PR, I missed the context of the interview, now having slapped my forehead with an open palm heel, I have gone back and reread the piece by the RS writer Hastings.

What most astonishes me is that the people on Obama’s staff would give any credit at all to the author of the thing. Having played fast and loose with fact and events, tying the General first to the torture scandal and then to nancy ROE makes it obvious the author hasn’t a clue about things. Tossing about the term Counterinsurgency and its shortened version COIN as though there were only one way to do it and only one definition of it in the same way many reporters deal with the idea of force multiplier, believing it only means more guns and more bullets.

The report itself only reinforced for me the sad reality that the president and vice president do not understand the art of diplomacy, and especially do not understand how to use as powerful a diplomatic tool as the US military. If indeed the president had a clue, he would have reprimanded the magazine and freed the generals hands to pursue the war with vigor.

“You better be out there hitting four or five targets tonight,” Then add, “I’m going to have to scold you in the morning for it, though.” are not the words of a general that has free reign over his AOR.

I don’t know if the article’s intent was to mess with the General or not, as I don’t think the author understood (then or now) what he was writing. The happy, if unintended, consequence may be to lift an oppressive ROE from off the soldiers backs.

I would join you in the salt provided it is sea salt, but I’m afraid you’ll have to drink alone. Not to be rude but I don’t want to be rude either.