The WSJ reports that "Troop-Boost Plan Gains Backing" for Afghanistan.
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration is moving toward a hybrid strategy in Afghanistan that would combine elements of both the troop-heavy approach sought by its top military commander and a narrower option backed by Vice President Joe Biden, a decision that could pave the way for thousands of new U.S. forces.
However, it looks like a classic Obama split-the-difference approach:
One scenario under consideration, according to an official familiar with the deliberations, calls for deploying 10,000 to 20,000 U.S. reinforcements primarily to ramp up the training of the Afghan security forces. But Gen. McChrystal's request for 40,000 troops also remains on the table.
Obviously, a lot of time has been spent kicking this around in Washington and elsewhere, and I have no idea what the right number is. Still, I wonder - does Obama think that King Solomon's suggestion to cut the baby in half was serious?
PILING ON: Bill Roggio, writing in the Weekly Standard, highlights the bankruptcy of the Biden approach.
If I had a kid there, I would want him home tomorrow. This Administration is not serious about the fight. Now it becomes Viet Nam. Any seasoned observer knows that indecision, stalling and half effort are all preludes to an ugly withdrawal described as victory.
Posted by: MarkO | October 24, 2009 at 11:31 AM
Biden. That's the ticket. Split the difference between Biden and the generals on the ground..Yes indeed, Prezidebt Present makes another dare I say audacious move.
Posted by: clarice | October 24, 2009 at 11:34 AM
What's this? They can't make up their minds about whether to take the troop-intensive COIN approach, or anti-terrorist striking, so they're gonna split the difference? Brilliant! (And this thoughtful analysis has taken the better part of three months?)
Cheney was wrong . . . "dithering" is too kind.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | October 24, 2009 at 11:39 AM
Remember this was the same idiot who rejected supporting the Surge during the campaign even with the hindsight that it was a success. In a rational country where security is considered a priority, that should've cost him the election by itself.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 24, 2009 at 11:53 AM
I hope NATO & the UNs rep's endorsement of McChrystal's plan will push BO to approve the full 40,000. McChrystal did say that 40,000 was the minimum required.
Posted by: MDr | October 24, 2009 at 11:58 AM
There are some who say we must kill every human being in Asia to win this war. Others say we should surrender to the Tollybahn and convert to Islam en masse. Let me be perfectly clear: I will never make the former choice, and I cannot predict the circumstances which would lead me to forcefully advocate the latter.
For years, Joe Biden and I demanded that George Bush - the man whose foolish war of necessity kept Afghanistan from joining the G-8 - listen to his generals. We knew the generals were right at the time because we are smarter than Republicans and their generals put together. That's how we knew the surge was a bad idea in 2007, and it's our incomparable intelligence that lets us be the only people in the world who still know the surge was a bad idea, years after its universally acknowledged success.
In recent days, my Afghanistan policy has come under attack from Dick Cheney, a man who once ran the reviled company Halliburton, who once shot a guy in the face, and whose gay daughter could not get married under the laws of his administration. His personal attacks have no place in a debate on public policy. America needs leadership, not the kind of scapegoating and petty insults you would hear from the traitors at Fox and their mindless automatons in the Republican party.
That is why I have convened this special session of Congress: because we need to act now. I have said we must win the war in Afghanistan, and so it is vital to the future of America that we join the Copenhagen accords on climate. We must defeat terrorism, and so Congress must nationalize medical care immediately. I demand Congress write and pass bills that are good. But I am flexible, particularly on the "write" part. Just pass them, we can fill in the blanks later. I have no patience for obstructionists who want to read the things. America does not have time for Republicans to learn to read. That is why I call for a bipartisan vote on principles that unite all Americans. We must act now. Congress must vote on all these measures by the end of the day, so I can sign them after my long weekend in Chicago, my golf outing to Florida, then I think I have something in Martinique until next Tuesday.
Posted by: bgates | October 24, 2009 at 12:18 PM
The new Obama "revolving door strategy". At any one time 20,000 troops will be arriving in Afghanistan whilst 20,000 are leaving.
Now you know why I can no longer support British troops being involved.
Don't count on NATO,they don't wan to be there either.
Posted by: PeterUK | October 24, 2009 at 12:18 PM
For those of you who have read Catch 22, I think I have found his metier'. Obama as Major Major. LUN
Posted by: matt | October 24, 2009 at 12:22 PM
PUK, that's why re-ups have gone in the toilet; who wants to be part of something where there's no commitment to victory? Where McChrystal can be trumped by bleeding-brain-stem Biden?
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 24, 2009 at 12:23 PM
But in this case,Obama as Minor Minor.
Posted by: PeterUK | October 24, 2009 at 12:23 PM
It appears to me an open question whether Barry has any desire to win in Afghanistan.
Perhaps he is only slipping unconciously toward a repeat of Viet Nam through the same half measures.
Or perhaps a man who thinks what occurred in Viet Nam was precisely what an arrogant hyperpower deserved is not as clueless as he seems.
It's a sick thing to have to consider in our CIC but after all I'm sure the Taliban are just as convinced of Afghanistan's exceptionalism under their rule as we are of American exceptionalism. And who are we to say they are wrong? That is Barry's express outlook is it not?
Posted by: Ignatz | October 24, 2009 at 12:26 PM
There are some who say we must kill every human being in Asia to win this war. Others say we should surrender to the Tollybahn and convert to Islam en masse.
That's perfect. It completely epitomizes the kind of bogus "presentation of alternatives" that Obama continually throws up and then rejects with his patented line against "false choices," leaving it up to the listener to realize that both of the to-be-rejected alternatives are actually championed by no one.
bgates crystalizes with these few words what a deeply deceptive and duplicitous man inhabits the White House.
Posted by: PD | October 24, 2009 at 12:27 PM
Well done bgates.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 24, 2009 at 12:29 PM
The thinking by Greyhawk (multi-part series beginning here) seems to be that Obama's dithering is due to his wish not to deal with the Karzai administration and would rather someone else was in place. I guess that would explain the push for a redo on the election, if they hope that Karzai can be pushed out -- although this kind of machination goes against Obama's explicit statement during his UN address that no country can impose its will on any other.
Posted by: PD | October 24, 2009 at 12:31 PM
Yes indeed, Prezidebt Present makes another dare I say audacious move.
Mr. "We must take bold action" strikes again.
Posted by: PD | October 24, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Captain.
The left has been absolutely gagging for another Vietnam,in Obama they have found a president who will give them one - hard.
Posted by: PeterUK | October 24, 2009 at 12:32 PM
If I had a kid there, I would want him home tomorrow.
Anyone in contact with the troops there, to know what they themselves think about all this?
Posted by: PD | October 24, 2009 at 12:36 PM
But in this case,Obama as Minor Minor.
Perfect company for Nancy the Lesser and Harry the Small.
Posted by: PD | October 24, 2009 at 12:36 PM
If somehow bgates' speech were fed into TOTUS and Barry delivered it would:
1. Anyone in DC besides clarice, OL and Krauthammer notice any difference?
2. Joe Klein, Keith O, and the rest of the media lickspittles breathlessly praise and defend it?
Posted by: Ignatz | October 24, 2009 at 12:38 PM
To hell with the gold standard: JOM has bgates.
I think Milo Minderbinder would be an even better character for The Once.
PD, you didn't think that The Once meant his own rules to apply to his own self did you?
Poll question: which is worse:
a) the sort-of honest imbecility of Biden or
b) the amateurish deviousness that fools MS-NBC viewers of The Once a/k/a Tricky Micky (Mouse?)
Posted by: Gregory Koster | October 24, 2009 at 12:38 PM
A tale of two Obama campaigns:
Afghanistan: "We must not be hasty and rush into anything without undue consideration. I'll get back with you in a few months."
Obama Reelection 2012: "Scorched earth! Not a step backward! Smite the infidels and apostates with fire and sword! Death to deserters, shirkers, and cowards!"
Posted by: MarkJ | October 24, 2009 at 12:39 PM
PD,
It is doubtful that Obama has any preferences on a Karzai administration,corruption and democracy are irrelevant to a machine politician like Obama.
No, the man is dithering for reasons of American domestic politics. It would be disastrous for Obama's left wing support to win,equally disastrous to the American public to lose. Obama is searching for the "Third Way",losing,weakening the military whilst coming up smelling of roses.
Nothing the man does is without regard to his own self interest. Nothing!
Posted by: PeterUK | October 24, 2009 at 12:42 PM
Our CiC is a Ditherer-in-Chief; I'll refrain from writing the abbreviation.
Posted by: PD | October 24, 2009 at 12:43 PM
PUK, they should file that under "Be careful what you wish for" because the circumstances of the two of them are very different. Bammers better get control of the innerwebbz before the final withdrawal because there will be plenty of betrayed people with stories to tell.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 24, 2009 at 12:44 PM
Poll question: which is worse:
Yes.
Posted by: PD | October 24, 2009 at 12:44 PM
It is doubtful that Obama has any preferences on a Karzai administration,corruption and democracy are irrelevant to a machine politician like Obama.
PUK, you may be right. On other other hand, wasn't Carville involved in the campaign of Karzai's opponent, and isn't Carville one of the people who's in on the early morning White House calls? (Are those still going on? White House staff conferring with Carville and I think Begala and Steffie?)
Posted by: PD | October 24, 2009 at 12:46 PM
bgates, you get better every darn day.
Your post raises a question though--Obama is always putting idiotic alternatives in the mouths of anonymoue "somes"("There are some who say...) . Maybe we ought to find him some better somes to talk to.
Posted by: clarice | October 24, 2009 at 12:49 PM
Ah, Mark that was the campaign last year, but the same will happen most assuredly next time. bgates that was so good it is scary, All I can say is "splunge and I'm
not being indecisive"
Posted by: narciso | October 24, 2009 at 12:50 PM
Maybe we ought to find him some better somes to talk to.
Good luck with that; he's always taken the path of larger idiocy content.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 24, 2009 at 12:52 PM
PD.
Does it matter who the temporary ruler of Afghanistan is? Democracy isn't going to take hold for decades,if ever. All that can be expected is to have a quiescent governance of Afghanistan,no terrorist bases and the minimum of attacks on the remaining garrison.
That the tribesmen are going to keep up with their national sport of feuding is a given,all that can be done is keep them within their borders and the Taleban away from Pakistan's nukes.
Posted by: PeterUK | October 24, 2009 at 12:57 PM
OT: I note our cowardly leader has declared a state of emergency over swine flu - because of course they failed to make the vaccine in time.
How will he use this emergency?
It has to have something to do with healthcare altho it should have the opposite effect.
Posted by: Jane | October 24, 2009 at 12:57 PM
As someone else pointed out Abdallah is not Pashtun, not Karzai, probably Hazara so he'd
have even less success. Hell we should go whole hog and make it General Fahim, sure he's a warload, but he's the power behind
the throne anyways. I realize that would make the situation even like Vietnam '64
than usual, but that seems the plan anyways
Posted by: narciso | October 24, 2009 at 01:00 PM
Stolen from Aos
1. Declare Swine flu emergency
2. ????
3. Economic recovery/Fox goes bankrupt
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 24, 2009 at 01:00 PM
Jane,
Swine flu is the current hysterie du jour amongst the political elite. The Liebour government tried to start a panic here. The MSM reporting every sad death. Unfortunately for the govt it war noticed that the numbers were infinitesimal compared to "ordinary" flu epidemics,that compared to hospital fatalities it was negligible.
I had my flu jab yesterday,oddly,no swine flu jab.
Like AGW,this is another control measure.
Posted by: PeterUK | October 24, 2009 at 01:05 PM
According to this is in the LUN, Abdallah,
he's at least identified as Tajik, seems like a good guy, despite having Carville attached to him, but who else was going to manage his campaign, Dick Morris?
THe line that comes to mind, about the swine
flu, is from the otherwise wretched "Strange
DAys", It's not that you're paranoid, it's whether you're paranoid enough" which in the course of the film, ended up being a dodge by the character who utters it. They
used the first interation of this, to put
in the 'noted epedimiologist' Kathleen Sibelius, so there's certainly that to consider.
Posted by: narciso | October 24, 2009 at 01:10 PM
Our CiC is a Ditherer-in-Chief; I'll refrain from writing the abbreviation.
Posted by: PD
Jane, now we can call him Tricky Dicky.
And regarding swine flu...this could be a really big mess!
Posted by: caro | October 24, 2009 at 01:18 PM
Yon called him 6-star General Obama.
Posted by: PaulL | October 24, 2009 at 01:26 PM
There are some who say . . .
Perfect. But Dude, warn me next time. (Luckily, there was no coffee involved.)
Posted by: Cecil Turner | October 24, 2009 at 01:29 PM
I don't think anyone's children should be in harm's way unless they have a commander in chief who is 100% committed to the mission.
The jug eared marxist can't commit to whether or not he'll have a ham sandwich for lunch without a poll and a focus group.
Posted by: verner | October 24, 2009 at 01:33 PM
That's the problem, Verner. The public is split on what to do in Afghanistan, so Ibama has to wait until the polls provide him with wisdom.
Posted by: PaulL | October 24, 2009 at 01:35 PM
bgates, I stand in awe. You are better than Monty Python.
Posted by: MaryD | October 24, 2009 at 01:37 PM
"That's the problem, Verner. The public is split on what to do in Afghanistan, so Ibama has to wait until the polls provide him with wisdom."
So Obama is waiting for the body count decider?
Posted by: PeterUK | October 24, 2009 at 01:38 PM
Brilliant bgates!!
Soon we'll most likely be referring to him as "BB":)
Posted by: glasater | October 24, 2009 at 01:47 PM
If you wish to watch a 'by the numbers' recounting of deaths from flu - this is the place. I would note that 47,000 Americans will cast off this mortal coil in the next seven days. That's about the same number as did so in the previous seven days and the count will be roughly the same for any seven day period in the near to mid future. I would also note that 4.2 million is the appropriate multiplier when looking at an age grouping of children e.g. 0-4 = 21 million individuals.
So. I wonder how we sit for anthrax vaccine stocks?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | October 24, 2009 at 01:52 PM
PD: "Anyone in contact with the troops there, to know what they themselves think about all this?"
Tiny sample, but the new son in law joined the Marines right out of college because of 9-11 and recently returned from Iraq as a fresh, decorated Intel Captain. When my daughter met him (OK the truth: in a bar in Georgetown), he and his pals were in for the duration, probably as career officers, and my daughter signed on with that understanding and eyes wide open.
At the welcome home party at our place, he and several other officers from the wedding announced they have turned in their papers and applied to grad schools. Focus on international business opportunities.
By my count that is too strikes for the home team: we have lost an officer with great potential, and he and his friends are far from commited to building their futures in the US if the business climate is better elsewhere.
Who said that elections have consequences?
Posted by: Old Lurker | October 24, 2009 at 02:33 PM
I had an interesting phone conversation the other day with another Marine wife whose son is leaving for Afghanistan in a few weeks. My husband is over there now.
I remarked that I am having more trouble with this deployment. She has been through two prior deployments - one with her husband during the invasion of Iraq and one her son being deployed to Al Anbar.
She responded: "I am hearing that a lot. [name deleted] is having a really hard time with this deployment. So are many other wives and mothers I talk with. Deploying under George Bush was a completely different deal. Even though the fighting was worse, the anxiety was tempered by knowing our CinC was behind us 100%."
"This time, not so much."
She's right. I spoke words to my husband before he left this time that I have never said, let alone thought before.
"Watch your back.", I said. Everyone I've talked to feels that way. The uncertainty is palpable.
And the real shame is that our CinC could so easily reassure military families. Two wars going on and the only enemy our President is willing to fight is Fox News.
Posted by: Cassandra | October 24, 2009 at 02:36 PM
Cassandra, How happy I am to see you here. JOMers who've missed your blog have really missed something wonderful. (And OL--Imagine when your survivors come across something named "Villanous Company" in the list of sites you visited!)
Posted by: clarice | October 24, 2009 at 02:40 PM
Ha Clarice!
And dittos to Cassandra.
Posted by: Old Lurker | October 24, 2009 at 02:48 PM
This is like the bar in Cheers, everyone eventually ends up here, and we do know if not our names, our handles at least.
Meanwhile back at the farm, while General Petraeus's troop request lies fallow,there's
always time for this, in the LUN
Posted by: narciso | October 24, 2009 at 02:48 PM
"And the real shame is that our CinC could so easily reassure military families."
Perhaps,but Michelle won't let him resign.
Posted by: PeterUK | October 24, 2009 at 02:50 PM
Blow to Obama diplomativ approach to Iran.
Posted by: PeterUK | October 24, 2009 at 03:05 PM
Oh that post referencing Abdallah was from Rich Lowry, whosw other beaut yesterday was
suggesting that 'teabagger' would one day
be regarded positively, I sent him a terse
emali on that, and he hasn't replied, then again they haven't posted anything new since
that Steyn comment on the IAEAA worker in what Clarice 'dubbed' the defenestration
division'
Posted by: narciso | October 24, 2009 at 03:06 PM
although this kind of machination goes against Obama's explicit statement during his UN address that no country can impose its will on any other.
That's in itself a pretty strong argument for it being what Obama will do.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 24, 2009 at 03:07 PM
OT: I note our cowardly leader has declared a state of emergency over swine flu - because of course they failed to make the vaccine in time.
How will he use this emergency?
I doubt he'll want to use this image out of Milwaukee. The line is for flu shots.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | October 24, 2009 at 03:08 PM
Obama Reelection 2012: "Scorched earth! Not a step backward! Smite the infidels and apostates with fire and sword! Death to deserters, shirkers, and cowards!"
So you think he'll still be on about Fox News then?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 24, 2009 at 03:09 PM
Obama -0 Campaigner in Chief.Telegrapgh. Like cheap wine,Obama doesn't travel well.
Posted by: PeterUK | October 24, 2009 at 03:12 PM
--And OL Imagine when your survivors come across something named "Villanous Company" in the list of sites you visited!--
If OL's computer caches that shot of Cassandra in her purple dress and thigh high stockings they won't have to imagine why he was visiting her. Yowza!
Posted by: Ignatz | October 24, 2009 at 03:21 PM
And no bandolier belt around the base of her boobs.
Cassandra is as lovely as her posts are super.
Posted by: clarice | October 24, 2009 at 03:26 PM
Anyone who relies on Joe Biden and John Kerry for military advice has got to be cotton pickin nuts.
Now that he's declared an emergency, maybe we will see in in his new El Presidente uniform on all the major news networks. What a buffoon.
Posted by: matt | October 24, 2009 at 03:36 PM
Safe to assume that is NOT what spanx are?
Posted by: Old Lurker | October 24, 2009 at 03:37 PM
Buffon?
Posted by: PeterUK | October 24, 2009 at 04:09 PM
Afghanistan - Mullahs - Drugs - Taleban - al Qaeda. Obama?
Posted by: PeterUK | October 24, 2009 at 04:48 PM
Thanks, Clarice :)
I read JOM but rarely comment. But then I rarely comment much of anywhere anymore! No time. At any rate, as you know I've always been a huge fan of yours (and Tom too).
Posted by: Cassandra | October 24, 2009 at 05:02 PM
Perhaps,but Michelle won't let him resign.
OMG. I just spit out my coffee :p
Thanks for the laugh.
Posted by: Cassandra | October 24, 2009 at 05:03 PM
I have to warn you about Mr PUK, Cassandra..Learn his symbol and swallow before reading.
Ditto Hit and Run and bgates.
Posted by: clarice | October 24, 2009 at 05:05 PM
See I don't go on to exasperating length on only one blog, The Seib Journal piece on Afghanistan was less objectionable thn I might have thought, consdering that WH
coffee clatch earlier this week. It wsa left to Moyar to explain why Afghanistan might still be important to the American people. Any piece with Dreazin is kind of
automatically suspect, in my book
Posted by: narciso | October 24, 2009 at 05:22 PM
So you think he'll still be on about Fox News then?
If Fox was a left-wing news organization getting criticized by the administration, this would be just about the time that they'd bomb their own offices to highlight their victimhood status.
Posted by: hrtshpdbox | October 24, 2009 at 05:36 PM
Yes remember my symbol.
Posted by: PeterUK | October 24, 2009 at 05:48 PM
This war is now going on for 8 years (Enduring Freedom). Democracy will not hold water in most foreign countries due to their culture of tribal chiefs not wanting to be equal to the street cleaner. America never learns to know the culture before going into war.
For me, having 2 sons in Iraq & myself in Desert Storm/Enduring Freedom/Iraqi Freedom/VietNam War in my career, I say bring the troops home or it's going to be another VietNam & the world will continue to hate America.
It was continual wars that brought brankruptcy & revolution to France in 1788 so, do we want revolution in America?
If this happens, then I strongly suggest everyone read that new, thriller just out (A Time To Stand by Oliver) cause revolution will come from the people who are fed up with continual wars & a bankrupt country. We don't deserve this kind of govt. Just read it, it's insightful.
www.booksbyoliver.com
Posted by: SilverFox | October 24, 2009 at 06:18 PM
Oliver's wrong if that's what he thinks. Turning tail and leaving Afghanistan now would be a major disaster for t0he US and the Middle East.
Posted by: clarice | October 24, 2009 at 06:23 PM
Enjoy your dinner:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitpic/photos/large/38291190.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=0ZRYP5X5F6FSMBCCSE82&Expires=1256425591&Signature=%2FsTqMcc7%2BWk9m5fkXaAPzMPRk6g%3D>
If that pic doesn't embed, http://twitpic.com/mspo6>go here.
Posted by: hit and run | October 24, 2009 at 07:04 PM
Hit, Are you trying to make us lose our dinner?
Posted by: Ann | October 24, 2009 at 07:31 PM
Let's get something straight, they elected
a Jacobin, not to say Popular Front regime; the argument is over effective strategies for counterrevolutionary change. Right now
electoral strategy seems a better than average bet, although we see all the
possible downsides to that path.
Posted by: narciso | October 24, 2009 at 07:33 PM
Ann:
Are you trying to make us lose our dinner?
Well the question isn't really whether I'm trying.
It's whether I'm succeeding.
Posted by: hit and run | October 24, 2009 at 07:41 PM
Regarding the Obama admin's assertion that it's a good idea to wait until we know who we'll be dealing with in the Afghani gov't: Is there some difference between the candidates in their policy toward the U.S., the way they'd deal with security within their country, or the way they'd related to Pakistan?
Posted by: PD | October 24, 2009 at 07:44 PM
Silverfox, I'm sure what you say makes sense to you, but your premises don not stand up to scrutiny and, even if they did, your conclusion does not logically follow.
Posted by: sbw | October 24, 2009 at 07:51 PM
And personally, I'm pretty well over people saying they hate the US.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | October 24, 2009 at 08:08 PM
As a completely OT palate cleanser for Hit's pictorial emetic, I offer in the LUN a "good neighbor" sign ht Patterico.
Posted by: Strawman Cometh | October 24, 2009 at 08:47 PM
I think SilverFox is the official booksbyOliver shill. He's been here before and his posts all lead to the same place.
Posted by: JM Hanes | October 24, 2009 at 08:56 PM
I really do hate spam with the 'force of a thousand suns" specially unoriginal spam.
Posted by: narciso | October 24, 2009 at 08:58 PM
Oh, that's good Strawman!!!
Posted by: hit and run | October 24, 2009 at 09:00 PM
Unfortunately, we've elected a typical neo-marxist wimp who has spent most of his adult life in the "anti-imperialist/American- agression" community.
The man is totally incapable of being a competent commander in chief because he quite obviously hate American military power, and thinks that the answer to everyting is being nice to our enemies, who are only our enemies because mean old republicans like Ronald Reagan and George Bush have been mean to them for the last five decades.
But WE all knew this before he was ever elected.
I don't have any children in the military, but I have family members and close friends who do. If I had my way, not one of them would be deployed to Afghanistan under this president. For gosh sakes, he can find time for Letterman, but won't even meet with McCrystal--tells ya everything about him that you need to know.
Posted by: verner | October 24, 2009 at 09:55 PM
Strawman, thanks for the big LOL!
Posted by: caro | October 24, 2009 at 10:12 PM
Yes, I can't disagree, this crew is almost destined to screw things up, at a Black Hawk Down, if not Dien Ben Phu. The problem is, "what is to be done" in the interim with
this crew in charge.
Posted by: narciso | October 24, 2009 at 10:19 PM
That's the funniest thing I've seen today Strawman; and this wasn't a bad day prior to that.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 24, 2009 at 10:33 PM
Strawman, That is a keeper! Thanks
Posted by: Ann | October 24, 2009 at 11:08 PM
shucks, it was just a link. There is some other good stuff on gmsplace.com
Posted by: Strawman Cometh | October 24, 2009 at 11:34 PM
BIDEN?? You're going to let BIDEN dictate military policy??
I wouldn't let that clown near a Nerf gun.
I know why they call him, 'Shoeless Joe'.
It's cause he can't PUT his shoes on with BOTH FEET IN HIS MOUTH.
Look, folks, this is too important to let a galactic ignoramus like Biden play Army with real live soldiers.
Put him back in his basement, or bunker, or whatever the hell it is where they warehouse him 'til Obama bites the big one.
Posted by: Tailgunner | October 25, 2009 at 01:04 AM
Tailgunner:
I feel for ya: http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/10/biden_team_drafts_its_own_coun.asp ">Biden Team Drafts Its Own Counterterrorism Strategy After Defense Dept. Declines
Posted by: Ann | October 25, 2009 at 01:17 AM
I know, I suggested the glass case, but that would mean come up with a new set of seals. "Shoeless Joe" should have figured
that out.
Posted by: narciso | October 25, 2009 at 01:18 AM
"As someone else pointed out Abdallah is not Pashtun, not Karzai"
It is my understanding that Abdullahs father is/was Pashtun.
Posted by: DAVOD | October 25, 2009 at 11:11 AM
All the interested parties think more troops are needed; the disinterested ones, like Helen Thomas, the Institutional President, think they aren't.
OK, Decider. Can you go for speed? Can you go for danger?
=======================
Posted by: It's not the end of civilization, but it is a trial. | October 25, 2009 at 01:54 PM
Dang, I wanted to get the Boy Racer President in the name on that last one. He's going the distance.
============================
Posted by: He's striving and driving and hugging the turns. | October 25, 2009 at 02:01 PM