Gen. McChrystal has a telephone interview with the Times in which he offers assurance that he is not threatening to resign and tells us that healthy debate is, well, healthy. He does tap his foot a bit on timing:
WASHINGTON — The senior American commander in Afghanistan on Wednesday
rejected any suggestion that his grim assessment of the war had driven
a wedge between the military and the Obama administration, but he
warned against taking too long to settle on a final strategy.
I hope "too long" is not less than six weeks; by extending this Kaussian logic a bit we can predict that Team Obama will push every controversial decision past the November off-elections.
The most frightening analysis of the McChrystal report I have read comes from George Packer, author of "The Assassin's Gate":
The only surprise is the impressiveness of McChrystal’s analysis. I was wrong in May when I
questioned the appointment of a special-operations man to run this war.
McChrystal’s report is written in plain English, it’s self-critical,
and it shows more understanding of the nature of the fight in
Afghanistan than most journalism and academic work. The U.S. military
now believes that the Afghan government is just as much a threat to
success as the Taliban. That’s a bold conclusion, one that our
civilians have not been willing to reach, publicly at least. And the
description of the different Taliban networks is as clarifying as it is
disturbing.
So this is what the general whom Obama rushed into the field earlier
this year has to tell his commander-in-chief: it will take time, it
will take more resources, we will have to get smarter. Again, no
surprise. The policy McChrystal is working within was set in March, by
the President himself, and it called for a renewed counterinsurgency in
Afghanistan in order to “dismantle,” “disrupt,” and “defeat” Al Qaeda.
Obama’s strategy-review team didn’t want to go looking to get America
deeper into the mess in Afghanistan—they looked at all the alternatives
and decided that the narrower approaches wouldn’t work against an Al
Qaeda network that’s so entrenched and interconnected with other groups
in the region.
Sorry, that is not the scary bit - here we go:
In my piece I wrote about the fears within the Administration that
escalation in Afghanistan could do to Obama what the same thing in
Vietnam did to Johnson (just substitute health care and energy
legislation for the Great Society). That’s the Vietnam analogy people
in the Administration keep coming back to. I’ve long thought that Obama
was more like
J.F.K.:
rational, coldly objective in the heat of events, unlikely to allow his
advisers and his ego to destroy his Presidency by getting the country
deeper into a war he never felt fully committed to. Obama has Kennedy’s
confidence in his own judgment, which Johnson tragically lacked. Gordon
Goldstein’s very good book “Lessons in Disaster,” about McGeorge
Bundy—national security adviser to both J.F.K. and L.B.J.—pretty much
proves that Kennedy, if he’d lived, would not have committed ground
troops to Vietnam at the start of his second term. After the disaster
at the Bay of Pigs, Kennedy stopped trusting his military advisers, and
went on to overrule them during the Cuban missile crisis and, again and
again, on Vietnam. Perhaps this is Obama’s J.F.K. moment. We’ll know in
a few weeks. And if so, perhaps he would be right.
Groan - every prominent Democrat lies awake nights wondering how they could be more like Jack Kennedy. Well, if Kennedy distrusted his generals and would not have escalated in Vietnam, by gum, Obama won't be trusting his generals or escalating in Afghanistan.
Packer admits to being a bit bothered by Obama's need for a six-month review of his decision in March:
The second thing is this: the alternatives were already rejected by
Obama’s strategy review, and since then no one has made a persuasive
case why they would work any better.
The strategy of battling Al Qaeda from fortified enclaves relying on drones is discussed (and disparaged) at Bill Roggio's Long War Journal.
SINCE YOU ASK: Obama living out his personal Kennedy fantasy was the scariest thing I read today. The scariest thing I read yesterday is that Joe Biden is driving the "Back Out Gracefully" side. Put it together and we have Obama acting out his Kennedy fantasy by taking advice from Joe Biden. Yike! (And yes, Biden is probably living his personal Kennedy fantasy...)
Well, what should we expect from a President and a party more interested in appearances than reality?
Posted by: JorgXMcKie | September 24, 2009 at 04:20 PM
New book out on first 9 months of this administration: "The Importance of Not Being Sure of Yourself".
This is a greater peek at his largely ignored imperfection - indecisiveness. Just what we need in a President - a dawdler, a procrastinator, a 100 day wonder of speaking and talking and doing nothing that isn't in his own personal interest.
At least Bush, when confronted with his mistakes in Iraq, acted, even unilaterally and dared the Congress to correct him by cutting off the funds. I wonder if Obama is waiting for Reid and Pelosi to save him from a decision by taking the decision over for him and cutting off the funds, this time?
Posted by: Jack is Back! | September 24, 2009 at 04:25 PM
so who's Obama's Diem?
Posted by: matt | September 24, 2009 at 04:27 PM
JFK was in love with the Special Forces, and it was the CIA, not the military who screwed the pooch in Cuba. The intervention turned on the Tonkin Gulf incident.The dems can't even get their history straight.
We were knee deep in Vietnam in 1963. My ex girlfriend's father was a helo pilot flying combat missions with the ARVN's. No dog tags, sort of like the Russian fighter pilots in the North. Kennedy had already taken the steps that would lead to the escalation even then.
Posted by: matt | September 24, 2009 at 04:40 PM
--Groan - every prominent Democrat lies awake nights wondering how they could be more like Jack Kennedy.--
Well if they're lying awake nights they're already halfway there. If they can get a few foreign spies, airhead actresses and mafia gun molls to join them they're home free.
And if Barry can get somebody to assassinate Karzai and replace him with our puppet, he's got it made too. We already had our missile crisis when he capitulated to Russia when
KruschevPutin said boo.Posted by: Ignatz | September 24, 2009 at 04:44 PM
Whatever happened to letting the Northern Alliance do our dirty work? That seemed to work well before, why not keep it up?
Posted by: sylvia | September 24, 2009 at 04:48 PM
Sez TM:
"I hope "too long" is not less than six weeks; by extending this Kaussian logic a bit we can predict that Team Obama will push every controversial decision past the November off-elections."
Flashback: it's late October 1942. The Congressional midterm elections are almost here, and the Dems look to be doing about as well as Admiral Kimmel's boys did on 7 December the year before. FDR makes a mock prayer to Harry Hopkins that he hopes the US Army can invade North Africa so the folks at home can see that we are striking back. FDR takes care, however, to see that this wish is kept from Marshall & King. On 4 November, the Dems are slaughtered. Four days later Operation Torch gets underway and FDR/Dem poll ratings rise.
Still believe in this , oh One? Takes a lot more spine to earn it than you've shown.
Posted by: Gregory Koster | September 24, 2009 at 05:06 PM
Packer, one of the more extinguished imbeciles at the NEW YORKER, writes:
"I’ve long thought that Obama was more like J.F.K.: rational, coldly objective in the heat of events, unlikely to allow his advisers and his ego to destroy his Presidency by getting the country deeper into a war he never felt fully committed to."
TM adds to this:
"Well, if Kennedy distrusted his generals and would not have escalated in Vietnam, by gum, Obama won't be trusting his generals or escalating in Afghanistan."
A big reason for the mess in Vietnam is that Kennedy really thought he could manage this conflict with signals, and the other side, being rational actors would follow along. Winning? Old-fashioned, for those folks who believed like Doug McArthur that there was no substitute for victory. But gotta be tough, so keep sticking your finger in the generals's eyes without deciding to get out entirely and take the heat. Packer, parrots Goldstein's idiotic notion that "JFK wouldn't have allowed this to happen in his second term," in the face of the clear record that second terms are notoriously weaker than first ones. Too, Kennedy would have been battling in his spectacularly weak way for civil rights. He'd have a choice:
a) civil rights, but stay in Vietnam or
b) get out of Vietnam, no civil rights.
That's a haunting choice. Johnson chose a) and look what happened. So far as foreign affairs went, Johnson was Kennedy's weak second term. But don't tell Packer/Goldstein; going cold turkey on liberal delusions would be far too much for them.
We're in for a dreadful beating thanks to The Once's dithering and idiotic wish that foreign affairs would just GO AWAY while he remakes American society.
Posted by: Gregory Koster | September 24, 2009 at 05:20 PM
JFK had a modicum of common sense and was a patriot. Obama has neither common sense nor patriotism.
Posted by: matt | September 24, 2009 at 05:26 PM
Oh, look Obama found something to cut.
Administration Will Cut Border Patrol Deployed on U.S-Mexico Border
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54514
CNSNews.com) - Even though the Border Patrol now reports that almost 1,300 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border is not under effective control, and the Department of Justice says that vast stretches of the border are “easily breached,” and the Government Accountability Office has revealed that three persons “linked to terrorism” and 530 aliens from “special interest countries” were intercepted at Border Patrol checkpoints last year, the administration is nonetheless now planning to decrease the number of Border Patrol agents deployed on the U.S.-Mexico border.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 24, 2009 at 05:33 PM
The Vietcong didn't follow us here, except in Ross Perot's fevered imagination. Packer qualifies as credentialed moron, but necessarily Journolist material. This is like Drury and McCarry's darkest musings
Posted by: bishop | September 24, 2009 at 05:36 PM
Dear Matt: Please show me the modicum of common sense in a) the handling of the Bay of Pigs b) the Vienna meeting with Khruschev in 1961 c) the runup to Vietnam 1961-63, d) the inability to outlaw discrimination in mortgage contracts by FHA and VA by signing an executive order e)loosing all sorts of vermin who infest the body politic to this day (Sorensen) who f) came up with all sorts of moronic dangerous schemes for dealing with Castro without actually executing them. The rest of his record, I grant shows the modicum, g) playing up the dynasy aspect of politics and saddling these states with his loathsome family.
Patriotism I'll give you. Kennedy was a grossly jumped up Senator, with pretensions to intellectuality. His favorite Greek philosopher was Mediocretes, who pigeonholed Kennedy correctly: a smidgen above Benjamin Harrison, rather below William Howard Taft.
Sincerely yours,
Gregory Koster
Chairman, Kennedys are Bunk Society
Posted by: Gregory Koster | September 24, 2009 at 05:40 PM
From the Corner:
"Yosi Sergant Exits [Jonah Goldberg]
I just got an email from the NEA. Yosi Sergant submitted his resignation and it's been accepted. It's effective immediately."
Posted by: C.R. | September 24, 2009 at 05:40 PM
Gosh, that's a surprise C.R. I was sure they'd get away forever claiming he'd been reassigned without disclosing what he'd been reassigned to.
Posted by: clarice | September 24, 2009 at 05:42 PM
Surely he'll be reassigned somewhere now.
Any news on Van Jones's speaking fees lately?
Posted by: Extraneus | September 24, 2009 at 06:02 PM
Wow, the administration is dropping like flies. Awesome. I wonder who the next commissar in line is?
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 24, 2009 at 06:10 PM
Buffy has to be next.
Posted by: C.R. | September 24, 2009 at 06:14 PM
Could Buffy be next? She must be quaking in her boots.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | September 24, 2009 at 06:14 PM
What he should have done was schedule the landind at Trinidad, but leave clues that it was going to happen at the Bay of Pigs,
using the USS Essex task force.Vienna, and Berlin, resulted from it. It's for cover. True he proved almost as feckless with the Freedom Riders, as with the Bay of Pigs,
Mongoose might not have been neccessary otherwise, and needless to say the Missile
Crisis. You still would Harriman & Lodge
trying to force out Diem, with all the attendant consequences
Posted by: bishop | September 24, 2009 at 06:15 PM
A cross post at the same time with the same point!! Coincidence? I think not. Buffy needs to watch for that bus.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet | September 24, 2009 at 06:17 PM
OT: What about Buffy? Keep in mind this woman has an office directly above the Oval Office in the White House.
She's gotta go too IMO! Here she is with Harvard Prof Marshall Ganz teaching a group how to use techniques for developing relationships with strangers...to gather volunteers. Buffy and a friend role play a scenario about 16:45 into it. (Sorry, but sometimes ya gotta wade thru the swamp to track your prey)
7. Building From Self To Relationship
Posted by: Rocco | September 24, 2009 at 06:19 PM
Maybe now Yosi will be available to blow some whistles.
Posted by: Uncle BigBad | September 24, 2009 at 06:30 PM
Between ACORN, NEA, NBBP, the IG interference, and most recently the gag order on Humana, Republicans need to start agitating for a special prosecutor. All of these things are illegal, most perpetrated by the Executive Branch, and all are clearly conflicts of interest for Holder.
Someone should do a public opinion poll on this question. I'd volunteer to write the question.
Of course, Bush had the golden opportunity to appoint a SP during the campaign, particularly on the anonymous credit card donation thing, but he just didn't have it in him to fight the domestic war.
"Culture of Corruption" was of course a masterstroke of projection.
Posted by: Extraneus | September 24, 2009 at 06:44 PM
Anecdotal OT,
At home in the places I hang out; gym/library/used book store and coffee shops, I've been noticing something lately.
I'm not noticing Conservatives being more vocal, but I am noticing a massive silence from Lib's who just months back were confidently and loudly proclaiming at every opportunity their hatred of Bush and the Conservatives as accepted wisdom. Their previous prideful and haughty praise of Obama and the hopey-changy Dem's has completely vanished.
If I do hear Conservatives on vocal offense, it's more screaming at the obvious corruption of out of control spending by our City leaders on Union Contracts, School Boards, property tax raises, etc, without actually ever improving anything, so not actually ad-hominem's, but instead "WTF's."
I would be interested in knowing if you guys are noticing a similar silence from the standard nose-ringed coffee barista's and veggie sandwich makers you guys hang out with. I'm off to Berkeley in a moment, so I doubt that I'll notice any difference on that campus, but it'll be interesting to me to see if the guys behind the cash registers at Moe's Used Books on Telegraph are still as pompously full of Lefty snark as normal, or if a cone of silence has likewise descended upon their caustic tongues.
Hope it's not just an Alaska thing. Bye.
And BAD dear, I will definitely be praying for you from way up high today, as up there, observing from such a majestic vantage point, one is always reminded of the magnificence of the Creation.
Posted by: daddy | September 24, 2009 at 07:01 PM
see if the guys behind the cash registers at Moe's Used Books on Telegraph are still as pompously full of Lefty snark as normal
Of that you can be sure. Berkeley is still Berkeley. A better read might be in Palo Alto (though not by much) or the Piedmont or Grand Lake areas of Oakland.
Posted by: DrJ | September 24, 2009 at 07:12 PM
yes, all true, but he was also faced with a cold war possibly becoming a hot one.He was a rookie not ready for prime time.
Kennedy was saddled with the Bay of Pigs and pulled the plug on American support at the worst possible moment. I think his efforts in Cuba afterwards were compensation for that. I also think that it was probably Castro who had him whacked.That would better explain a 48 year old embargo. It was personal between him and Fidel.
It all actually started with the U-2 incident in '60. After the Bay of Pigs and Vienna and Berlin Wall, the Russians did feel they could right what they felt was a wrong, which was the US missiles in Turkey.
Kennedy was a novice, but I think he did learn from the Missile Crisis, and we didn't bend even though we were minutes from launch.The Turkish missiles would have hit Russia first, then the subs, then the bombers. Funny, because the Atlas and Titans in Kansas and the Dakotas were only good for hitting Seattle at the time.
In Vietnam, we were faced with the Diems, who were hated by most of the electorate in the South and a real menace from the North. The army was corrupt, but had some bright spots like Ky who might actually fight most days. All of SEA was involved in insurgency and we were playing for real markers.
So yes, he was probably a low "C" as president. Obama, though, to me is a "Z"
Posted by: matt | September 24, 2009 at 07:18 PM
or a RICO prosecutor, ext
Posted by: matt | September 24, 2009 at 07:18 PM
I hate to see Obama politicize the necessary war in Afghanistan by postponing necessary decisions.
I am concerned about making sure our forces have the necessary assets, in terms of things like air support, armor, and other technologies, to carry out their mission.
I recall that the Predator was experimental when it was first deployed. It has had a tremendous impact on the battlefield since then. The technology represented by the Predators doesn't necessarily have to be airborne to be useful. I hope that all the gadgetry that might possibly save lives, will be made available to our troops in Afghanistan.
Posted by: Original MikeS | September 24, 2009 at 07:22 PM
Of course, Bush had the golden opportunity to appoint a SP during the campaign, particularly on the anonymous credit card donation thing, but he just didn't have it in him to fight the domestic war.
Oh, golly, I can't think of anything a lot more destructive than having a sitting President naming a special prosecutor to pursue the candidate from the opposing party.
Arresting him and sending him to Gitmo, maybe?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 24, 2009 at 07:26 PM
Clair McCaskill just accused Kitt Bond of Politicizing the war in Afghanistan.
FWIW, they are the Two MO Senators.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 24, 2009 at 07:38 PM
Daddy
As I've noted before, there ain't a whole lot of libs right here local, but ANYBODY leaning CLOSE to conservative is starting to get righteously pissed off. I think, probably, especially those who hated Bush because he spent too much.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 24, 2009 at 07:39 PM
If you recall, the ACORN registration fandango was played out over a background of a perfectly groundless attack on Gonzales on the Hill . Bush never really got control of DoJ and in his waning hours it was utterly off the track.
Posted by: clarice | September 24, 2009 at 07:40 PM
Oh, golly, I can't think of anything a lot more destructive than having a sitting President naming a special prosecutor to pursue the candidate from the opposing party.
Arresting him and sending him to Gitmo, maybe?,
Gitmo, I like it.
Although, seriously, Barry SHOULD have been held to account for that. But, we all knew that he held up the FEC, especially so they couldn't/wouldn't look into things like that.
Yes, the whole thing is corrupt from the top down. Needs to be bug bombed.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 24, 2009 at 07:40 PM
Oh, and Cashill, it would appear, has been vindicated.
Who's next?
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 24, 2009 at 07:41 PM
daddy is going to love this:
Obama Likes Tyrants and Dislikes America . . . and Here's More Proof [Andy McCarthy]
Obama is giving $400,000 in cash (your cash) to the Qaddafi family.
Posted by: Ann | September 24, 2009 at 07:58 PM
I just listened to the Benjamin Netanyahu video at Powerline. I want a leader that speaks with passion about the truth - that stands for our country as Mr. Netanyahu rightly does for Israel.
Sides are being chosen...
"those who sanctify life against those who glorify death"
The Obama administration is trying to align us with those that glorify death, and I am so ashamed.
Posted by: Janet | September 24, 2009 at 08:15 PM
Oh, golly, I can't think of anything a lot more destructive than having a sitting President naming a special prosecutor to pursue the candidate from the opposing party.
Was the credit card system legal? I think not; but if it was, then great, nothing needed to be done. If it wasn't legal, and the DoJ knew or suspected it wasn't, how could they investigate or prosecute another party's presidential campaign without being accused of partisan motives? The only other choices were to ignore it, or appoint someone independent of the administration.
Bush chose to ignore it. I didn't think that was an ethical or politically smart choice.
Posted by: Extraneus | September 24, 2009 at 08:23 PM
UncleBigBad:
Maybe now Yosi will be available to blow some whistles.
Well, of this we can be sure and the departure of Yosi doesn't change it: the entire Obama administration blows.
Posted by: hit and run | September 24, 2009 at 08:24 PM
Bush chose to ignore it. I didn't think that was an ethical or politically smart choice.
Extraneus, I realize that it's an Item of Faith that Everything Is Bush's Fault, but do you really imagine Bush could have single-handedly named a special prosecutor to investigate Obama's campaign?
Weren't we just complaining the other day about Obama politicizing the CIA prosecutions? Talking about it being like a banana republic?
Now, let's ignore, for the moment, whether it would be good for the country to establish as a precedent that the current sitting President sets up an special prosecutor targeted at the opposing party's candidate; let's further forget, for the moment, little difficulties like all the complaints that the special proscutor system was inherently flawed, and the results a combination of political grandstanding and the ability under current Federal laws to ensure a Republican can always be convicted of something, at least in some jurisdictions; and let's forget, then, that once the election was over, if Obama had won, that he'd then be completely justified in the eyes of a good part of the country to pursue any theory, no matter how ludicrous, to get Bush and Cheney into the dock.
In other words, let's ignore the near certainty that it would be the single thing most destructive of American democracy since Aaron Burr tried to start a war so he could become King of Texas.
Then just consider, politically, that with the legacy media on his side, and a matter of mere months to pursue it, the likely result would have been 66 or 68 D Senators and God alone knows how many Representatives.
Or to put it more succinctly, don't be a dope.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 24, 2009 at 08:49 PM
As Insty would say, "Heh!"
Breaking - President Bush fully vindicated, multiple WMD stockpiles found in Iraq
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | September 24, 2009 at 08:53 PM
Or to put it more succinctly, don't be a dope.
So, rather than take the quick road, we'll just take the slow path to hell. Corruption and partisan hacks are becoming entrenched on EVERY level. Hell, even if a 'Pub were to get elected, they may not be able to govern.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 24, 2009 at 09:05 PM
Daddy,
I think I am noticing that, altho I can't be sure because most people around here know how far in the tank I am so they wouldn't show their zeal to begin with. I hear things like "I am less pleased".
Posted by: Jane | September 24, 2009 at 09:23 PM
THey do that anyways, not to political people, but the ones who try to keep this country safe. They just want to tear everything down, 'isolate from all bases of support' any challenger, the ethics
complaints, the lawsuits against any opponent. So now we pledge allegiance to Obama, now, but everyone else has to be driven from public life.
Posted by: bishop | September 24, 2009 at 09:28 PM
I would be interested in knowing if you guys are noticing a similar silence from the standard nose-ringed coffee barista's and veggie sandwich makers you guys hang out with.
Not so much, but this is Madison, WI, soulmate to Berkeley.
Posted by: PD | September 24, 2009 at 09:29 PM
Aaron Burr? Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on who's succicnt and who's a dope.
Posted by: Extraneus | September 24, 2009 at 09:29 PM
Obama is giving $400,000 in cash (your cash) to the Qaddafi family.
Guess he didn't find the Lockerbie bomber release so "highly objectionable" after all.
Posted by: PD | September 24, 2009 at 09:30 PM
"Or to put it more succinctly, don't be a dope"
Geez, Charlie. Do you really have to do that?
Posted by: JM Hanes | September 24, 2009 at 09:33 PM
I'll stand up too.
Come on, Charlie, Extraneus deserves better!
Posted by: Ann | September 24, 2009 at 09:48 PM
Come on, Charlie, Extraneus deserves better!
Deserves better than what? He gave her a lengthy explanation of where she is going wrong.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | September 24, 2009 at 10:23 PM
"Or to put it more succinctly, don't be a dope"
The problem isn't "politicizing", or precedents, etc. The problem is a one-sided (cough) objective (cough) media, as it has been for the last 40 years. Solve the media problem, and we can start to operate like a Constitutional Republic again with proper checks and balances.
Posted by: Bill in AZ | September 24, 2009 at 10:36 PM
The media problem is slowly solving itself as the profitability of the press disintgrates. The interim when the old foundations collapse will be rough, I admit.
Dear Charlie: Your summation of the difficulties is succinct and on target. Even so, Bush should have gotten a special prosecutor rolling, though not until after the election. All the difficulties you mention would come to pass. Pofarmer answers you best: corruption is steadily rising. Getting rid of it will take tough doing. How much better was the nation when the Supreme Court panicked and decided Bush v. Gore, rightly in my view, instead of vacating all Florida and federal court decisions and handing this political problem over to the political branches: Congress and the Florida legislature. Let the Congressionals earn their pay. We on the Right frequently say that this nation was not founded by fearful men, still less fearful women. But looking back can never capture the fear felt at the times that tried their souls. We have an unhealthy tendency to duck similar fears today.
Besides, Charlie, so what if The Once went on a full scale war of revenge against Geo. W.? Such a war would stop his domestic agenda. Would the nation suffer more from blood feuds than it has from The Once's idiotic health care crusade/cap and tax/to Hell with foreign affairs, let Israel guard American interests in the Middle East tango? Geo. W. has plenty of millions, and as Nixon found out, vendettas against your political enemies have a nasty tendency to backfire. The nation would survive.
I don't think Extraneus is a dope. I don't think you are either. Which is why you should not have writren "don't be a dope." This may only prove that I am a dope, much too fond of rushing into No-Man's-Land during a bombardment hollering Stop!
Sincerely yours,
Gregory Koster
Posted by: Gregory Koster | September 25, 2009 at 04:50 AM