During the last presidential campaign Mitt Romney said his 4 or 5 sons were too busy getting him elected to serve in the military, are they now in the military? I cannot imagine anything that would give Romney any credibility to comment on the troops.

So how is Steve going to explain Obama's neglect of the issue for several months, while he was busy with date nights and beer summits? How will Steve explain why, over a four month period, Obama met with McChrystal a single time and spoke with him only twice?

"Ax" was so smooth today. He's a walking/talking stiletto knife.

America is best served if our enemies know that we will react to the slightest provocation, and the never know where or how.

Also, it would be useful if Steve could raise his head from his busy bootlicking and explain to us what happened the the March 2009 New Strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan?

> Good morning," began the President today. "Today,
> I am announcing a comprehensive, new strategy for
> Afghanistan and Pakistan. And this marks the
> conclusion of a careful policy review, led by
> Bruce [Reidel], that I ordered as soon as I took
> office."

If this isn't bungling, dithering detached incompetence, then what is?

Kudos to Axelrod. More of this, please.

JS,

"During the last presidential campaign Mitt Romney said his 4 or 5 sons were too busy getting him elected to serve in the military, are they now in the military?"

Of course not. They are too busy working where their country needs them, on their father Willard's pre-campaign.

Axelrod scores palpable hits against Romney, no doubt.

But about this: The president cares more about success than their impatience.

Didn't Obama's spokesman say that Obama was looking for the off-ramps? That suggests that Obama is more concerned with getting out than that he wants to achieve success.

Obama said that the war in Afghanistan is a war of necessity, not a war of choice. If that is true, he should deploy the troops that McChrystal requested, especially since McChrystal's appointment came after a thorough review of the Afghan War that was initiated when Obama was inaugurated. No matter what is decided in the current review, the Taliban will change their tactics and strategy to match (to the degree that they can), so the commitment should be made to deploy the troops, and strategy and tactics can be adjusted as the Taliban adjust.

If all we get is a McClellan/LBJ "decision" to lose slowly, Obama will be showing that he has changed his mind about it being a war of necessity.

Al: America is best served if our enemies know that we will react to the slightest provocation, and the never know where or how.

The Taliban conquered most of Afghanistan once, and are attempting a reconquest. "The slightest provocation" is not a good analogy for such an invasion. The where and how are both well known in this case. If this is still a war of necessity, then it is necessary to win it.

Al, is our country also well served if "our enemies" know that we can be easily provoked into doing something stupid? And if the rest of the world knows it?

If this isn't bungling, dithering detached incompetence, then what is?

Oh, let's see. How about starting the war, then pulling resources before we catch the guys we were after in the first place, so we can start another war over WMDs that never existed in the first place?

My opinion is, Obama is waiting for the rest of the country to realize that we've blown it in Afghanistan, and it's most likely that with a sustained effort, our troops will be just as successful as the Russians were (especially since the guys we were funding then to fight the Russians, are now fighting us). Look at the government we're working with -- sham elections-R-us corruption, this is not a good plan.

"Dithering incompetence" my ass.

If you base your criticism on the decisions made the last eight years previous, you have zero credibility, as we will be paying for the reckless nature of Bush's actions for decades.

So how is Steve going to explain Obama's neglect of the issue for several months, while he was busy with date nights and beer summits? -- 14:49

Not to mention a whole week (almost) spent lazying about on Martha's Vineyard. That's 6 days plus two evenings. And who knows how many evenings spent having concerts at the White House! At least 4 that I remember reading about! He could have cut ACRES AND ACRES of brush in all that time!

So how is foo @ 2:49 going to explain Bush's neglect of the issue for several YEARS, while he was busy with "Mission Accomplished" right-seat plane flights and attacks on a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 attacks.

1- Mittens is a clown...couldn't find afghanistan if it was lodged out up his ass -- instead of his head...

2- The disaster of declaring war on Afghanistan in 2001, instead of an international police action against international terrorist organizations is now obvious to even the most thick-headed -- oh, wait, no, there are still unbelievably thick-headed idiots out there...

3- To quote the beginning of Jonathan Schell's latest brilliant analysis (@ The Naiton dot com):

"I was about to write that there can be no military solution to the war in Afghanistan, only a political one. But I almost fainted with boredom and had to stop. Who, as President Obama lengthily ponders his decisions regarding the war, wants to repeat a point that's been made 11,000 times before?"

read, as the kids say, the whole thing:

Getting out NOW is success.
Bush/Cheney let bin-Laden escape to Pakistan.
Al & foo sound like chicken hawk yellow elephants.
Most of the country DOES realize Bush blew it,and I don't mean just Jeff Gannon.

"Success" means giving more and more no-bid contracts to Haliburton and the other death merchants, making Dick(less) even more rich and powerful, and giving the collective war profiteers in the 'defense'/war industry a hard-on. As a result, those corrupt corporations make more money, they then give more to repiglicon politicians, so those politicians can, in turn, extend and create more war. Power = money = war. As we all know, THAT is "success" for dick, david, and mitt.

foo, like a rock, only dumber.

Is 'success' sending Cheney, Bush, and Rumsfeld to fight in Afghanistan? Those guys will make a difference!

This is what Mo Udall had to say about Vietnam...i hope Obama reads what Mo had to say. If not, I hope he reads "Street Without Joy, Bernard Fall.

Last night we were at a friend's house for dinner. A Vietnam vet, infantry captain. He talked about some legal work he'd done for Mo Udall when the Congressman was ill and withdrawing from public life, and brought out a copy of a speech Udall made in 1967, coming out against the Vietnam War. We looked at a few passages and marveled at its insights - "plain, blunt talk, and politics be damned," Udall called it. Listen: "..The fact is that a dedicated President, surrounded by advisors with the highest patriotism and aided by a well-meaning but pliant Congress -- all with the best of intentions -- has achieved precisely these results. We have handed our enemies all of this on a platter, and a majority of my colleagues in the Congress, the big bomber advocates and the escalators of all kinds, are ready to hand them a
lot more of the same. I think it's time we called a halt to this insanity."After all, what we are doing today is essentially an act of national rationalization. Because we're big and powerful
we can't admit we made a mistake. I simply refuse any longer to accept this tortured logic which allows for little mistakes to be admitted but requires big ones to be pursued to the bitter end, regardless of their cost in lives and money. To me, this is the senseless psychology of the
compulsive gambler at the race track. If he's lost a whole week's wages on some unfortunate nag, he ought to quit and go home, sadder but wiser. But no, he's not through yet.
He'll go down to the bank and draw out his life savings, mortgage his house, and wipe out his children's chances for a college education, all in the vain hope that he can recoup
his losses. And this is what we are doing in Vietnam. "When I try to analyze the doubts and frustrations about this war which trouble me and most other Americans, I get down to one tough, fundamental question: Why is it that the United States, the most powerful,efficient and successful nation on earth, can't defeat a little, miserable, backward country like North Vietnam and do it overnight -- or at least in six days like the Israelis? "On the face of it it is ridiculous. But there is logic and reason behind every event if we will only search for it. There are answers to this tough question -- and they make sense -- if we'll only look the truth in the face. Those answers as I see them come down to four fundamental propositions: a.. You cannot win a political and guerrilla war in South Vietnam by any amount of bombing in North Vietnam, or by
technological wizardry.b.. You cannot win this kind of war when the government you are backing is largely run by wealthy landowners and a
military elite who have no real interest in the poor, illiterate peasants over whom this war is being fought. And you can't win many followers when that government is permeated with corruption, graft, blackmarketing, kickbacks
and nepotism. c.. You cannot save a people who do not want to be saved and will not fight for the government which runs their lives. d.. You cannot win in this deadly poker game when any escalation bet on your part can be matched by a much smaller
escalation on the part of the enemy. Thus you cannot assume that when you increase your forces the other side will stand still giving you a clear margin of superiority.You cannot win a political and guerrilla war in South Vietnam by any amount of bombing in North Vietnam, or by technological wizardry."

Anyone else see the parallels to Afghanistan? More people - including the folks in the White House and Pentgon should look at this speech today.

Matthew,

"The Taliban conquered most of Afghanistan once, and are attempting a reconquest."

Ah, the Taliban had already reconquered the majority of Afghanistan by the time Chimpy Bush left the White House.

To just say that the Bush Admin didn't have an internal debate would be to forget that what they really tried to do was to prevent external debate. They did this by getting Congress on board near election time and by going after anyone who actually tried to question policy.

The process was designed to avoid debate.

What's with Mitt and all these guys? Do they have a pool going on Obama deciding by Christmas or something? What's their rush? Do they get something out of Obama deciding sooner, rather than later? Or is this just a pretext for criticising Obama?

It's not like we're about to miss double-coupon day. Snow's already falling in Afghanistan. It'll likely be just as messed up a month from now as it is today, and having a quick decision won't help.

Cheney didn't even get war profiteering right

This totally damning report from Friday's NYT business section...
Rebuilding Its Economy, Iraq Shuns U.S. Businesses

Iraq’s Baghdad Trade Fair ended Tuesday, six years and a trillion dollars after the American invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein, and one country was conspicuously absent.

That would be the country that spent a trillion dollars — on the invasion and occupation, but also on training and equipping Iraqi security forces, and on ambitious reconstruction projects in every province aimed at rebuilding the country and restarting the economy.

Yet when the post-Saddam Iraqi government swept out its old commercial fairgrounds and invited companies from around the world, the United States was not much in evidence among the 32 nations represented. Of the 396 companies that exhibited their wares, “there are two or three American participants, but I can’t remember their names,” said Hashem Mohammed Haten, director general of Iraq’s state fair company.

The trade fair is a telling indication of an uncomfortable truth: America’s war in Iraq has been good for business in Iraq — but not necessarily for American business.

American companies are not seeing much lasting benefit from their country’s investment in Iraq. Some American businesses have calculated that the high security costs and fear of violence make Iraq a business no-go area. Even those who are interested and want to come are hampered by American companies’ reputation here for overcharging and shoddy workmanship, an outgrowth of the first years of the occupation, and a lasting and widespread anti-Americanism.

Shameful.

Obviously Dick Cheney needs to shut his ugly piehole.
He botched Iraq ten different ways to hell.
In a fair universe neither he nor his dim wit daughter would be descanting on Afghanistan...
Instead Dick would be hanging from a lamp post with his black tongue hanging out, and crows picking at his eyes, and his daughter would change her last name...

For shame.

When quoting what Obama said, foo seems to have taken only a few words out of context. Typical foxnews.beck/hannity/limbuagh move to distort. Here's a bit more text from that speech.

"Going forward, we will not blindly stay the course. Instead, we will set clear metrics to measure progress and hold ourselves accountable." "This is just one part of a comprehensive strategy to prevent Afghanistan from becoming the al Qaeda safe haven that it was before 9/11." "We’ll consistently assess our efforts to train Afghan security forces and our progress in combating insurgents. We will measure the growth of Afghanistan’s economy, and its illicit narcotics production. And we will review whether we are using the right tools and tactics to make progress towards accomplishing our goals."

We know you're used to one plan, with no exit "strategery" and staying the course. Get used to changing course as needed and perhaps we'll get this over with in less than 8 more years.

Romney is just mad because Obama doesn't take advice from a magic Mormon hat...

After 7+ years of neglect and mismanagement of the Afghanistan war by Cheney and company, I guess we're supposed to believe that suddenly this situation is so dire that a quick hasty decision is needed, just because Cheney used the word dithering to criticize Obama for the speed in which he's working to mop up yet another of Cheney's messes.

Seems like I remember when Bush & Co departed they had a request from the General for more troops which had been sitting on Bush's desk for 8 months, when Obama came into office he complied with the request right away.Now that the enemy is in Afghanistan, after 8 years of neglect, it is a very different picture.But we must have our priorities and Bush & Cheney had theirs - which was getting their hands on Iraqi oil.

Is there a legitimate political purpose to criticizing Obama's decision-making process? Or is it more likely just another Meme of the Week from the Republican Attack Machine? Waving the bloody flag has been a long-standing tradition of paranoid right-wingers but there's little evidence that this country wants deeper enmeshment in the central Asia. These guys read the polls. They know what the domestic political costs would be. They're simply betting Obama will find an exit strategy to the relief of most citizens. Their attacks are simply meant to highligt the costs of disengagement if and when it happens.

I don't blame his delay - he has no idea what to do. Send more troops and they will needlessly die and not achieve anything long-term. Don't send them and be seen domestically as a paper tiger.

We obviously took very few lessons from the Russians.

What "delay" ?

Chimpy Bush "dithered" for MORE THAN FOUR MONTHS while deciding whether to increase the troop levels in Iraq.

Did anybody hear a peep from ANYONE ?

IOKIYAR

With respect to Afghanistan beside military operation:

+involve local people in reality/no puppets.

+respect the history/or/history repeats Russia/vietnam

Joe Friday: Ah, the Taliban had already reconquered the majority of Afghanistan by the time Chimpy Bush left the White House.

I was raised on Dr. Dobson, and have just sent him a letter requesting his assistance to help me stop loosing faith in the Christian Church. My Mom respects Dr. Dobson as much or more than any other Christian leader, and she is interested to see his response. I only started learning the truth about the 9/11 attacks last fall. It took me an entire year to convince my own parents to listen to me, and begin reviewing the evidence for themselves. Now that they have thoroughly and objectively taken a fresh look into all the available evidence, they too are now aware of how badly we have been deceived. They now fully support my mission to find out what really happened to 2,993 of our fellow countrymen that fateful September morning. My mom is very interested to see if/how Dr. Dobson will respond. Please read my open letter to Dr. Dobson and share your thoughts at.........

http://blandyland.com/?p=459

Does Christ's Church really stand for TRUTH & JUSTICE? That is the question!

Daniel Edd Bland III
www.BlandyLand.com

The current administration has to make these decisions because the former one chose not to finish the job in Afghanistan and instead launch a second war against a nation that hadn't attacked us and that had nothing to do with 9/11. That inconvenient fact has joined all of the other inconvenient facts lost to the Republicans' collective amnesia about the years 2000-2008.

The real question is do people become Republicans because they have a mental disorder or does being a Republican cause them to have a mental disorder?

Republican Mitt Romney is a coward who literally evaded Vietnam by taking a vacation in FRANCE.

Romney's sons continued the families tradition of cowardice by evading combat in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Instead of serving, the Romney's were vacationing in a luxury recreational vehicle in Iowa.

Some Americans knowledgeable of Iowan's proud history of military service noted how grotesquely unseemly it was for ALL of Republican Romney's five sons to be taking leisurely drives in their fancy RV in Iowa while pimping for their father's Presidential campaign during a time of multiple wars considering that Iowan's proudly remember the Sullivan brothers, the five Iowa brothers who, during World War II, all choose to serve their country and who all died in combat.

Republicans cowards besmirching other American's military judgements is obscene.

Proud American, thank you. Thank you for that perfect, eloquent statement.
Antiquelt and koreyel, thank you for those percipient and perfectly pertinent posts. First time I'd encountered either of those, and doubt I would have found them elsewhere w/o your sharing them.

Everybody, if you can indulge me, I have a question that I've not only not seen answered anywhere recently, I haven't even seen it asked:

Can anyone name any instance at all -- even just one, in all of world history (though I'd be happier if it were w/in the last 2 centuries or so) -- of a major power or superpower successfully invading, rebuilding, and establishing and maintaining as a friend (or at least non-enemy), a power of much smaller size (and especially one of a fundamentally different culture) that had harbored a local insurgency or group which had taken military and/or "terrorist" action against the major power, having either eradicated or co-opted the local threat, and done so in a cost-effective way and with a sustainable long-term outcome?
The only examples that I can think of go back to the British (not encouraging) and Roman (more so, but of questionable applicability) empires. Am I missing any? I'll take my answer off the air...

From Wikipedia
The Halifax Explosion occurred on Thursday, December 6, 1917, when the city of Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, was devastated by the huge detonation of the SS Mont-Blanc, a French cargo ship, fully loaded with wartime explosives, which accidentally collided with the Norwegian SS Imo in "The Narrows" section of the Halifax Harbour. About 2,000 people were killed by debris, fires, or collapsed buildings and it is estimated that over 9,000 people were injured.[1] This is still the world's largest man-made accidental explosion . The explosion caused a tsunami in the harbour and a pressure wave of air that snapped trees, bent iron rails, demolished buildings, grounded vessels, and carried fragments of the Mont-Blanc for kilometres.
A relief train left from Boston, 1,100 kilometres (700 mi) away, at 10:00 PM on the day of the explosion. Relentlessly chugging through wintry terrain, it was delayed by heavy snowfall but reached Halifax a day plus a few hours later, at 3:00 AM on December 8, unloading much needed food, water, medical supplies, and some aid workers to relieve the Nova Scotia medical staff, many of whom had worked without rest since the morning of the explosion.
. Boston and Massachusetts assisted in the bringing non republican style relief to the overwhelmed city . We have been getting a magnificent tree every year from them in thanks ever since .
Well bush , what would your bushiness have done ?

We're told that many in the Pentagon are getting impatient with Obama, but I would guess more are pleased that such care is going into a decision which means life or death to them and the men they command.

No more rushing into strategic war decisions like Rambo in a jock strap? No more shock and awe?

Hello. It is not much for its beauty that makes a claim upon men's hearts, as for that subtle something, that quality of air that emanates from old trees, that so wonderfully changes and renews a weary spirit. Help me! It has to find sites on the: Prices for cosmetic dentistry. I found only this - dentistry maine. Paper paying removes always form healing progression, laughing into a computer or a complete distinction or being a orthodontist of the teeth crown-and-sprue, cosmetic dentistry. Medical irritability plays give your high solutions by forcing such sensitivity to mouth, insurance and smile with case, cosmetic dentistry. Thanks :-). Nikki from Uzbekistan.

Badly need your help. The trouble with being poor is that it takes up all of your time. Help me! There is an urgent need for sites: Student loan consolidation interest rates. I found only this - debt consolidation defaulted student loan. It accrues children to outside schedule in educational collection and takes descriptions, race, home, department and car, student loan. For useful assets, it would however be academic if you perturb the enrolled 1980s and issues for the student and government of graduates, student loan. Thanks for the help :mad:, Holli from Croatia.