Comments on: Pick a number

By: Cannoneer No. 4

Cannoneer No. 4 — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 17:57:48 +0000

Hope this comment shows up before the thread is closed. Been monitoring. Haven't had leisure to pipe up until now. habu@4: People, we are serving a noble purpose in performing this dissection of a madman who is attempting to destroy the greatest, most benevolent nation man has ever seen. A decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that we should declare the causes which impel us to the separation. programmer@8: I would be pulling back into defendable enclaves that could be protected with available assets. Premature. We may well be forced in to such a posture as we attempt a retrograde under pressure, but until the National Command Authority accepts defeat and orders the troops to hole up on the FOB's, they need to be outside the wire drinking tea, arranging escape for locals who trusted us, and kinetically disrupting the enemy's capability to interfere with whatever movements we make. Our Soldiers and Marines must not be made to slink out with their tails between their legs. If their country has given up on them, then they must ruthlessly inflict Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt up to the last wheels up. Konyok@35: The U.S. promoted Karzai in the loya jirga because he was an unaffiliated Pashtun without ties to the heavily Tajik Northern Alliance or other mujahideen factions. IMHO, Karzai was promoted because he cleaned up well and spoke English and made a good impression during media coverage of ODA 574 and the danger very very close JDAM at Showali Kowt. josh@37: So hey, why is nobody saying anything about this Marine Captain cum diplomat who has resigned in disgust? Old Blue has said something. So has Quatto. Cannoneer out. Gotta check if the thread has closed yet.

By: Prospettica

Prospettica — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 15:03:20 +0000

Obama is a book-learned internationalist. He’s being advised to back off so that Europe will have room to step up. If they don’t, he’ll punt the war to the next admin and try to look concerned. I don’t believe for a second that briefings have changed his gut feeling that the US is temporary, that the pursuit of its own interests is a good in itself. He’s already selling us out in umpteen other ways. Afghanistan is another opportunity to do the same. All in good time.

By: Nichevo

Nichevo — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:14:24 +0000

Dave,

“In addition to which, Ike Eisenhower, Matt Ridgway and a single regiment of Marines in Northeast Thailand had the Ho Chi Trail effectively interdicted and enemy forces thus
stymied. The Kennedy administration threw away all that and then kept digging their hole deeper and deeper.”

Please elaborate.

By: Rob

Rob — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 08:43:52 +0000

@programmer

“However, were I the local AO commander, while waiting for the Prez’s decision, I would be pulling back into defendable enclaves that could be protected with available assets. ”

That way, the Afghan people in every little town will know that we have no concern over their security, and will cooperate with the Taliban out of fear for their own lives, and will not provide any information to either the Afghan, NATO, or US forces. By allowing the Taliban free reign outside of a few enclaves, that will ultimately allow security, stability and peace to break out in Afghanistan.

Great idea, that worked so well in Iraq from 2004-2006.

By: Wadeusaf

Wadeusaf — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 21:35:36 +0000

The Grand Army of the Patomic was potentially the largest most modern and well oiled killing machine of its day. Its failures were not due to the incompetence of the various corps commanders but due to the indecisiveness of the commanding General McClelland. His failure to put the machine into motion, to allow it to do what it was assembled and trained to do is a matter for much discussion and will not be resolved here but I have to believe little Mac was unwilling to order his men to their death, despite the additional lives his delay ultimately cost. It has got to be one of the toughest orders to give.

Having a taste of what the military is really about, could president Obama be similarly disinclined to give the order, despite the lives such a delay must certainly take. It could match what motivated his ill advised Photo op with the fallen.

By: anton

anton — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 19:30:25 +0000

88. Dennis:
Those elections can play out two ways in my veiw. If they are disasterous for the Dems it may tell them their time is short and they best Rahm though anything and everything they can manage. Alternately, like a child burned by fire, they may shy away from the most agrressive actions to lull the public while they position themselves for 2010 and 2012. Either way it will be bad.

My hope is that the elections are a complete train-wreck for the Dems and they go totally bonkers. Once they drop the mask they will have few friends left. The Independents, and even the media, are already drifting away. It will certainly make a mess, but better that than trying to rebuild in 2016.

By: Marty

Marty — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 18:17:22 +0000

I’m not sure dither is inconsistent with blither. Specifically, what it took to get elected was very specific and known, the decisions were easy. What it takes to implement a leftist agenda may look more complicated and uncertain once one is in power. I suspect the main goal is socialism in one country, the USA, but since the issues don’t line up all nice and neat one after the other, and the rest of the world keeps getting in the way, the problem of how to implement his transormation becomes very complicated and somewhat indeterminant. As other posters have suggested, does a decision on Afghanistan have an effect on health care? If so, what would that be? If I only get one bite at health care, I have to achieve my goals, how do I do that with all these nuisances like Iran and Afghanistan and Beck in the way.

So consider that maybe the hesitation on Afghanistan is that in itself it just isn’t that important, and the question isn’t what to do there, but secondary and tertiary effects on domestic issues.

Consder it like this:

1. Obama and the people around him believe that the USA has been a baleful force since at least 1945. It does not deserve to prosper, it must atone.

2. Leftists are moral, anyone else is not.

3. Leftists need to implement “social justice” in the USA.

Just take all that as a given, that’s how they think. The question then is how to accomplish those things in #1 and #3. Sometimes, there are tough calls. That’s when he dithers.

By: Dennis

Dennis — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:25:53 +0000

In re-reading these comments two things come to mind:

The first is the man himself. He is not trusted to be as the rest of us. There is no faith that he sees the country and its storied history in the same positive light as we do. To me, his dislike is not even the cynical leftist slant that we’ve seen since the sixties but, rather, a visceral distrust and dislike of most things American. I can’t think of a more representative example as that during the campaign when he gave Hillary the finger. It was a sneaky, childish thing, full of contempt with her, the process, and the traditions of those presenting themselves for high office. He does not see himself as part of us but apart from us.

The second thing that struck me is Wretchard’s discussion of “consumables”. He said (much more thoughtfully and elegantly than I)that Obama is searching for more assets to consume. My point was that if the 3 elections now in process portend for him that his time on stage is short, his disinterest and contempt for us as a nation will become manifest and result in choosing social and political change over national security. I believe he could reason that in the country joining a world government he and his ideas would/could still survive and prosper. Continuing the war would/could result in starving the socio-political beast and reducing his hopes for “change he can believe in.”

I believe there are exceptional dangers ahead for us over the next couple of years and they will be seen on a number of fronts, all with a single unifying (but not readily transparent) goal.

By: KareninPA

KareninPA — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:12:08 +0000

In C.S. Lewis’s story,”The Shoddy Lands,” the narrator finds himself transported from a conversation with a former student and his fiancée into a strange landscape, where grass and sky are blurry, and trees are dingy upright blobs. He comes upon the Walking Things, people-sized and moving, but indistinct except for an occasional detail, something a woman is wearing, or sometimes a man’s face. In all this dullness he sees that there is a source of bright, clear light, and finds that it comes from windows full of fine jewelry and women’s clothes. These things are perfect to the last detail; they are real.
When he comes upon a giantess, a vulgarly perfected version of his student’s fiancée, he realizes that he’s in the landscape of her mind, and that all the things that make life sweet to him hardly exist for her.
Lewis shows us the world of a vain and shallow young woman. But this is also the world of the narcissist.
Some things are quite real and vivid: those that serve his needs.
I think this helps to illuminate some of Obama’s apparent contradictions. About things that feed him, the narcissist is clear and decisive. About these he is not lazy, not bored or vague. During the campaign, Obama is described as driving many of the decisions, sure-footed, never hesitant. (Yes,it could be PR, but to me it feels true.) He is an expert at the one thing he has worked at all his life — the marketing of Barack Obama. We do not hesitate in the areas we know expertly.
But beyond, there is… unreality. I think Afghanistan is out there, in the shoddy lands. So are small business owners in America, and productive people generally, unless they are useful; then they may temporarily be like the daffodils and roses in the Lewis story, real because they can be cut for a vase.

By: marymcl

marymcl — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:25:21 +0000

One of the great things about the favorite post thread was the opportunity to look over old threads and rediscover some forgotten links. This one by Ali Sina, an apostate Muslim (h/t Robohobo) is a long discussion of Obama that makes some of the same points as Batman @77 above

http://www.faithfreedom.org/obama.html

@78 wretchard

“…Obama the blither is altogether more frightening. He is not alone. A large part of the electorate believes in what he aspires to.”

That’s the thing that keeps me up at night. You don’t need foreign manipulation when you have true believers right here. When someone as usually hard-headed as Camille Paglia can tear his policies to pieces but still insist he’s a fine president, I can’t help thinking of something Hannah Arendt wrote 60 years ago ~

~ ” The disturbing factor in the success of totalitarianism is the true selflessness of its adherents; it may be understandable that a Nazi or a Bolshevik will not be shaken in his conviction by crimes against people who do not belong to the movement or are hostile to it; but the amazing fact is that neither is he likely to waver when the monster begins to devour its own children and not even if he becomes the victim of persecution himself…..On the contrary, to the wonder of the whole civilized world he may even be willing to help in his own prosecution and frame his own death sentence if only his status as a member of the movement is not touched.” ~

Origins of Totalitarianism (p. 307)

NahnCee @75 brought up the possibility of a swine flu epidemic leading to martial law or worse. All I can say is, the MSM browbeats the nation into semi-hysteria every flu season and just when I think they can’t sink any lower they break out the jackhammers. It’s something to keep in mind. Obviously I can’t guarantee there won’t be an epidemic but I’ll be greatly surprised if there is.