which way the President will go. BHO is obviously looking for a way. But a way where? A way out? A way to win? Well readers, which is it and why?
#6 Armaggedon Rex:
It would not take nukes. In the book “Kill Bin Laden” the head of the Delta Force contingent sent to Tora Bora explained that salting the passes between that region and Pakistan with aerially deployed mines would have done it. We did not do that and it is not hard to imagine why. The images of children and innocent goat herders with their legs blown off would have filled the media at once.
And we still have not done it. We should be deploying such mines daily, making them timer and radio-detonated, blowing them up and deploying some more, every day. The cost would be trivial compared to the rest of out effort, the logistics requirements well within our normal capabilities.
The biggest problems we have relative Afghanistan were created by the Left – at opposite ends of the logistics pipeline. It was politically expediant to decry the war as one Bush was losing. But in so doing they have set the bar so high that a WWII style victory, with the Stars and Stripes waving peacefully and triumphally over every village from Kabul to Islamabad, is the only way to prevent the enemy from being able to proclaim “We won!” Gen McChrystal has presented the bill for that scenario, and they don’t want to pay it.
Over at this end of the pipeline they have set the bar too high, too. They continue to insist that “9/11/01 came from Afghanistan” when in fact it came from the Middle East and from decades of standing by and letting everyone from O.J. Simpson to the people who sent the bombers to the Marine barracks in Lebanon go free and thumb their noses at us. At the time of Bush I’s inauguration the greatest military controversy was allowing women in combat and homosexuals in the military. How do you think that looks to the crazies in the world compared to how we looked in 1945? We looked like wimps because we acted like wimps. The Left likes to think that if we just get those last few Bad People In The Mountains then we can go back to being National Wimps.
Marc,
I agree that Obama’s character is to retreat on military issues but he is more passive aggressive than beta male. Obama’s resistance to American winning is his radical background not being a beta male. Obama is certainly ruthless enough on the domestic front.
Heinlein once said, “ a pacifist is the first to haul up the Jolly Roger” Pacifism is a mindset that can be changed with proper stimuli, however they generally do not know how to control their aggressive nature.
I do not make the mistake that Obama is a pacifist. He is a narcissist that is convince that he can be the loved one with his foolish nuclear disarmament. He is trying to realize the dreams on his youth the 1980’s the anti American radicals who demonstrated against the Pershing missiles in Europe during Reagan’s days.
It getting clearer how much Obama is trapped in the thinking of his youth with his Marxist inclinations, anti American rhetoric and socialist dreams.
His inability to assume the role of President from the role as candidate is troubling. His greatest tool and strength is his ability to give a speech, at least in his mind. Regrettably the media has enabled that belief.
That is an important role of the President, but not the most. Bush was a capable president and his public speaking was not his strong point.
Obama wants to avoid the conflict with McChrystal so he ran to Copenhagen; Obama does not feel comfortable as CINC.
So it is natural for him to try to get rid of strong Cabinet people and the DOD is not a Department that can be run within the Whitehouse.
Emasculating the DOD with Hegel is one way, but this is a position that has to be approved in the Senate and the Senate will not approve Hegel.
Gates was already approved and he was the most astute political DOD could wish. He would not contest publicly with the President.
But Obama feels threatened with Gates and the DOD. He only comfortable with Rahm and Axrelrod who are both incapable of running the DOD. Panetta is already kicking up a fuss.
Obama has the problem is that he became President while we are in a war. Bush was good war President but it absorbed all his time. Obama has different focuses like domestic issues and foreign issues are just in the way. His impulse is just to punt it down the road. He has been doing that with Iran and these recent negotiations are more of the same.
But other countries do not have that luxury and the more he appeases Iran and Russia the more likely that Israel will take out Iran.
The worry that Bush had was that would bring us into war with Iran and possibly with Russian help so he tried to use more covert means to delay Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
Israel faces the risk that if they do a strike they will not take out all the threats and a missile bombardment from Iran on Israel will occur. If that happens is not certain that the US will succor Israel or come into help.
Public sentiment in the US would be to help Israel and punish Iran. We already have the assets in the area.
But there will be a public backlash against Israel if we sucked down that road. That is one reason Israel has been hesitant but they will have no choice.
McChrystal should make a jaunt to Copenhagen and put in a bid for the Olympics to be held at Kabul in 2016; That just might get some attention.
(Whoa! Click to edit? I’m so excited I don’t know what to do!)
Great comment # 22 Wretchard,
Obama ran and let his staff ague with McChrystal. Biden can be sharp sometimes especially when he is free to speak his own thoughts. This sounds like Biden and not Obama speak.
McChrystal is right that without local forces we cannot get actionable intelligence for targets.
With the swamp being filled by madrasses in Pakistan the Taliban is not going away, managing them to be a non-threatening force is inevitable.
The problem with Taliban is that they do not police the thuggish elements and instead allow them to go wild like they did in Swat.
They cannot restrain themselves and in a power vacuum they will rush to fill it. They have not yet suffered enough losses for them to keep their heads down.
I found it interesting that Hilary was quiet. I believe she knows better but will not speak up. Her position is odd. She has been put aside with little power. Will she try to become Obama’s vizier or instead create her own empire at State very quietly?
Her time is limited. She gave up her seat for the shot at the Presidency and is too old to try again.
Biden has foot in mouth but he is not dumb. He is the heir. He is almost like the court jester that says the truth while he ignored as a power threat.
I have to say that the Afghanistan policy is political and military and it is a good idea that both give input. I agree with the military that Obama will not wage a decisive ear. McCarthy is wrong with Obama cornered. He will just bring out his reset button. And say we misunderstood him.
BBC NEWS South Asia US success story in Afghan town
As President Obama reviews policy on Afghanistan, US Marines in Helmand province are claiming a success story.
UK and US forces have driven the Taliban from Garmsir and introduced an atmosphere of relative safety.
Ian Pannell reports.
—
Edd Hendee (Texas Radio Host) just got back – he slept in the same tent as this BBC Crew.
He was impressed with the crew, and VERY impressed with the Marines.
All this chatter about politics and power and who is doing what to whom misses one point. The enemy. They have their own plans. They are not waiting for us to decide on what the rules are going to be. They have one goal and that is to destroy our army in Afghanistan. They aren’t concerned about saving lifes or winning hearts and minds.
This is NOT a Friday night football game. We have troops who are are in contact and dieing. They need help! And our government is sitting around on their fundaments, trying to decide whether to defecate or go blind. What a bunch of losers, all of them. They don’t deserve the loyalty of the military. But,…they have it. Our men and women in the Armed Forces will do the very best they can, and die, if need be. There is no curse in the many languages of Christendom sufficent to express proper disdain for the idiots currently in positions of power. They wanted to be the leaders so badly that they have almost destroyed our republic for leadership, and now they refuse to lead. As they watch all of their sophmoric, high school UN ideas crumble and wither in the confrontation between good and real evil, they are like deer in a headlight,…Oh sh*t! I’m going to go get another cup of tea.
If we ‘win’ in Afghanistan and thus have ‘freedom of action’, and this upsets ‘certain elements’ in Pakistan, what happens to our logistics, which depends on the cooperation of Pakistan?
BHO represents the far American left and a lot of the leftists of the world. They specifically detest American projection of power as Imperialistic and reject it no matter the cost in confidence or American image. The school yard bullies of the world view it as weakness, which it is, and draw strength from the retreats and nibble at the edges of the cookie waiting for the whole edifice to collapse upon itself.
The bottom line is O will find a way to retreat to keep his base in line. He won’t buck the base and down the road there will be much more instability. The left doesn’t care because it is a long way from Marin County, Portland, and the Upper West Side.
If we ‘win’ in Afghanistan and thus have ‘freedom of action’, and this upsets ‘certain elements’ in Pakistan, what happens to our logistics, which depends on the cooperation of Pakistan?
My guess is that US success in Afghanistan would change the relative balance of power within Pakistan over the long run, but whether for the better is another question. Put it another way: with the US out of Afghanistan, the NWFP and beyond would again become the uncertain fiefdom of elements of the ISI and increase their power vis a vis others. Neutralizing this bailiwick from hell would greatly weaken some of the most malevolent forces in Pakistan, but my understanding is that these pestilential elements keep other kinds of political bugs under control in that ecosystem. It may even be that without these games to play, Pakistan would fall apart.
I guess my answer to what happens to logistics if the US wins in Pakistan is “I don’t know”. But I think it’s a reasonable to suppose that the choice of Afghan strategy has real repercussions on Pakistani domestic politics. You can almost think of Afghanistan as the thermostat which indirectly controls the weather in Pakistan. And maybe this is what the debates are about: how far to twist the thermometer in one direction or the other.
This is why the McChrystal request is making them think, because now they must act. But what a dilemma! It’s like one of those bomb disposal scenes in a movie: blue wire or red wire? In the end you have to choose which wire to cut and see what happens. Maybe that’s why Joe Biden is out front.
Biden’s policy of getting the US out of the Afghanistan fight and relying on locally trained proxies has a name, “Decent Interval.” We all know where that leads to and we also know what level of threat will come from Afghanistan once the Taliban regain power and Pakistan with its nukes falls decisively away from us. I do not think that the American people will support that if the conservative opposition continues to counter attack and regain control of the narrative.
India cannot allow a Taliban – Pakistan – China alliance to take root following an American withdrawal under the Biden plan. That creates an existential threat for India. This is analogous to the existential threat to Israel that Obama’s coddling of Iran – Syria – Hezbollah has precipitated. The US, India and Israel are facing a coordinated offensive by the Shanghai Cooperative Council. If we had strong leadership then we could have Europe and possibly Japan on our side and face this threat down with a smaller, I will not say with no, war. The recent European elections show that the voters there are grasping the nature of the situation. The problem is that with allies, I am not saying agents, of the forces threatening us in power in DC we cannot provide that leadership. Japan is therefor going to try to pursue a more independent course and hope for survival. India must must be weighing its options carefully. There is only so much slack that Australia can pick up.
For a critical contingent of voters, including relatives of mine, Obama’s support rested on the argument that Bush was hated by the world, not just by the Islamists, and it was extremely important that we regain the respect and affection of old friends. The argument was largely a lie. It was a creation of media meme setting and depended on a consensus between elites in the United States and Europe.
Most Americans do not understand is how undemocratic the EU is and how the European elites are even more alienated from their constituencies than are their equivalents in America. What Europe has lacked that the Left has built in America is a radicalized voting block based on actual (latino in the US) or cultural (urban blacks) aliens. Rathke going to build a European Acorn in Sicily is extremely important. If Berlusconi has a grasp on this then he should use every tool at his disposal (which exceed those available to a President operating under the US Constitution) to get him out of there. The Mafia should also feel threatened but they may see this as an alliance floating back from Chicago.
Baba Tim sez:
The Internal Focus of ISAF
The Greatest Afghan War — Michael Yon
Great comments by many, including wretchard and rah.
Notice that what is being concluded is not the logistics of the war, but Obama’s psychological inability to be president and CinChief.
Obama is a pathological narcissist; he has no intellectual capacity to think through a policy or program. His mental activity is confined to psychologcally controlling those with whom he is in contact so that they will adulate him. That’s it.
Such a relation is obviously irrelevant between Obama and a military general and in such a case, where Obama cannot set up a situation of psychological adulation, the other person simply ceases to exist for Obama.
Obama, who is profoundly ignorant of and indifferent to history, economics, societal structures etc, does not have the intellectual capacity and knowledge to develop policies. He delegates all of that to others. He is merely The Salesman..that’s also why he can’t answer questions because has hasn’t a clue about these programs.
As a narcissist Salesman, Obama demands that you accept His policies because they are deemed an Appendage of Him. Congress is not supposed to read or debate policies but accept that because they accepted Obama as President. Simple as that.
Obama’s only focus is on adulation,where he feels in control. Critique him, and he feels threatened and his reaction will be first, to attack and denigrate you..He uses the ‘race’ card constantly, accusing you of Bias if you reject him or his appended policies. After all, there can’t be anything ‘wrong’ with Obama!
If he can’t control you, you cease to exist. Actually cease to exist.
So, he’ll throw Afghanistan out, Iran, Israel…he’l allow Russia to expand, Iran to expand its imperial agenda, Venezuala to expand its imperial agenda..and so on.
Obama could appeal to the emerging desire for democracy in Iran..he won’t. In Afghanistan, he could support the generals; he won’t.
And remember, since he can’t think up any policies himself, then he’s the Salesman for the policies of the BackRoom Gang in the WH – a set of radical leftist socialists, who are anti-American, anti-capitalist thugs.
We are fighting against the wrong enemy. It is al-Qaeda, not the Taliban, that has an international reach and can hit our country. Our military leaders admit that until the Afghan government becomes a functional government, there is no possibility of defeating the insurgency in that country. Let’s face it, the Taliban IS the country. The Taliban is an “insurgency” targeted against one of the most corrupt regimes in the area. My suggestion—let them have at it. We should not be seen as defenders of the Karzai regime. The Taliban represent no threat to Pakistan. And once our forces are out of the country, it would be al-Qaeda, composed of Arabs, that would be the foreign element in the area.
At the risk of sounding like the old woman who swallowed a fly, it is becoming increasingly clear that the most effective supply route into Afghanistan is Iran. The problem is that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a jerk who revels in humiliating his enemies.
Barack Obama ran on an essentially pacifist platform in 2008. He may have talked of Afghanistan as a “war of necessity”, but his anti-war supporters lionized him on the basis that he would bring our troops home and leave the battlefield to our enemies. Anti-war activists did not expect Barack Obama to mean what he said about Afghanistan.
The military necessity of winning in Afghanistan may very well require the conquest of Iran. However, Barack Obama is politically running on empty. There is little to no political support within the United States for starting another war now, especially led by a man who called the Iraq war a “dumb war”. It will be difficult for Barack Obama to explain how liberating Iraq is a “dumb war” while liberating Iran is a “war of necessity”, especially when the New York Times (Obama’s backbench) is already comparing the “weapons of mass destruction” concerns about Iran to concerns in 2002-2003 about Iraq during the second Bush administration.
Sure, sure, Barack Obama may be giving Iran an ultimatum concerning access and verification of Iran’s nuclear weapons program. The answer will be the usual repetition of Iran’s statement of “f*** you” phrased in flowery Islamic prose occasionally punctuated by chants of “Death to America”. (Given how people get raped in Iranian prisons and how Iranian dissident women who are virgins are systematically raped as part of Iran’s perversion of Shi’ite “temporary marriage”, the statement “f*** you” is graphically more accurate in this context than it normally would be.)
I don’t think Barack Obama has the nerve to conquer Iran; even if he did, his backbench would oppose any such intervention. Greeks conquered Iran. Arabs conquered Iran. Mongols conquered Iran. Even a coalition of Britain, the Soviet Union, and the United States conquered Iran during World War II. (Since Iran allied itself with Nazi Germany, the casus belli was valid.) Still, even with the Iranian government is teetering on collapse, Obama’s backbench is so shy of foreign wars that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad could probably bully Obama with sheer bravado and nothing else. If Barack Obama couldn’t stand up to the Javanese children who bullied him in the streets of Djakarta, how can Americans (or Iranians) expect him to stand up to Ahmadinejad?
Given the present configuration of the United States Armed Forces (and the consequent difficulty of reconfiguring America’s supply system to circumvent Pakistan, Russia, and Iran), Barack Obama may be facing a stark choice between defeat in Afghanistan and the conquest of Iran. Barack Obama has a tough mountain to climb concerning Afghanistan, and he hasn’t made his life any easier by alienating the very people he would need to create and maintain a war coalition. If he starts a war, he should expect to be vilified by the very same people who deified him one year ago; he should expect the Left to portray him as a puppet of his generals. If he doesn’t start a war to open an Iranian corridor, he should expect to be an object of ridicule just like Jimmy Carter.
What does “victory” in Afghanistan look like?
Females getting fear free educations?
Taliban all dead or staying underground 24/7…redundant?
Al Qaeda eliminated or forced elsewhere?
Or just nobody shooting at us or placing IEDs?
Functional Government.?…hell we could use one of those in the CONUS.
All of the above?
Separating the wheat from the chaff, so to speak, what we have in Afghanistan is called “Mission Creep” in Pentagonese.
The original mission in the ‘stan was to kill terrs (AQ, Taliban, etc.), AKA “Bug Hunt” in milspeak. This mission got off to a good start and is going VERY well.
The problem with bug hunts is there is no glory there. There is no glory in any war for the grunts. Glory is claimed by the Generals. McCrystal wants to be the General that conquered Afghanistan, which would give him a place in history, since the last General to do that was Genghis Khan who isn’t a bad guy to be mentioned with, as far as Generals go. Like sharing a record with Pele or Tiger Woods.
Two problems with that from McCrystal’s POV.
First, conquering Afghanistan wasn’t the mission. Second Afghanistann isn’t really a nation/state. If the good General can mission creep the ‘stan into a nation building mission then he solves BOTH the problems in one fell swoop.
As a bug hunt, logistics isn’t an issue. I bring this up because modern warfare is about logistics. Guerrilla, Insurgency warfare, civil wars, or any of the other forms of small wars are not logistics based. True guerrillas depend on their enemy for logistics support, which is one distinction between the ‘G’ and state sponsored terrorism. Hezbo’allah gets their weapons from Iran, not the Israelis.
By trying to re-make Afghanistan into a more conventional war, the good General runs the risk of creating another Bataan. That’s right, Bataan, not vietnam. That would be the goal for the ISI and Taliban, not a Vietnam. Cut the logistics train like Battan and the Talibam will have about 80,000 US Soldiers as hostages. A beheading a day for a Looooooooong time.
As the French have pointed out, this President is a pussy. He will fold under that sort of pressure.
My back of the envelop calculation shows 100,000 to be the maximum number of troops that can be supported in the event of the supply lines being cut by Pakistan and Russia. And that is if those 100,000 troops do nothing but protect the airfield from ManPADS.
My traing was military, not political, so I don’t worry about intentions. Both Russia and Pakistan are capable of cutting the logistc trail into Afghanistan, so we must plan for them doing so.
The solution is to stick with the original mission and pull out the Army. The Army is just to awkard for bug hunts. They tend to want to burn down the building to get rid of the bugs. While arson has it’s place in the great scheme of things, this isn’t it.
Send in the Marines. A Marine Division would be able to finish off AQ and put a real dent into the Taliban. A 2 carrier BG will provide all the air support needed. Put into effect the GC rules on journalism and let the Jarheads hunt bugs. The Marines enjoy it, the ‘gani’s enjoy it, even the terrs will enjoy it. Allow the media in ONLY as embeds, which the Geneva Convention allows. In a few years the ‘stan won’t be an issue and in a generation, there might actually be a Nation/Sate there. I wouldn’t bet on that, but stranger things have happened.
Alan Simon,
My suggestion—let them have at it.
Nice job on your web site. You are wrong about the Taliban. We can’t give Afghanistan back to them because they already proved they can’t be trusted. Trying to be to clever by half just gets us into more trouble. Maybe if the US was not a democracy we could execute a clever cynical policy where professionals line up and cut deals with groups like the Taliban. As Miles Copeland once asked, do we really care if the social nationalist or the national socialists are in charge? But we are a democracy and while the real world is messy and we do have to work with unsavory locals we also have to have a few clear simple lines to follow. The Taliban sponsored al-Qaeda and started this war. We cannot manage a relation with them after 9-11. We need to convince everyone that Uncle Sam is best left alone or at least not pushed to far. Otherwise we will have a dozen other thugs and proxies sponsoring al-Qaeda clones in the plausible deniability racket. Do you want Chavez sponsoring a Hezbollah cell thinking he would be safe from blow back? The only thing we can do with the Taliban is kill them and hope that the locals can come up with something else, not necessarily Jeffersonian, but more palatable. If Karzai is not the answer then how can the Afghans, not us, come up with something better? Maybe they need the king back. Maybe they need another Grand Council.
programmer 28: The enemy. . . . They are not waiting for us to decide on what the rules are going to be.
The folks over AfPak are not the enemy. The goal here has nothing to do with American national interests abroad. It is all about political power at home. Power that can be used to support allies that can in turn support you and your allies. Think community organizer. What goes on outside of the patronage network is irrelevant if it confers no immediate, tangible benefit in these terms. Were AfPak teeming with conservative Republican voters you can bet that the war would be waged a l’outrance. But AfPak is a kind of tar baby that is stuck to BHO (inherited from the evil GWB, to be sure), it confers no benefits and is fraught with liabilities. His task is to rid himself of it in the way that will confer the most benefit and least detriment to him and his associates.
What we are seeing is Westmoreland redux. Where are the supplies flowing in from, that equip the Taliban? How much of them are made in Afghanistan?
My answer is, bypass the Karzai “government”, and bring in a continental preparatory regime for Asia, as well as Africa and South America. Because the Karzai “government” is as ham-handed as the Diem government in dealing with the sons of allah who resent the progress of those they demonize, put want to go back to the time of Mohammed.
For, it largely rests on property rights being
defended and/or respected. When they are done
more often for more people, then life tends to
get better. When they are defended and/or respected less often, and for fewer people, life tends to get worse. Now, what is wrong with life getting better? There are examples
of people who have put their time to aiding their fellow man, because their life has become more affluent. Even though there are examples of people who, when life becomes better, become less respectable. That is something they will have to deal with, but it
does not invalidate that there are people who
truly become more respectable when they become
more affluent.
This is at the heart of the struggle between those who are targeted by those who divide the world into the Dar al Islam and the Dar al
Harb, and those who make that decision.
It’s easy to forget that George Bush came into office and spent his first several months as President determined to pursue a domestic agenda, and wanted to spend little time on foreign policy. This is entirely typical for US Presidents – they have been steeped in domestic policy tussles for years during the campaign, they won the big prize, and they want to reward their friends and punish their enemies domestically, which is pretty good fun. Then they get sucked into a difficult foreign policy issue, and we all know how that turned out for Bush. And Carter. And Nixon.
Obama is about to engage with the part of his job for which he has few qualifications. Worse for him, Americans in general either don’t trust him in this area or, if they are liberals, have a long history of turning on their own President as soon as he commits to any serious goals overseas which might divert resources from their domestic agendas.
Obama is smart enough to realize that as soon as he asserts an objective in Afghanistan the fun part of his presidency may be over.
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the blog post From the Front: 10/02/2009 News and Personal dispatches from the front and the home front.
JS/39; Bataan –or Singapore.
Breaking news: Chicago gets least amount of votes for olympics, will not proceed to next vote, Tokyo eliminated on second round.
Why should a president with a radical -marxist – thirworld-ism cultural background want America to WIN against muslim terrorism ?
He has no reason to do that : for him, WE are evil, the terrorists for him are a “symptom” of problems that in his paleo-marxist opinion WE have created.
I am astonished at the lack of civic courage in Congress: not ONE, not a single Congressman dares speak the truth and say to the People that America is led by a president who wants America to be defeated.
Not one.
There is not one single Patriot in the whole Congress.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
PS Our Warriors DIE every day and this president says that he will decide what to do IN SOME WEEKS.
Poor president ! THE WORLD doesn’t love him !
he must apologize more and bow more, then maybe he will get more friends !
Do you need the tag ?
/sarc
“it’s too early” to know which way the President will go. BHO is obviously looking for a way. But a way where? A way out? A way to win? Well readers, which is it and why?
Obama sees himself as an intellect and he believes that he can out-think and out-negotiate any foe. He is committed to a non-violent resolution in the region and he will be naturally attracted to any solution in that vein. Joe Biden is doing O’s bidding as a buffer and we all know what Joe’s solution was to have been in Iraq: Divide and conquer. In other words, divide Iraq into three separate ethnic states; Sunni, Shiite and Kurd. So I predict that Bidens’ approach will extrapolate from the same basis of thought. I would look to a kind of federalization of Afghanistan roughly drawn up along ethnic lines. It would give each province some autonomy and something to fight for. Obama will be circumspect because this would put Pakistan on the spot because of the shared Baluch population, which will appeal to him, but will royally piss off the Iranians which he’d be loath to do at this point. Re-writing or re-righting the failed map drawing of the British will be the closest thing to a historic victory so the administration might try this approach. But if they do, they have to soft peddle it as something else. They could simply embed the feature in the training and command and control of the Afghan forces.
Once again we are being forced to watch the WH make decisions between political expediency of popularity of the next election and that which would be in America’s and the world’s best interests. The queer resolve of the party in power is that what is best for their party must be best for the nation.
Afganistan has always been the cross roads of Asia with the surrounding countries the functional goal. Pakistan,Iran, India, China, Russia, the Asian hub of tribalism, ethnicity,religious vehemence, conflict, and ancient grudges may just be an insolvable problem and best treated as such for a long time to come.
Meanwhile back at the ranch:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/112352
“The latest Fox News/Opinion Dymanic poll is chock-full of bad news for the president. But on foreign policy, the results are nothing short of stunning. On who they trust more to decide the next steps in Afghanistan. 66 percent say military commanders, while only 20 percent say the president. Even Democrats have more faith in the military commanders (by a 45 to 37 percent margin). On Iran, 69 percent say Obama has not been tough enough, including 55 percent of Democrats. Sixty-one percent favor a U.S. military action, if needed, to keep Iran from getting nuclear weapons. Fifty-one percent think Obama apologizes for American too much.”
Chicago’s bid to get the 2016 Olympics has been rejected. Barack Obama staked much of his political capital on pressing the International Olympic Commission to award the 2016 to Chicago. It looks very clear that Pakistan blocked it.
McChrystal gives an interview to “Le Figaro” :
“It is the Afghan people that will decide who will win this war. The Afghan government and Afghan army forces that are, ultimately, the decisive forces will prevail. We, Westerners, we must be their loyal partner. We can win because the Taliban and other insurgent groups are not an irresistible political force. They are the result of the weakness of the Afghan state. We’ve got the duty to convice Afghani population to not support insurrection”
http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2009/09/29/01003-20090929ARTFIG00017-mcchrystal-comment-nous-allons-gagner-en-afghanistan-.php
Alexis,
No, it was the World’s hatred for GWB.
Poor BHO has been victimized again by his predecessor.
…and what a rotten country we are.
THE EGO HAS LANDED
BBC SPORT Olympics Live – 2016 Olympics decision day
Live coverage of the great event.
Love that headline.
Should become our mantra.
Turn India loose on Pakistan.
Turn Israel loose on Iran.
Enough fighting wars against jihadis with one hand behind our back.
Obama has no desire to “win” in either Afghanistan or Pakistan. Instead his objective is to have one or more US cities nuked, probably by Pakistani factions/forces allied with AQ and the Taliban, so he can create a forceful surrender to Islam and become Marshall Petain. In a Vichy America. Or become America’s Vizier. Whichever you prefer.
THAT is the sum of his actions: gutting missile defense, abandoning Afghanistan, Iraq, the Israelis, accepting Iranian nukes, bowing and scraping before the Saudi King, cutting the military, cutting and running in abject defeat in Afghanistan. Which collectively can only create a nuclear attack on the US.
Obama and his people are not stupid. THEY KNOW THIS. So too, does the US military.
There will be no coup by the US military in the event of an American surrender and defeat in Afghanistan and Iraq. Humiliation and surrender will not produce it. HOWEVER, a nuking of a US city or two (which Obama CLEARLY wants badly), will produce a coup IF Obama reacts as predictably, he will, by ordering a surrender.
Even Obama has limits. Even he cannot allow the nuking of US cities without nuclear retaliation on suspect nations to prevent MORE US cities dying.
Obama hates the US (and its mostly White population). He is the President and the military though it loathes and hates him will obey him. But only to a point — certainly not his end game which is nuclear destruction and Vichy America.
It is not “too early” to tell anything about Obama. He is of a type which is a commonplace on the left: A post modern, anti-American, pseudo-intellectual, pseudo-academic, political hustling Marxist, and his mentors one way or another are or where disciples of the very real legacy of direct political action campaigns against the USA of agencies of the Soviet Unions and the PRC. A true, “post-modern” Bolshevik of the new global brand is what he is.
There are quite real connections to this sort of business, direct or indirect, in his past. He is the enemy of this nation. He is the enemy of our civilization. Sure, there are the political cogitations of his band of looters, and, just as sure, there are psychological underpinnings of narcissistic and sundry other “personality disorders”, but these are juat part of the package. They are part of the program; they are features not bugs. It is all just gravy. For anyone to set about this sort of betrayal they would have to have these other aspects to one degree for another. That was all a part of the selection process. Nowhere in this is there one scruple about what is right and good and true.
Obama is a front man. This does not mean that his handlers just give him orders or threaten life and limb in order to get his compliance. He is manipulated by his various vices and flaws. It does not mean that he is kept from inserting his own views or twists on their perfidious plans. He may actually think that he is calling the shots. Who is behind him? My guess is that even the immediate circle behind him, the “New Left” gang in the WH, are not really in charge either. Have a look at the lot of them, they can hardly think straight, let alone shoot straight. These are not serious people. They cannot plan and execute such a monstrous program and the Obama administration.
He will give away the store. He will betray us at every turn. One only hopes that someone at Langley is keeping the real secrets from him for he would surely give all of it to our enemies. I am amazed that folks hereabouts think otherwise about him. We have new evidence, new outrages practically everyday. Nothing could be more obvious. We are in a real pickle.
We have a great nightmare upon us and at a moment of great peril and and great weakness. We have never had such a traitor in such a position of power backed by corrupted and compliant legislators, Media and establishment institutions. I will marvel if we survive it intact. If we manage to somehow regain our position as the leading nation of the world, it will appear to me as an act of the Almighty.
Obama will do the utmost damage to our interest externally and internally. He will royally screw up AF/Pak in particular and the WOT in general. Great tragedy will result, has already resulted really, and it does not matter if it is willful or not, or whether it is a result of cunning or incompetence.
But my vote, obviously, is that it is willful and cunning, and that he, his circle and their masters pursue this program with what can only be described as demonic relish, intensity, alacrity and enthusiasm.
We can only hope that they are too cunning by half.
Certainly, the IOC seems to have their opinions of what is afoot.
“He will give away the store.
He will betray us at every turn.
One only hopes that someone at Langley is keeping the real secrets from him for he would surely give all of it to our enemies.
I am amazed that folks hereabouts think otherwise about him.
We have new evidence, new outrages practically everyday. Nothing could be more obvious.
We are in a real pickle.”
—
Agreed
—
Rio’s Olympic bid video
—
‘funniest ever’ mating ritual
#57 Mongoose
As (I hope) it is clear from my posts, I agree with your analysis.
Except for one point: Soros is the puppeteer of this gang of “post-modern bolsheviks” (perfect !).
Soros’ (and Soros’ brotherly friends) goals are mysterious to me. But they probably go in the direction of the “world government” by the UN.
A nightmare inside a nightmare.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
@22
“BHO is obviously looking for a way. But a way where? A way out? A way to win? Well readers, which is it and why?”
How about a way to save face? He doesn’t appear to go much deeper than that. Maybe that’s why his foreign policy, if we can call it that, is such a conundrum to greater minds than his. Maybe he’s not even thinking about the things you are, Wretchard. Maybe he’s just running scared.
Notice that what is being concluded is not the logistics of the war, but Obama’s psychological inability to be president and CinChief.
I think it was Buddy or LOTM who said a few threads back (paraphrasing) that the problems aren’t the problem – they’re easy, we could solve them over a three-martini lunch (perhaps he said three-hour lunch). The problem is the spider web of stuff we choose to be constrained by.
And Wretchard has been circling a thesis that Obama himself isn’t the problem, narcissist-in-chief, liar, weakling, naïf, thug or screwup though he may be. He is just a particularly unpleasant symptom of the problem washed up on our shores like some rotting whale carcass that stinks worse every day and we don’t know how to dispose of it (nb: the whale carcass symbolism is mine, not our hosts). The real problem is a dysfunction within our societal decision making process that lets horrible choices like Obama, Pelosi, Reid, et al get made.
And frankly nothing else really matters. Afghanistan, Pakistan, GM, Health Care, AGW – as seemingly critical as any or all of these are, trying to address any of them is like trying to bail an ocean liner with a tea cup. Even trying to plug the holes is useless, because there’s a nut loose drilling more holes faster than we can plug the old ones. What we need to do is fix and hold the nut accountable for all the water coming in.
The nut of course is modern leftism, but it’s a hard thing to pin down and is shifty and good at camouflage. But that’s our target. When it comes to the fiascos that are hatching (like Afghanistan), what I think we should focus on is not debating the different strategies put forth, but rather on making plain how poor the choices offered are, and then, more significantly, on the self-imposed (or rather, Leftist-imposed) constraints that are responsible.
Doesn’t mean it isn’t a tragedy when things fail, especially when we have troops caught up in the fiasco. But honestly there’s no “solution” to Afghanistan available under the current political constellation in the US.
SZ/47; Why should a president with a radical -marxist – thirdworld-ism cultural background want America to WIN against muslim terrorism ?
Exactly so. But the real question is, HOW on earth could 52% of America NOT have known that –at least a year or so before the freaking election?
(not that it matters now, but for future reference)
Afghanistan is another mess this president was handed when the keys to 1600 were left under the mat. Obama knows that all of his options on this one are filled with the same trap doors. He has had to figure out how to win this one while developing a long term get out clause strategy virtually from scratch. Obama doesn’t even enjoy any loyal opposition from the other major party in congress on his defense policies as his predesessor did with the exception of Mcain, Powell and Gates (Educated, but largely rejected opposition leadership). However, the president is gambling on returning to a multi lateral approach to entice greater international support that could end the majority of conflict earlier, save defense tax dollars and improve the building of infrastructure which that country desparately needs. Will it work?. The change is certainly better than what was…
Annoy Mouse – Biden’s outsider’s suggestion to divide Iraq into 3 ethnic sectors has been rejected by the Iraqi people themselves, who have moved instead to political rather than ethnic parties in a full Iraq.
Moving away from a civic model of governance, which accepts all ethnicities as equal citizens, back to a tribal model, is regressive and simply enables old tribal conflicts.
Poor citizen – Obama’s denigration of Congress, insisting that they pass His Bills on the basis of Trust-in-Him rather than read and debate them, and his rejection of criticism (see his minions who accuse dissenters of racism, being un-American).. is hardly a recipe for an opposition to be loyal to Him. Furhermore, the oppostion’s loyalty is owed to The People not Obama The One.
As for multilateralism, you continue to ignore he 33 members of the Iraq coalition, insulting every British,Australian, etc soldier who fought and died there. Why?
Obama has been refused assistance in Afghanistan by Europe. And this is the situation around the world, as more and more nations realize his naivete, his egoism and his anti-Americanism.
PC/63; so, the OEF expeditionary force was, like the rest of the world, just sort of milling around aimlessly until Obama came along?
Well “swing voters” get their political information and biases from broadcast TV for the most part. You know what happens to the ones that make it into and through college. The cultural views acquired from TV shows and movies are what they are and that affects them also. They tend not to make up their minds who they will vote for until a few weeks before the election, which is why the “October Surprise” is such a time honored tactic. The bell cure for ideological commitment puts the swing group in the middle and it makes up about 10 percent of the voting public if I recall correctly. On top of this the US has been a very wealthy country from the middle of the twentieth century. The tax revenues since the time of Regan have been unreal. So the soft and wacky have not had that hard a time prospering. With wealth comes corruption. Now the revenue is dropping like a gut shot goose and even the rent seekers are getting nervous. My “feeling” is that Obama politically died in office during the tail end of July, 2009.
In part because even the swing voters are beginning to get news and views off the Net.
Apparently a lot of people have started scrapping the Obama campaign stickers off their cars.
Many people are surprised to learn that there was a lot of pressure on Lincoln to just give up the fight and let the South go its own way. Lincoln was a very strong man, though, with the fixed opinion that the Union should be preserved. Through thick and thin.
Now, the Union has elected a weak man, whose idea of “doing something’ is to pay off his old friends in Chicago by PUTTING THE WHOLE STATUS OF THE USA ON THE LINE, and begging one of the most corrupt organizations in the world (the IOC), to get the Olympics.
It is an indication of Obama’s weakness (and that of the USA now), that Brazil won the “prize.”
And any of you think that you should be arguing tactics or strategy on the “Roof of the World” in 2009? You should be signing petitions and going to your representatives, demanding that American soldiers be withdrawn immediately. Every soldier that dies in that part of the world is dying so that Obama can look good on the WhiteHouse lawn.
2012 cannot come fast enough for the West.
JMH,
I referred to a 3 martini lunch back on August 7th during the “Who goes there?” thread about immigration law.
Many problems may be solved over a 3 martini lunch lunch but few problems can be solved after one.
Poor Citizen,
Obama doesn’t even enjoy any loyal opposition … in congress on his defense policies as his predesessor did
A very poor citizen indeed and I hope not of my country. If the issues were not so serious I could thank you for an excuse to laugh.
@63 Poor Citizen
Are you serious?!? Not to belabor the obvious, but Obama sought the presidency. He wanted the job. He campaigned aggressively that he would get Bin Laden in his sights, even invade Pakistan if necessary. He accused the previous administration of being criminally delinquent about Afghanistan. He said (incorrectly btw, but that’s another issue) that the WOT began in Afghanistan and further that it would end there. Are you suggesting he had no idea what that entailed? Whining that it’s really, really hard for him now is a pretty feeble endorsement of his ability to pull off “a multi lateral approach to entice greater international support that could end the majority of conflict earlier, save defense tax dollars and improve the building of infrastructure which that country desparately needs.”
The real thing to dread is a rout in Afghanistan where as Obama is frozen with fear and indecision, the jihadis surge in the countryside and our troops are cut off from resupply. What happens then, does the military take matters in their own hands? A general whose name I forget said, “Don’t let your armies get caught between the forces of history” which in this case is a weak spineless American leader and the forces of evil on the march. Pray for our nation.
PC is an idiot once more…
Afghanistan was supported by the international community and was not a “unilateral action” but a “multilateral action”, remember Obama praised it as the “good War”. If you removed your head from your rectum for a little while you’d see that Obama has already been snubbed by the international community both on his requests for more military assistance and taking Gitmo detainees. He asked for troops and got 5,000 cooks & pencil pushers who are barred from combat for his troubles and got stonewalled on the detainees.
ummmm Scott at No. 71: he has also got warriors from Canada and Britain, and according to Michael Yon, they are very good soldiers.
Which is why I am so clear about getting the soldiers out of this Obama mess. The US is the leader, the core of the effort here. And Obama is a heartless, gutless “Leader.” I don’t want ANY soldier dying while this man is leading the “Free World.”
And there will be terrible consequences, I know. But, as we have been for years, we can depend upon the Israelis to control Iran (with a nuke if necessary). Well, almost half of the American public are proud to be feeling kindly nuanced lefties. And they have voted to step down from being the Imperialist monster of their imaginations.
It is too bad. If we are lucky, 2012 will come before complete disaster. However, Julius Caesar is always an option, No?
Maybe what we need to do is follow the money. The Taliban and AQ profit from opium. They get a kickback from protecting the crops from Americans. When we destroy an opium crop we are nourishing hatred toward Americans.
We need to license the legal growing of opium and protect the farmers from the enemy. Studies have been done which indicate the farmers could make a significantly better income. Opium is grown legally in Turkey and India.
Building a pharmaceutical plant in Kabul would go a long way toward centralizing the country.
Wow, all sorts of stuff since my #17.
Rah prefers and open dialog on AF, I want our leaders pay attention to business and select a policy. But his view is certainly as good as mine about it.
IMO O has already signaled what that policy will be, but we keep the future around so we can be surprised. And we often are.
O is probably going to go with a fig-leaf policy of training and support for the AF rather than more combat troops. That was what Nixon did for Vietnam (Vietnamization of the war) and it worked, or at least staggered along, until the US cut off support in 1975. Then the South collapsed.
Why the South collapsed will be debated for years. My view pretty much agrees with Stanley Karnow’s. But AF is our topic.
I don’t worry about an Islamic – Chinese alliance against India. China doesn’t like the antics of the Muslim fundamentalists already in China. China is nationalistic, I doubt they will align with the Taleban or religious activists.
India is seen by some Westerners as China’s great rival in the region. I believe that is as much imagination as fact.
China knows India won’t bother China. And what would China gain by bothering them? I don’t see a plus for either side from a China v. India fight or Cold War. (Both nations like to appear powerful so face saving is very important when India and China do encounter each other.)
I am baffled by the assertions that leaving AF might help us get a more stable Pakistan. Or that the Taleban are proxies for PK intelligence. The whole region is packed with people of divided loyalties to clan, religion, nation, and various political thoughts. We know that. Yet I think the PK army and intelligence agencies primarily want to control PK. And backing the Taleban does not seem to promote that.
Perhaps I don’t understand how PK and AF are entwined. Can anyone?
Geopolitically, I think leaving AF or easing off will lead to AF, PK, and Central Asia to the North going fundamentalist fairly rapidly. American influence and presence would totally vanish. Some political factions would scramble for support from China or Russia. However the big winner would not be a political ideology or nation but Islamic fundamentalism.
On a (much) lighter note.
“The Ego Has Landed” about the fiasco of O’s Olympic effort has to be the quip of the year.
Even Nancy may smile at that phrase. Botox permitting.
The American Idol needs a few lessons in humility. And he won’t get them from the MSM. But they can’t bury this story about the Olympics. His Chicago style encountered an equally tough set of foreign thugs.
O’s adoring, yet fickle, overseas media is falling out of love. His great merit was that he wasn’t Bush. Now some wish he was.
K/75; “Houston, et cetera, wee wee have a problem.”
RWE @23:
I agree with your statement about our problems with Islamism being an existential one involving most of the Muslim world instead of a problem with a few hundred, thousand, or tens of thousands of Jihadists in the Afghan-Paki theater. Yes, the core of the problem is in Saudi Arabia, Iran, and a few other gulf states. Yes the left continues to ignore such problems. If progressives admit that Islamism is an existential threat to liberty, western civilization, and the U.S. in particular, then they are clearly cowards for refusing to deal with the situation like the adults they claim to be. Even an apathetic electorate like the U.S. has today tends to vote cowards out of office. Besides, it’s nearly impossible for most progressives to comprehend how anybody except gun-clinging, redneck, crackers in flyover country can take religion seriously, much less take it seriously enough to contribute a tenth or more of all pre-tax income to supporting religious causes. All we will continue to see from them is deny, deny, deny!
As for mining the “passes” throughout the Hindu Kush between Pakistan and Afghanistan, It’s not realistically possible. I once wondered why something like this wasn’t attempted by the Soviets when they were in Afghanistan. Then I got to see the terrain! God knows they planted enough mines down in the fertile valleys! The answer is that a fair amount of the equipment is carried in a Talibs hands or on their backs, or on small pack animals. Many of the “trails” they use are really goat paths. Literally goat paths! We’ve been finding seasonal caches way up above the winter snowline. If we mine the easy ways, they’ll resort to steep and rough paths where air dropped mines wouldn’t stay. If the mine landed on the path it would slide off into the valley below! The same thing happens with snow and rock slides, which is a designed feature to some of the paths. The other issue of course are the goats, gazelles, and sheep, and herdsmen who traverse the paths on legitimate business. With our current administration setting ROE so that Taliban can attack with near impunity so long as they hide amongst civilians, do you think they’re going to go for indiscriminate mining of large swaths of the countryside?
Mining huge swaths of terrain consisting of steep rocky mountains isn’t the answer.
Nasty biz –Yellow Rain, Soviets, Hmong, world press ‘clicked off’ by Harvard scientist who said it was ‘bee pollen’ and tho laughable thereby sent Yellow Rain to the history books as “controversial”.
(stanley kubrick in Dr Strangelove had the American soviet symps right –the soviet ambassador saying USSR had developed the doomsday bomb because ‘USA was working on its own doomsday bomb’. Asked by USA president where USSR had gotten such wrong information, he answered “We read about it in the New York Times!”)
A Rex, Glad you chimed in on the problem with mining the trails. I have looked over the geography via google and this is the classic silk road . The Hindu Kush is a large area, that is why the British set up forts at the choke points in Pakistan. The major pass is the Khyber Pass.
Any one thinks that choking off the trails is over simplistic. Even air cover is difficult. We do patrols and have been successful to a point.
The real problems are political and logistical. Without the political will no strategy will work.
That is why the discussion goes back to Obama. We know he plans to deep six the Afghan campaign, the question is how he plans it.
An inferior force goal is often to harrass the superior force until the superior force figures it is not worth it. We did that in our war in the revolution.
AQ tried that in Iraq but Bush was stubborn and determined.
What ever decision Obama makes will make this his “baby”. He can no longer blame Bush.
AQ has leaders that want to win. We get the impression that Obama wants to fail in Afghanistan, just as he wants America to fail as a country.. Our great leader questions victory…SDAB
Obama is also gonna throw away the Iraq victory, too, which will topple the whole Persian Gulf ( Saudi’s have already done a major $2bbl heavy weapons deal with Russia –likely soon enough the Caspian Axis will guide OPEC pricing –and likely sometime ahead, allocation), which will wedge western europe off the USA, and as EU, toward the SCO.
maybe it’s all part of a master plan –to accomplish something really important –saving a couple dozen union boss performance bonus plans perhaps.
“Buy American” –like Smoot and Hawley said!
Buddy, the real question behind that deal is what the Saudi want 150 or so Hinds and Hips? (does anyone know the breakdown of that deal, btw?).
It almost looks like they want to put together an Air Assault division.
Why? Very odd, given the small size of inhabitable areas in SA? It certainly seems like they are building an offensive capability.
Wait until they start pricing oil is a currency bucket, or Euros. This is certainly what it is all about: Take America out as the “Hyperpower”. And perhaps there is broad collusion about this.
We really need to stop it. What is so vexatious is that no high level GOPer, or even pundit, is talking about what is up.
My guess is that Russia and China will be real peer powers by the time he goes, which is really beyond belief, given to where we were not long ago. We will be so screwed up with debt that we will have a hard time turning it around.
One has to wonder how much of the Democrat’s agenda is ideological, and how much of it is the result of bribes.
Just throwing Obama out in 2012 wil not turn this back.
Hinds and Hips, sorry
That makes my stomach hurt, Luddy and Mongoose.
Let’s talk about Letterman, OK?
Doug,
Regarding the gap toothed over promoted weatherman from South of Michigan (ed., You mean the POTUS? me, No shaddup) three things come to mind.
1) Blackmail is a low horrible crime and anyone who engages in it should be totally destroyed.
2) The worst thing was hearing the audience cheer, not the admission but the act, as he confessed.
3) Every Republican, not just Palin, should beat this like a drum until this crumb is off stage.
OK a fourth item. What is it with Liberals in a position of authority? Couldn’t they ever talk to a girl without holding her paycheck first?
OK OK a fifth item. His wife should clean him out but good.
good point, doug –and excellently made.
KSA has always been the prize –the only comparable reserves, the global price swinger –and a huge obstacle to a Russian power that the Russians may not ever have to use, as just the having it will do. The temptation inherent in the geography and the oil situation is something that the Kremlin can’t help but reach for, if the coast is clear. They started reaching when the 2006 midterms came in. it’s full swing now, with pro-russia factions in the various oil producers rising and the USA cliques falling (see the big weapons buy –a small initial batch to test the repositioning). The “pro-Asia” (pro-China) party blew out the pro-America party in the japaneses elections and the process is already up and running.
you’re right –this can’t be turned back with anything but time and a tremendous effort –and a concomitant stumble on the part of our rivals (and fat chance they’ll ‘do’ an obama).
A century of work on spreading consensual multiparty government is going into the garbage can but fast. I guess because our system showed it couldn’t protect itself from a virus so the world is switching programs. what’s holding the Dollar up now that the world cop role is being mooted is that 55% of the world’s debt is still in Dollars. It represents a check you wrote that the payee has in the desk drawer –leaving your cash balance that much larger. Sixty years of these held checks has let us live higher and stronger in a way that no other country –because they don’t have the world’s reserve currency as also their national currency too –has been able to do, and now that the worm is turning these other nations will not let it turn back if there’s any way they can prevent it. And i do mean “any” way –this is the big push –everything is in place –the American voter has thrown away an irreplaceable national treasure he/she didn’t even know he/she owned.
ETAB – I am trying to guess what the administration is going to do by attempting to answer Wretchard’s question and I am pretty clear on what happened in Iraq and why carving it into separate states would have been a disaster. But do you suppose Biden felt that way?
That said, as far as regressive policies are concerned, you mean that the good and noble people of Afghanistan who kill little girls for going to school and bugger little boys because, well, it’s nice, are to be sensitized to the nuances of nationhood over tribal loyalty? It is a travesty that we do not have a firm kill them all and let god sort them out policy, or at least a more relaxed ROE that says we kill bad guys and if you happen to be hanging out with them prepare to die, but short of that, dividing and conquering these savages would be the first step towards civilization. You cannot preserve a nation based on medieval feudalism and make something good and progressive out of it without first annihilating it and their collect will to resist. You may wince at the bigotry shown here but it would not register with 99 of 100 Afghanis who’d gladly act out their ancient tribal hatred. Treating them as an amorphous herd of goats will do nothing but harbor more violence.
Corruption does have consequences.
d/88; yes it do. we got nobody to blame but the guy in the mirror. war and peace has been more under our control and less under anybody else’s for a long time now –hope it won’t be too big a shock when it isn’t anymore.
Annoy Mouse,
The reason that carving Iraq up is a bad idea is because of the neighbors. Let us take them in clockwise order.
1) Turkey, liable to solve domestic problems by stomping on Kurds over the border.
Best dissuaded from developing Putinesque fantasies of resurrecting an old empire.
2) Iran, actively engaging in attempting to revive an empire that on the eve of Islam reached as far as Egypt.
3) Kuwait, they really were using slant drilling to steal oil from Saddam.
4) Saudi Arabia, unstable target of al-Qeada exports suicidal unemployable Wahabi youths.
5) Syria, ruled by Ba’ath party fascists controlled by the tiny minority Alawite clan.
Iran and Syria are Russian clients and Turkey and KSA have recently moved to sign agreements with Russia. Creating s set of smaller states in the middle would be equivalent to dropping a box of kittens into a dog pound. The Kuwaitis and the Gulf Cooperation Council states must be looking at the situation and weighing their options.
Rush caller says Penske deal fell through due to foreign car company insisting on being protected from fall in the dollar.
For the love of Pete, are we not talking about Afghanistan here? How did this turn into a retro discussion about what did not occur in Iraq?
Quoting myself in the original post –
“Joe Biden is doing O’s bidding as a buffer and we all know what Joe’s solution was to have been in Iraq: Divide and conquer. In other words, divide Iraq into three separate ethnic states; Sunni, Shiite and Kurd. SO I PREDICT THAT BIDENS’ APPROACH WILL EXTRAPOLATE FROM THE SAME BASIS OF THOUGHT.”
Then my follow up –
“I am pretty clear on what happened in Iraq and why carving it into separate states would have been a disaster. But do you suppose Biden felt that way?”
Gosh, why do you guys think it was so important for Chicago to win the 2016 Olympics … and do you still beat your wives?
LOTM @ 90
“Creating a set of smaller states in the middle would be equivalent to dropping a box of kittens into a dog pound.”
That line is pure gold, man. Keep it up!
Hey, I’m feeling more optimistic than I have for months that we’re gonna schuck this ‘roid and get serious again. BofA’s making the right moves, Merkel’s win is a “teaching moment,” and O’s inept salesmanship in Copenhagen’s got to tee off his masters in Chico-land.
Could it be, the tide is turning?
Here in Arizona, it seems even stalwart liberal zones like Flagstaff are turning their ships’ keels into the winds: there’s talk of lowering property taxes, reducing environmental regulations – like their draconian septic permitting standards – to allow landowners to build assessable, permanent homes more easily (gee, imagine that, assessable structures = more tax revenues, libs! Chew on that!), and I expect Phoenix will make a move to liposuction some of the cheesy fat off of the local university (can you say “gender studies program”) too.
Sometimes, the best remedy for a case of fleas is a cold-water, reality dunk. Signs are, reality’s settling in, and the fleas are cutting loose. I’m more hopeful than I’ve been in a long, long time.
We don’t need a ‘solution’ in the ‘stan. What we need is for it to be removed from the headlines and to prevent it from being used for a safe haven by Islamic terrorists ( what ever label you stick on them).
It’s a Marine mission, so give it to the Marines. The Marines will use an Ink Blot ops approach, with putting Platoons and/or companies into villages and small towns to provide protection for the locals while a militia is trained and equipped. As each H
hamlet comes on line, it controls the area around it and acts like the strands in a net. The Marines act as the QRF and provide fire support.
The locals soon enough notice that they are better off. They tell their clansmen about doctors and eating regular, clean water and other stuff that comes with the Marines. Before long, the village headman the vally over wants to know how he can get some Marines for his own. The net spreads. In a decade or so, there are no more Terrs to hunt. The ‘gani’s are forming their own marines.
The ‘problem’ still isn’t solved, but there is no headlines where there is no blood and the terrs are finished because they get no local support, either given or coerced.
Those Peroxide IED’s make Blonde Bombshells.
– Nick DiPaolo
“HOW on earth could 52% of America NOT have known that”
Because it was not 52% of America – it was more like 33% of America. Lots of people chose not to vote. I was one of them. Can you blame me?
Don’t worry, though. It will all work out. Yes, there will (at best) be a military take-over in the US to revive the Constitution. At worst, the Cold Civil War in the US will turn hot. The rest of the world will have to learn to look after itself, and most of the Europeans will have to learn Russian. Astonishing thing is that people in future years will look back on the 00′s as the last of the Good Times. This is as good as it is going to get for several generations — go forth and enjoy it!
10-4 JbS –
Command should have sent in the Marines when they first asked. Arguably though the inkblot strategy was employed in Iraq but did not take root until clear and hold methods were employed. It least, that is what it seemed to me. Nobody was willing to make allies when AQI managed to move into places after the Marines had left. Though I’ve heard that the real winning part of the strategy was taking the troops out of the FOB’s and putting them in the neighborhoods. I am not sure if the same approach would work in Afghanistan because the Taliban are surging themselves and unlike AQI, they have been there and ruled AF before. If reports I’ve read are true, the resistance is stiffening. Not that you couldn’t use SOF to bug hunt while trying to “hunt” Bin Laden. In fact I have speculated before that this is the prize that the administration is after and a smaller footprint in light of a shaky AF government would probably prove beneficial. LIC on the DL.
Mouse,
Check out my #27 link.
The Marines know what works,
but it might be too little too late.
Yon said the Brits never did train for counterinsurgency.
@85 LifeoftheMind
“What is it with Liberals in a position of authority? Couldn’t they ever talk to a girl without holding her paycheck first?”
My theory is that they feel emasculated in today’s society but can’t face it, much less say so because it runs counter to their professed beliefs. So some of them go off the deep end getting even when they have the chance. They know not what they do. Idiots. Hence also the dismaying urban phenomenon of bitchy men (and I don’t mean gays or drag queens).
OK, take it away whiskey…;)
I’m sorry to be such a parnoid skitz but something about the flood of news about the ‘stolen election’ by the ‘corrupt Karzai government’ –a vast wave alright but as far as i can tell a vast wave of assertion –reminds me of the familiar old ‘delegitimization campaign’.
Thanks for the link Doug. I never doubted the Marines and I wouldn’t want to deprive one of a fight. But what is McCrystal saying? That he needs more personnel because the enemy is growing in strength. I never understood this COIN thing very well because my instinct would tell me that I was not killing enough of them. But as the Lt Col in the video says, “they don’t have to kill them, they ask them to put down their weapons and rejoin society.” This didn’t work to well in Iraq because the ‘splodey dopes were getting paid which I suspect is gonna happen in Afghanistan if it isn’t already. They are still pumping oil in KSA. But as the finals words say – “unless Nato is willing to spend more blood and treasure, then the sacrifices will have been in vain.” That should read the USA not Nato.
Lb- re ‘delegitimization campaign’. I haven’t heard any of the nuts and bolts about polling malfeasance but it sure seems that the administration thinks that Karzai is a lame duck. I think what it boils down to is we as a nation, and particularly liberals are ashamed of previous US gerrymandering, that is, unless it is used against republicans.
The patient’s limb has advanced gas gangrene;
The surgeon’s choice is to cut off the limb.
Otherwise, the patient dies.
AM/102; during our upcoming short period of military rule, gerrymander reform ought to be high on the list of decrees only a Provisional Acting President (*cough*) Petraous can do. He needs to order up a nice transparent acetate overlay graphed to a scale where about 435 squares will cover a map of the USA. That’ll take care of that. Of course, some districts will have five people and some will have five million people, but they can even it out by …oops i have to go wash the dishes
Mongoose 82:
Are you are aware that the US of A is buying Hips for the Iraqui Air Force?
Maybe that aircraft will be chosen to replace the US Presidental Eurochopper that Obama says costs too much?
One event I believe reassured the Obama team that they could get away with more or less any lying trick they could think of was the slimy con done by Gordon Brown in his first days as newly-elected Prime Minister of the UK. The English people had just voted down the agreement that would have made them subservient to the European Union faceless bureaucracy. What did Brown do? He signed a treaty as head of state – which has the force of law binding on all UK citizens just as surely as any legislation passed by the House of Commons – with the EU, committing the UK to more or less exactly the same terms as the agreement the English Voters had just rejected!
Among the many things that didn’t get said by our amazingly useless Media, was that for Brown to have done this within such a short time after his election means that he and his government – and the EU – had prepared this treaty long in advance, and had never allowed the UK voters any choice in the matter. It had been a done deal before he was elected, and you can bet that he and the rest of his criminal crew had been working behind the scenes to screw Tony Blair for years and bring him down.
Interesting how alike the Chicago mob are to the current crowd of fapping Knob Jockeys in Whitehall…
85. I’m going to give the audience the benefit of the doubt that they didn’t realize that Dave was being completely serious when they were laughing.
U.S. Review of Battle Disaster Sways Strategy on Afghanistan
A 2008 firefight in eastern Afghanistan has become a template for how not to win there, and helps to explain the strategy of Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal.
The battle of Wanat is being described as the “Black Hawk Down” of Afghanistan, with the 48 American soldiers and 24 Afghan soldiers outnumbered three to one in a four-hour firefight that left nine Americans dead and 27 wounded in one of the bloodiest days of the eight-year war.
Soldiers who survived the battle described how their automatic weapons turned white hot and jammed from nonstop firing. Mortally wounded troops continued to hand bullet belts to those still able to fire.
The ammunition stockpile was hit by a rocket-propelled grenade, igniting a stack of 120-millimeter mortar rounds — and the resulting fireball flung the unit’s antitank missiles into the command post. One insurgent got inside the concertina wire and is believed to have killed three soldiers at close range, including the platoon commander, Lt. Jonathan P. Brostrom.
The description of the battle at Wanat — the heroism, the violence and the missteps that may have contributed to the deaths — ends with a judgment that the fight was “as remarkable as any small-unit action in American military history.”
Sorry to drop in so late, but Steve Coll’s book “Ghost Wars”:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_4_2?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=ghost+wars&sprefix=Gh
provides the definitive history of the Pakistani ISI and the Taliban along with the history of the American involvement in Afghanistan. There are a couple of sad cases of Cassandras working for the CIA on the Pakistan/Afghanistan station from the Reagan through the Clinton years, whose warning were ignored (of course, that’s why they’re Cassandras). If those warnings had been heeded, 9/11/2001 would have been just another date.
There have been no lack of opportunities to bring the ISI to heel, except for the exaggerated sensitivities toward the Muslim/3rd world: and who is the US to dictate to a sovereign nation? Maybe it’s just me, but I’d say that ~ $10 billion/year should buy a few.
Trying to imagine this administration playing any kind of hardball with these rats boggles me brain.
Let’s remember, please, folks, that the primary interference that has hobbled every government – even Clinton, when he was able for a few minutes to yank his attention away from the blowjobs – was the determined contrarianism of the LEFT.
Trans-national progressivists – the idle intellectual imposters distilled of several generations; entitled of all, loyal to none; spoiled-little-tantrum-tossers; adolescents who discovered that they could get sex from other protesters at the anti-war rallies.
Well, economic good times always seem to allow even the bumbling idiots to thrive. Since people naturally tend to imagine themselves to be the architects of their own success, when times are good they come to believe absolutely in their own infallibility. The US had almost two full generations without serious competition. During that time our parents assisted other countries in recovering from the devastation of WWII AND raised a bunch of kids who were at every level shielded from the consequences of their own idiocies.
Insufficient natural culling of the herd…
So now, the kids who never learned to bring their toys in from the rain have inherited their parents’ home and business. They don’t even realize how thoroughly they’re screwing things up.
“Mmmm, mmmm, mmmm.”
@59 Sherab
“Soros’ (and Soros’ brotherly friends) goals are mysterious to me. But they probably go in the direction of the “world government” by the UN.”
Soros is in the game for profit.
He has habit of befriending government officials, gaining inside information and front running the bond trades. He almost broke the Bank of England in 1992. He is doing the same with the 0bama administration and the dollar. He’s a jumbo sized inside trader.
Taliban Inroads in north imperil path for U.S. materials
Growing Taliban influence in northern Afghanistan is threatening a new military supply line painstakingly negotiated by the U.S. as rising violence takes hold on the one-time Silk Road route.
The north has deteriorated over just a few months, showing how quickly Taliban influence is spreading in a once peaceful area. Local officials say the Taliban are establishing a shadow government along the dilapidated road that ultimately could prevent vital supplies carried in hundreds of trucks every week from reaching the military. It also raises the danger that the supplies could end up in militant hands as fodder for suicide attacks.
People in Baghlan and Kunduz provinces complain that international forces, the government in Kabul and aid have passed them by in favor of more troublesome regions. Militants are taking advantage of that resentment, and control by either Afghan or international forces is slipping.
“For the past two to three years, it’s deteriorated day by day,”
‘We pity the Brits’ the view from the Marines –
US troops in Afghanistan are shocked by the standard of equipment their British counterparts have to use.
The Marines speak with nothing but respect for those who held this ground in far fewer numbers – the British servicemen who passed, as some might say, this poisoned chalice on to them. If anything, there is muted admiration for how they coped with less equipment, particularly with their vehicles.
YON The Greatest Afghan War
The Greatest Afghanistan War has deteriorated so noticeably that one can now feel the enemy’s growing pulse. Each month it beats steadier, stronger, and in 2010 it will finally be born.
—
On Aug. 26, I was in Helmand with the British when a bomb exploded in Kandahar, killing at least 41 people and blowing out windows in the room I later rented to write this account. There were bombs and attacks on a daily basis in Kandahar but I only watch from the roof as Afghans kill Afghans. Potential for civil war is great.
In this unprecedented moment, dozens of the world’s most notable nations have focused on helping one land, yet Western sympathies for Afghanistan already have peaked.
While an Afghan avalanche is poised, our thoughts are growing cold. This is it. Either we will begin to show progress by the end of 2010 or, piece by piece, the coalition will cleave off and drift away, meaning 2011 will begin the end to significant involvement in Afghanistan.
Glenn Reynolds Interview – The Warrior Ethos of Steven Pressfield
Trangbang’s worries are worries number one. Number one ain’t winning –number one is not losing a cut-off army. i do not understand why this wouldn’t be a worry –a first move in a big war –possibly the orders go out the minute IDF jumps the Iranian nuke sites –would be to fully exploit a position just screaming vulnerability. If Obama was half what he thinks he is he would signal it then do it –turn it over to the generals –now.
There is a school of thought, and no one has disproved it, that AQ and the jihad will energize enormously off a western retreat from a’stan, and that paki nukes going off in western cities will be then just a matter of time.
This is serious –too serious for Chicago politix calculation and play-offs. It needs to be foursquare in the hands of our people in uniform who have sworn the oath.
Related, Obama is referring to the strategic nuclear forces as ‘the president’s weapons’. This ain’t good, not from this source. we absolutely have to stay crystal clear aware of what the hell he’s doing. First of all, they are NOT the president’s weapons –the president is a member of a national population, and those weapons belong to that national population. The president has temporary power over their circumstances and that power is to be used to preserve the national population that owns the weapons.