Governor Palin Signs Letter to President Obama Urging Him to Fully "Resource" Afghan War
From The Foreign Policy Initiative:
The Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States
The White House
Washington, DC
Dear Mr. President:
The situation in Afghanistan is grave and deteriorating. This is in part the legacy of an under resourced war effort that has cost us and the Afghans dearly. The Taliban has retaken important parts of the country, while a flawed U.S. strategy has led American forces into secondary efforts far away from critical areas. However, we remain convinced that the fight against the Taliban is winnable, and it is in the vital national security interest of the United States to win it.
You’ve called Afghanistan an "international security challenge of the highest order, " and stated that "the safety of people around the world is at stake." Last month you told a convention of veterans, “Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which al Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans. So this is not only a war worth fighting. This is fundamental to the defense of our people.”
We fully agree with those sentiments. We congratulate you on the leadership you demonstrated earlier this year when you decided to deploy approximately 21,000 additional troops and several thousand civilian experts as a part of a serious counterinsurgency campaign. Your appointments of General Stanley McChrystal as top commander and David Rodriguez as second in command in Afghanistan exemplified the seriousness of purpose you spoke about during the campaign. We are heartened to see that the much needed overhaul of our military operations has begun.
Since the announcement of your administration’s new strategy, we have been troubled by calls for a drawdown of American forces in Afghanistan and a growing sense of defeatism about the war. With General McChrystal expected to request additional troops later this month, we urge you to continue on the path you have taken thus far and give our commanders on the ground the forces they need to implement a successful counterinsurgency strategy. There is no middle course. Incrementally committing fewer troops than required would be a grave mistake and may well lead to American defeat. We will not support half-measures that repeat the errors of the past.
This is, as you have said, a war that we cannot afford to lose. Failure to defeat the Taliban would likely lead to a return of al Qaeda to Afghanistan and could result in terrorist attacks on the United States or our allies. An abandonment of Afghanistan would further destabilize the region, and put neighboring Pakistan and its nuclear arsenal at risk. All our efforts to support Islamabad’s fight against the Taliban in Pakistan’s tribal regions will founder if we do not match those achievements on the other side of that country’s porous northwestern border.
As you observed during the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign, “You don't muddle through the central front on terror and you don't muddle through going after bin Laden. You don't muddle through stamping out the Taliban.” We completely agree. Having “muddled through” in Afghanistan for years, this is no longer a politically, strategically, or morally sustainable approach.
Mr. President, you have put in place the military leadership and sent the initial resources required to begin bringing this war to a successful conclusion. The military leadership has devised a strategy that will reverse the errors of previous years, free Afghans from the chains of tyranny, and keep America safe. We call on you to fully resource this effort, do everything possible to minimize the risk of failure, and to devote the necessary time to explain, soberly and comprehensively, to the American people the stakes in Afghanistan, the route to success, and the cost of defeat.
With the continued bravery of our troops, and your continued full support for them and their command team, America and our allies can and will prevail in Afghanistan.
Sincerely,
Steve Biegun
Max Boot
Debra Burlingame
Eliot A. Cohen
Ryan C. Crocker
Thomas Donnelly
Eric Edelman
William S. Edgerly
Jamie M. Fly
David Frum
Abe Greenwald
John Hannah
Pete Hegseth
Margaret Hoover
Thomas Joscelyn
Frederick W. Kagan
Robert Kagan
William Kristol
Tod Lindberg
Herbert London
Clifford May
Robert C. McFarlane
Joshua Muravchik
Sarah Palin
Keith Pavlischek
Beverly Perlson
Danielle Pletka
John Podhoretz
Stephen Rademaker
Karl Rove
Jennifer Rubin
Randy Scheunemann
Gary Schmitt
Dan Senor
Marc Thiessen
Peter Wehner
Kenneth Weinstein
Christian Whiton
(H/T baboonking)
Posts
231 comments:
I'm not sure I want more troops sent there with the current overly-restrictive rules of engagement. There have been documented incidents of helo and UAV pilots waiting for 20 minutes for permission to fire.
Looks like I need to do some homework . . . I have only heard of 6 of the signatories . . . a good letter but just seems like an odd mix of people, from my lowly perch in Baltimore*
*it's not really Baltimore, it's near Bel Air, MD
Wow. Something David Frum agrees with Sarah on.
And unlike Van Jones, Sarah Palin knows what she signed on to.
Whilst helping the Afghan people is a worthy and just cause, the domestic threats must surely be of much greater and immediate importance.
Furthermore, with America spending money (that it doesn't have) like there's no tomorrow, it could be prudent to use what precious capital the country has on creating an strong border defence, rather than funding wars in far-away countries. An awesome border defence for land, sea and sky would surely negate the need to be fighting wars on the other side of the world.
David Frum will probably come out tomorrow and do a Van Jones and claim he was mislead into signing on to this letter.
Perhaps like death panels, doing a Van Jones will come to mean signing a letter or petition that one was mislead or ignorant to its actual intention.
And to think that SP would sign on to a "foreign affairs" letter from the Foreign Policy Initiative or be permitted to sign on.
Perhaps Sarah Palin has gotten to "first base" in foreign affairs after all and is in the process of stretching a long single by her criticism of Obama's handling of the Bernard AP situation and ending up on third base.
Will Sarah steal home in the next little while? Stay tuned.
Alinsky's Rules for Radicals
Rule 4: "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules." If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 300,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity's very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to it's commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)
Sarah certainly has had the lion's share of experience with this Alinsky Rule.
Interesting thoughts from: Tigerhawk - "Alinsky nods" Sep 6, 2009
"For conservatives, at least , nothing in the last year has been more gratifying than the rights' sudden and rapid adoption of the tactics that have HAVE BEEN USED AGAINST IT with such great effect for more than a generation....
So the elevation of the first 'community organizer' to the presidency seems also to have transferred the most successful tactics of the left to the right, where--by dent of their novelity--they are both shocking and awesome to behold. Ironic, that."
Also interesting:
Order Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" from Amazon and a pop up reads: "Customers who bought "Rules for Radicals" also bought...
"Liberty and Tyranny" Mark Levin
and
"Common Sense" Glenn Beck
Super Ironic???
Obama made a lot of promises during his long,long,long campaign for the TOP JOB. Since taking office he has made additional promises. WE THE PEOPLE need to hold him accountable for each and every one. See if he can withstand this Alinsky Recommended Heat from the American People.
O/T
Laura Bush defends Teh One on school speech: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2334102/posts
Would this whole clan of losers please just go away already?
Next time I get a speeding ticket and have to sign it I am going to traffic court and saying I "did a Van Jones" and didn't know I wa admitting guilt by signing it.
If I am ever audited by the IRS and they find a 25 cent error on it and want fine us and add interest that will make our final payout to the IRS be $154,479.24.....and want to put my husband and I both in jail I am saying:
I "did a Van Jones" I signed the tax return, yes, but I was unaware of what was actually IN the tax return that I signed. Therefore I am not responsible.
Question:
Did all the people who took out a mortgage that they could not afford do a "Van Jones" by signing a loan agreement saying they would have to actually PAY the loan BACK not realizing it said that? And therefore are not responsible for said debt so should be bailed out by the government?
Rino-Hunter:
What I wrote about this topic at FR:
The Bush train has already been taken off the main track and consigned to the railyard to be put in mothballs.
A new train is now on the main track, rocketing towards national moral clarity picking up more passengers along the way and it it being "engineered" by the defiant Sarah Palin who does not countenance Marxists.
Mrs. Bush, your "compassionate conservative" train has run out of steam and diesel fuel and has grinded to a halt and been made redundant. Accept it and move on. Nobody is looking to buy tickets for and be passengers on your train any longer.
What has driven me crazy about Afghanistan is that if we are going to war, why are we not going 100% full tilt? I support the Iraq and Afghan campaigns but not if we arent giving our troops EVERYTHING they need to win. It is not fair to them otherwise.
The commanders there ask for more troops and Obama gives them about half of what they want. Well, here we are and McKrystal is going to ask for even more since they should have been given more months ago.
Either fight the war to win and give our guys EVERYTHING they need and then some, or bring them home.
Her foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann from the campaign signed it. I wonder why John McCain didn't.
I don't understand war issues, so I can't comment, but I know that a war cannot be half-financed. If the country decides to go to war, they must be committed about it.
This could be the first move that could be reliably construed as neo-con by her. Its interesting that she's the only politician in the group.
and that means what? she will always be called governor if not president some day....Go Back To You Hold flicker
Update; Alinsky's "Rules for Radical" is # 52 on Top Sellers List. We should ALL order a copy or copies and get it to #1. That would make the radical leftists both in the White House and outside wee wee even more.
Headline: Conservative Patriots armed with Radical Rules on the Warpath
Guys, forget bring them home from Afghanisthan. It's not gonna happen anytime soon. Obama won't bring them before he does that in Iraq and it won't happen for years either. These decisions will be left for President Palin one way or the other. By that time I hope she has enough capital to build a couple of bases which can withstand and stop seasonal attacks of Taliban.
But don't argue from weakness. US cannot be seen to going to down to Taliban. Work with you get. Armies are always trying to fight with what they got. They scrimp with less. That's in their nature. Sure, it'd be good to have more men, more money, more armors etc but it's not gonna happen in the best of circumstances. That doesn't mean the mission should be given up. If Us gives up on Taliban, we all might as well throw our hands and learn to bow toward mecca.
Wisetrog,
There are a lot of neo-cons in that group but I don't consider her to be a neo-con but rather a more traditional conservative. I believe she signed the letter because she has a son in Iraq and knows how dangerous and foolish it is if we don't adequately fund the war effort. She's basically calling on Obama to dispense with the half measures and fight this to win.
Sarah keeps the pressure on. The enemy has gathered in Afghanistan. So let's kill them there.
Obambi doesn't have a clue about winning a war. God bless & protect our troops.
Another interesting signature:
Dan Senor
He is the husband of Campbell Brown. I wonder what he's in for tonight at home when the missus finds out that good old Danny Boy agrees with anything Sarah Palin espouses and further legitimizes her in the foreign affairs arena.
Could we call this a "conflict of interest"?
Is everybody on that list a private citizen?
The latest poll shows that this war is unpopular but if you're going to fight a war the troops should have everything they need and you fight to win as quick as possible.
Jennifer Rubin is another interesting signature. She has been, I believe, anti-Palin of late.
It will be interesting to see what slant her columns over at Pajamas Media towards the viability and policy positions of Sarah Palin will take on over the next little while.
Doug Brady, I'm not saying she's a necon but that this is first move that could be reliably interpreted as neo-con. There's a difference. I think as we move along as her temperament becomes clear her difference from neocons would also be clearer. We'll see. All in all more stuff coming from her which is good.
wise
neo-con?? I guess I'm not up to speed on that one could you explain. thanks
BTW, none of the NRO staff is there, did you notice that?
johnmd, sorry, no hyphen. Just neocon.
The reality is that many from George Will to Steve Chapman, even
Ralph Peters, all seem to want to do a "George Aitken" declarevictory
and go home, she knows that is irresponsible in the extreme. She's probably what I would call an American nationalist, half way
between neocon and realist
Narciso,
Excellent points. She knows that if we leave, al-Quaeda will have an unopposed base from which to regroup and plan future attacks against the US. Also, if Afghanistan falls, Pakistan, with their nukes, could well be next. She doesn't want us to confront a situation where we are facing a nuclear armed al-Quaeda.
Neither do I.
I noticed quite a few neoconservatives on that list. I hope to high heaven that they haven't captured Sarah within their grasp.
Building democracy or changing culture is a futile effort. Even the totalitarian and brutal Soviet Union couldn't change the fundamental nature of Afghanis. We will not achieve the neoconservative goal in Afghanistan.
To put this into perspective, imagine how you would react if a foreign power occupied the US and was intent on changing our culture. For instance, the majority of marriages in Afghanistan are to cousins, so imagine the resistance in the US to a foreign power trying to make us start marrying our own cousins. In other words, forcibly changing customs is an almost impossible task.
If the goal is to stabilize Pakistan, the the effort should be directed at securing the border and actually stabilizing Pakistan. Let Afghanistan find its own way, political wisdom and stability can't be imposed from without, they need to arise from within.
As for Al Queda encamping within a Taliban controlled region, the solution is simple, we bomb them wherever we find them. The Taliban have not launched attacks on the American homeland, they just seek to control their own people.
I don't think she's a neocon in the sense a lot of the other signatories or Bush are. She supported Steve Forbes in the '96 primary and Pat Buchanan in the 2000 primary. That doesn't scream "neocon" to me.
The key names are the first one (presumably the lead author of the letter) Steve Biegun and Randy Scheunemann. Both were foreign policy aides to McCain who were subsequently assigned to Gov. Palin to bring her up to speed on foreign policy and the debate with Joe Biden. Here is an ABC News report on the relationship between them during the campaign;
http://tiny.cc/QPFTk
Biegun is the more senior of the two and was a senior official on George W Bush's National Security Council. Both were strong defenders of Gov. Palin following the campaign.
I wouldn't put to much into the argument that she has become a full neocon because of this letter. This is more of a "what do we do now" situation rather than adopting the grand strategy of the neocons.
Alexonian,
I agree, and if the additional troops are Infantry tasked with hunting down and killing Taliban, I'm fine with it. I just don't want them concentrated in cities doing "nation building" so they're nothing but targets.
Rusty,
I agree with you. She is no neocon but, in this specific instance, finds herself on the side of some of them.
That is a pretty good group of people to be associated with, think tank people , foreign policy experts. Wonder who invited her to sign on.
Sarah is an old-fashioned, spread-eagle politician;
LOL :) Um, you might want to reword that phrase.
"With General McChrystal expected to request additional troops later this month, we urge you to continue on the path you have taken thus far and give our commanders on the ground the forces they need to implement a successful counterinsurgency strategy. There is no middle course. Incrementally committing fewer troops than required would be a grave mistake and may well lead to American defeat. We will not support half-measures that repeat the errors of the past."
There was a report (can't remember the source) that McChrystal was told to delete his request for additional troops. If accurate, Obama must be hammered and hammered hard. I will officially become anti-war if the lawyers start running this war, because it will only result in more good men being lost in a increasingly losing effort.
Alexonian and Rino-Hunter,
Ditto on the no nation building. That's a recipe for disaster and a terrible waste of troops and treasure.
The Taliban weren't a significant force in Afghanistan barely 20-25 years ago, they were the product of Maulvana Younis Khalis, one of the Peshawar Council of the Mujahadeen,supported by the ISI and Saudi General Intelligence. Thirty some years ago, it was a generally secular society, it was
the disruption of the Soviet invasion, and the influence of the above parties that made it so
Bush used to go to miltary funerals and visit with the families of soldiers killed in action. Has the scumfuck that's now in the white house been to a military funeral other than Kennedy's?
I think it is more of a letter stating that our troops are there and to many are dying needlessly because they don't have what they need so give it to them.
RINO-hunter,
I agree, and if the additional troops are Infantry tasked with hunting down and killing Taliban, I'm fine with it.
Here's the problem - we become the foreign devil who is killing Afghanistan's sons.
From the US foreign policy perspective, the ONLY US INTERESTS that are affected by Taliban supremacy is that there is a risk that they will allow Al Queda to return and that they will subvert the Pakistani government. That's it. The Taliban's domestic agenda doesn't affect the US. Their subversion of the Pakistani government is a risk, though a small risk, in that strong supporters of the Taliban can be found in the Pakistani intelligence community. The Taliban are merely useful fools. The root of the cancer is within the heart of Pakistan.
The most effective way for Afghanistan to address the Taliban issue is to do it themselves if they find it unbearable. That type of effort results in legitimacy because it is the will of the people that originates the effort and it is bought with their own blood. Having it imposed by Americans and their international allies makes any victory temporary because there WILL ALWAYS BE Afghanis who are pissed off with foreign powers imposing fates on them and they will continually feed their sons into the Taliban in order to fight against the foreign powers, so in a way, the support for the Taliban becomes more of an issue of fighting against "oppressors" (us) and less about the idea of furthering Dark Ages Islam within Afghanistan.
johnmd said...
That is a pretty good group of people to be associated with, think tank people , foreign policy experts. Wonder who invited her to sign on.
..................
The ones that are working with her.
Out of office a little over a month and Sarah has been a one busy little bee.
HeHeHe
I've never seen Sarah as a nation-building type. While most of her critics accused her of not being able to come up with a definition of the Bush Doctrine, such a rabid Palin hater as Chris "Thrill up My Leg" Matthews praised her REdefinition of the Bush Doctrine into a more realist-nationalist philosophy of preemptive war. But the letter does not mention nation building, only stability and victory.
The Taliban gave AQ sanctuary,many AQ, including the 9/11 hijackers were trained at camps like Khaldun or Al Faruq in Herat, do we need to go over this again. She's not being cavalier about this, it would be easier in the short run,
to push for a pullout, or reduction
in forces. But then again, she's never followed the easy path
Techno,
I hear you, but when you're talking about a female politician, you can't innocently use "spread eagled" the way you can with a male politician.
Jean A:
I wonder if this is going to end up being the same situation as it was with "Meghan Clyne" in the NY Post after Obama's first 100 days in office, that Meg Stapleton will be coming out with a statement that Sarah's name was included in the letter in error.
Nothing would surprise me!
narciso,
No we don't need to have that explained. Al Queda and other forms of internationally-focused terrorist groups are the problem, not the Taliban itself.
What do you see as the end-game in Afghanistan? How do we win?
I can just imagine the low-life media hacks having a field day with "spread eagle" like they did with "tea-bagging."
flicker said,
>>Sarah is not the Governer any more
-- yes, we know that. Did you just find out ?
Alexonian,
I thought it but didn't want to say it . . .
:-)
Techno,
I hope not. The story would go on for days.
No Newt, Huck, Romney on the list.
On Neil Cavuto (he's off today) they are going after Cass Sunstein and his 2008 book that advocates for mandatory organ donation. I'm not sure if he advocates for this prior to or after death. Do not certain religions forbid the removal of organs? Does Cass Sunstein have a religion? Does it end in an ism?
Looks like Czar Target #2 may be Cass Sunstein.
Good grief! Sarah is no longer Governor??? R U kidding me?
Has Meg confirmed that? I won't believe it till Meg or Sarah confirms it.
"What do you see as the end-game in Afghanistan? How do we win?"
That is the important question we all need to be asking. We need to set an attainable and realistic goal that will do damage the enemy's effort, and achieve it as quickly and efficiently as possible. No open-ended pseudo-strategies justified by talk of high-minded altruism which, let's face it, has nothing to do with the realities of war. War means fighting, and fighting means killing.
Alexonian, you are trying to separate the virus from the carrier host. I think there's a bit of isoloationist nonsense going on in here when you say Taliban isn't America's enemy. Taliban must be defeated. Period. Without defeat Taliban there's no way Al-qaeda can be defeated and there's no reasonable way both can be distinguished unless you wanna split hairs.
How could you accidentally put someone's name on a list of people who signed on to this document? Still, would Sarah include this on her FB page if she put her name to it?
CK MacLeod has a write-up on Hotair:
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/09/07/staying-to-the-presidents-right-on-afghanistan/
BTW, Rome took 60 to 70 years to fully eradicate the pirate threat. Britain took years in eradicating insurgencies in their empire. Low level wars go on for a long time. Must not be impatient. Don't cut and run. Try and minimize losses as much as you can. This is a war of attrition and you've got to break enemy's will. if Obama buckles, the game is over. Al-qaeda knows that all they have to do is a Democrat in and the jihadis win. That's we can;t give up now.
wisetrog, alexonian,
where can I go to find "The Idiots' Guide to the Taliban and Al Quaeda ?"
They don't just exist in a vacuum, they have to get funding and direction from somewhere, so where is it ?
It's like getting mad at the author of Vanity Fair for Levi's article - why not go straight to the top ?
And who really does own AP ? Someone posted that Soros' crowd is on the board ?
- What a bunch of wussies all their wives must be. Oh, the mother of their children is no longer their wife, I forgot.
I know every life is precious but how many lives have we lost in Aghanisthan compared to lives lost in Korea, Vietnam, Second World war? Those were wars of choice too. Afghanistan doesn't compare. One can reasonably ask for changes in ROE etc but not give up the mission. I'm getting more n more disappointed in Republicans giving up on the war. Are you guys just going to support wars America fights only when you guy is presiddent? That's borderline non-patriotic? Compared to IRaq, there's not much of nation-building going on, so that's a smokescreen and not a real objection.
Wisetrog,
AL Queda is an international terrorist group. The Taliban is an insurgent group:
It has regrouped and since 2004 revived as a strong insurgency movement[4][5] governing at the local level and fighting a guerrilla war against the current government of Afghanistan, Pakistan, allied NATO forces participating in Operation Enduring Freedom, and the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).[6] It operates in Afghanistan and the Frontier Tribal Areas of Pakistan.[7]
The Taliban movement is headed by Mullah Mohammed Omar. Mullah Omar's original commanders were "a mixture of former small-unit military commanders and madrasah teachers,"[8] and the rank and file made up mostly of Afghan refugees who had studied at Islamic religious schools in Pakistan. The overwhelming majority of the Taliban movement were ethnic Pashtuns from southern Afghanistan and western Pakistan[9], along with a smaller number of volunteers from Islamic countries. The Taliban received valuable training, supplies and arms from the Pakistani government, particularly the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI),[10] and many recruits from madrasahs for Afghan refugees in Pakistan, primarily ones established by the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI).[11]
Although in control of Afghanistan's capital (Kabul) and much or most of the country for five years, the Taliban regime, which called itself the "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan", gained diplomatic recognition from only three states: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. It has gained some amount of political control and acceptance in Pakistan's border regions, but recently lost one of its key leaders, Baitullah Mehsud, in a CIA assassination.[12]
The Taliban is today classified by security analysts as an "alternative government" in Afghanistan. It operates fifteen Sharia law courts in the country's southern provinces handling civil and commercial cases and collects taxes on harvests in farming areas. Reflecting its persistent power to intimidate the populace, the Taliban implemented one of the "strictest interpretation[s] of Sharia law ever seen in the Muslim world", yet still occasionally updates its code of conduct.[13] In mid-2009, it established an ombudsman office in northern Kandahar, which has been described as a "direct challenge" to the ISAF.
The Taliban's focus is internal to Afghanistan. Al Queda's focus in primarily on international terrorism.
That the Taliban once facilitated Al Queda is not in dispute. The past however does not set in concrete the future. We we invaded Afghanistan, Al Queda eventually got the message and decamped and found new places to encamp.
How did our fight against the Viet Cong insurgency go?
This is very good political positioning for her. Lets analyze the positioning. Obama has three options:
1) Pull out with "external enforcement" - the George Will strategy.
2) Pursue the status quo - stay in and "muddle along" but don't take the risk of committing more resources.
3) Fully resource the war to win.
There is no way Obama will pull out (the George Will strategy). If there is any terrorist attack against the US in the next three years that can be remotely traced back to Afghanistan and/or Pakistan, Obama's Presidency would be destroyed under these circumstances.
So he has only two options. The status quo - "muddle along" approach or fully resource the war to win. The left wing of the Democratic Congressional Caucus will never allow him to escalate the war. So Obama will continue to muddle along.
Given this, the best political positioning for Gov. Palin is to take the hawkish approach. If Obama's efforts in Afghanistan fail, and/or a terrorist attack occurs, she can blame Obama's "muddle along - Vietnam startegy" for this, and point out that had he fully resourced the war, and committed himself to win it, this would not have happened.
If Obama resists his left wing and fully resources the war (unlikely), Gov. Palin can take credit for pushing him in this direction.
It is the best and only position for Gov. Palin to take. Again this does not mean she is a neocon, it just means it is the best strategy to take given the situation as it exists today - both politically and from a military and foreign policy perspective.
And she has taken this position well in advance of Romney and Huckabee.
The problem is the people who put these forces in motion are former ISI head (and Taliban sympathizer)
Hamid Gul and former Saudi General
Intelligence chief, ambassador to the UK and the US Prince Turki, and their successors.
Wisetrog,
What is the mission? What is the endgame? How do we define victory? Under what conditions can we leave?
It took around 25 years for Sri Lanka to demolish LTTE but they did achieve that finally. Now there's hope for peace. In war, there's no middle groud. You either win or lose. Do you want to lose or seen to be losing to rag tag third world Sslamist menace called al-qaeda n taliban? Would ANYONE take US seriously after that? US would be a joke and the fact is the region will turn into a tinder box and international terrorism will go significantly up because of it America will be forced to re-enter at some time. That'd be an even worse joke. I understand your frustrations but you cannot give into your temporary frustrations and isolationist impulses when dealing radical Islam. I am not an theist. I don't want to be forced to pray to mecca at point of time in my life unless i want it myself. Stand up for liberty. What's bad in that? It's not neoconissh although they'd do that.
You can look at this letter in another way. Sarah's next major speech may be on foreign policy.
The left is going to go nuts when they see the list of names.
Awwww, c'mon you guys, no fair! Don't you know that I am "The One"?
You're supposed to be enraptured with my tone and timber, with my sonorous notes and heartfelt resonance. Why aren't you swooning and basking in my reflected glory?
You're not supposed to actually LISTEN to what I say. I won and you're supposed to be quiet and get out of the way. It just gets me so wee wee'd up! After all, I have to say so many things to so many people in order to be everything to everybody which of course I can now that I'm partners with God!
Now do you understand? Though you may have heard my words, you don't really comprehend them. So even though I backtrack, change course, renege on promises and improperly calibrate, I will work my wonders in strange and mysterious ways because I am Me!
Now back to the latest revision of my lesson plan....
I just read the original letter at the Foreign Policy Initiative.
Unlike the Meghan Clyne episode this appears to be genuine.
So I do apologize if my former suggestion may have led to some unfounded skepticism.
It took around 25 years for Sri Lanka to demolish LTTE but they did achieve that finally.
Sri Lanka, not the US, not India, not the UK, not the UN. The only way to destroy an insurgency is to have the host population eradicate it. When foreign oppressors are the hammer, there is always hatred directed at the foreigners and this hatred always works to the benefit of the insurgents.
I understand your frustrations but you cannot give into your temporary frustrations and isolationist impulses when dealing radical Islam.
Seriously, what I think has a better chance of working than this "reform the Taliban movement" is a new variant of the cold war strategy of Containment. It's far fetched and extreme, I grant you, but LESS far fetched and extreme than the GOALS of the current strategy. Bans on international travel, international commerce, international migration, etc. until improvement is seen. Look, there is nothing coming out of Afghanistan that is important to international commerce. It's not a huge market for our companies, it doesn't provide valuable exports. In fact, to put this into perspective, in the entire Middle East and North Africa region, if we exclude oil, the exports of over 800 million people can't even match the exports of Spain, a nation of 46 million, and one of the less wealthy nations of Europe.
Look, I know it's not a realistic strategy nevertheless it has a better chance of delivering the outcome you seek than does the current strategy.
Alexonian, again your tendentious definitions remind me of Alqaeda and Alqeda in Iraq or Al-qaeda in Mesopotamia are all different debate or whatever they choose to call themselves. Bottomline is they are all part of the radical Islamist network and you cannot appease one without losing the war.
In war, the only end game is victory. BTW, we may differ on how to get there and it takes a particular mind to cut through the Gordian knot but as I've said it took over 20 years for Sri Lanka to smash LTTE. Compared with that timeline this is nothing.
By all mean,s continue to press on answers if your overall strategy is victory. I am not a military strategist myself, so I can't help there. All i can say if you its wrong to cavil and make mountains of molehill distinctions between alqaeda, taliban etc. They're all radical islamists.
The third nut to crack is Saudi Arabia of course. That won't happen until Sarah gets into office. She'll drill for domestic oil which will lessen Saudi clutch on American power and she can pressure them to stop their promotion of Wahhabism. can't believe how many parts of the world were peaceful until set fire by the Wahhabi nonsense of S.Arabia. I hope she comes out and hits at S.Arabia.
Sarah has clearly drawn a line in the sand regarding Afghanistan. Agree with it or not at least the lady has now taken a firm position. It will be interesting what Romney and Huckabee say now regarding Afghanistan.
BTW, I don't think your analogy works so well because Sri Lanka is effectively two different populations: Sinhalese and Tamils. It's as much a foreign population defeating, Sinhalese over Tamils as anything else. I also cited British victory over Malaya and Rome's over pirates. This from my pitiful knowledge of military history which is not much.
Bans on international travel, international commerce, international migration, etc. until improvement is seen. Look, there is nothing coming out of Afghanistan that is important to international commerce.
This is the similar kind of ignore them mentality that US approached after the Cold War and see what happened. One 9/11 isn't sufficient for you?
What comes out of Afghanistan isn't important. Taliban n Al-qaeda must be defeated, they are now in front of our targets there, go get them. Doesn't matter if it takes 10 more years. US has to demonstrate staying power. You can't cut n run from every small diddly squat war and still be a serious power. Afghanisthan is not even a major war by historical standards for god's sake. US hasn't even got back its troops from bosnia/s.korea, so why the haste in Afghanisthan?
alexonian and others - This has the earmarks of a pseudo-Iraq surge in Afghanistan. The surge was very successful in Iraq. We are able to withraw out of Iraq now under better conditions because of the surge. It probably is not an accident that Petraeus (the Centcom Commander is technically in charge of Afghan now. The surge never was meant to last long in Iraq and it didn't so the same would hold true for Afghan.
Now within military circles the debate is who had more to do with the surge Odierno or Petraeus. Petraeus loves the media so he generally gets credit but many in the military believe it was more Odierno's idea (I served under Petraeus in Mosul, Iraq so I am in the Petraeus camp).
The key is to take note that they are listening to Generals on the ground and not politicians and other staffers that have political motives. A general wants a win and minimum loss of their troops. Also if you read there is a slam at the Bush and Neocon policiy as they state how bad the last couple of years have been run in Afghanistan. Bush quit the last couple of years with his Neocons, Sarah would never quit on her troops. I don't know everybody on this list but I bet it is a mix.
Wisetrog,
Radical Islam is the problem and you can't win a war against a religious philosophy through a force of arms. The only way to win is to have the adherents of the religion resolve the issue for themselves. Islam missed a period of great reformation, like the one that occurred in Christian nations.
Such reformations can't be imposed by soldiers from "Christian nations." When you argue that we have to destroy radical Islam that's what you're arguing.
The best solution is, just as with the Communist Bloc, to isolate them and let them live their lives as they best see fit and to minimize our interactions with them. This way they get to reap the consequences that arise from their own decisions and philosophies. And, as with the Communist bloc, the whole arrangement will self-destruct in time and then reformation, initiated from within, will take place on the ruins of radical islam.
Alexonian, pardon me that's bullcrap. Al-qaeda is falling rapidly in popularity in Pakistan. It's severely weakened everywhere except in Afghanistan where it's mildly resurgent. With all due respect Islam has its low ebb and tide like every other religion. Everybody used to say terorits were terribly popular in Pakistan. It was true in the initial stages. Not true anymore. Similarly terrorists are losing their edge even in indonesia. Contrary to your Christian world view of history which seems to color you history all Muslims are not animals. They can be turned into effective allies against terror, we should have wisdom and perseverance. (Reformation didn't happen by people who didn't have stomach to fight for religious liberty btw.)
Much of the modern Islamist recreudescense is due to funding of Saudis and represents their power game. They can be cracked by less oil dependence. Once that's taken care of, this Islamist menace can be demolished, both by eradicating fighting camps, insurgents, localizing and limiting trouble spots, eliminating terrorist leaders, disbanding networks etc. once the insurgencies are weakened, US needs to work with imams and other local relgious figures to desegregate Islam from terrorism ( aquasi-Reformation if you will, already happening on the ground and bearing results, though don't know how much US is involved). This may take years but that has to be done and can be done.
BTW, nobody is talking about putting pressure on S.Arabia to stop Wahabbi promotion and nobody is talking about working with local imams for moderate forms of islam. Those two should go as top priorities for foreign policy establishment as well.
PEC.
This has the earmarks of a pseudo-Iraq surge in Afghanistan. The surge was very successful in Iraq.
Define success. There is a temporary reduction in violence. That's good. Heavy troop presence serves to subdue sectarian violence. History is replete with evidence that blood feuds continue once heavy police presence is removed.
If you think that we've achieved success in laying the foundation of democracy in Iraq, think again:
This is a startling fact given that throughout history about 70 democracies have collapsed in poorer countries. In contrast, 35 democracies spent a total of 1,000 years under more affluent conditions, and not one collapsed. Affluent democracies survived wars, riots, scandals, and economic and governmental crises.
The probability that democracy survives increases monotonically with per capita income. Between 1951 and 1999, the probability that a democracy would fall during any particular year in countries with per capita income under US$1,000 was 0.089, implying that their expected life was about 11 years. With incomes in the range of US$1001 to US$3000, this probability was 0.037, for an expected duration of about 27 years. Between US$3001 and US$6055, the probability was 0.013, which translates into about 78 years of expected life. And above US$6055, democracies last forever.
When this analysis was done Iraq's GDP/capita was less than $3,000. Even in 2007, with high oil prices, their income was only $3,700. Their oil reserves are depleting and so too will their national income.
Iraq has a very, very good chance of revolting from Democracy. What we're seeing is not a success, it is a lull from a trend.
I'm pleased that Sarah has joined with this very impressive group, well, except for David Frum. For those of you who are freaking out that she's aligned with "neo-cons" - you haven't understood the group. It's non-partisan, across the spectrum.
Seriously, can't nobody read? I didn't say she was going neocon, just said that this is one endorsement that can be interpreted as necon with some justification. Be prepared for such comparisons. once her outlook on foreign policy issues becomes clearer, her break from neocon policy will become sharper.
Alexonian, you seem to glass half empty type.
RINO-huner-
Where did you read that she supported Buchanan in 2000? I've never heard anything about that. In fact, they differ on many issues. Buchanan is a protectionist and very anti-Israel, while Sarah supports free trade and staunchly pro-Israel. I can't imagine that she supported him in 2000 when they differ that greatly on two rather substantial issues.
Wisetrog,
Contrary to your Christian world view of history which seems to color you history all Muslims are not animals.
Dude, I'm not Christian.
nobody is talking about working with local imams for moderate forms of islam.
What are moderate forms of Islam?
In Islamic law (sharia), the consensus view is that a male apostate must be put to death unless he suffers from a mental disorder or converted under duress, for example, due to an imminent danger of being killed. A female apostate must be either executed, according to Shafi'i, Maliki, and Hanbali schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), or imprisoned until she reverts to Islam as advocated by the Sunni Hanafi school and by Shi'a scholars.
As I wrote earlier, Christian religions went through their periods of reformation centuries ago. Islam never had such an event. Many religions deal only with the realm of the spirit and soul, while Islam also deals with the realm of governance. Imposing an Islamic Reformation by force won't work, the need for change needs to come from within the ummah.
Sarah, "I read your dam book Taliban"/
From Patton
I love, respect and admire Sarah Palin. Agree, half-hearted measures (if that accurately describes U.S. policy in Afghanistan) are never adequate. If we are going to be at war, the nation must be fully committed. On that point I fully agree with the Governor.
However, I'm not convinced that large scale troop presence in Afghanistan is a good idea. That god-forsaken place has proven itself resistant to every foreign military power over the centuries.
Afghanistan is a thorny conundrum.
In any event, I too am nervous at seeing Sarah's name listed with a bunch of neocons.
Doug Brady and some others - you offer a sensible way to view this, for now.
Meanwhile, I agree with the concerns raised by RINO-Hunter and Alexonian here, and I think Andy McCarthy's piece linked to the open thread is right on.
Hopefully her signature to this letter will have the strategic political benefits for Sarah Palin that someone suggested above but which I am not adequate to judge.
Please be VERY careful, Governor. You're precious to us.
Wisetrog,
Alexonian, you seem to glass half empty type.
You know how many conservatives criticize liberals for their schemes and plans to engineer society to their liking and how conservatives believe that these grand schemes fail because they impose change rather than letting change develop organically, well, the same criticism applies to schemes that are imposed on foreign nations, cultures and religions.
Just because it is conservatives who think that they can reform another nation's culture, religion and governance, doesn't make it any less crazy than when liberals try to do the same in the domestic sphere.
I think we have had this discussion before, but the definition of neocon has become very blurred and does not really mean what it once did. Today, many people attach the neocon label to anyone who is hawkish on foreign policy and is pro-Israel, regardless on where they stand on other issues such as social or economic. In that sense Sarah would fall into the current neocon label even though she would not fall under the original definition of a neocon.
From ABC news, dated Sept 1, 2009:
"Gen. Stanley McChrystal released his assessment of the current Afghanistan war strategy on Monday, calling for a new strategy that focuses on protecting civilians and relies more on Afghan forces. While his assessment did not include a specific request for more troops, he is soon expected to ask for a substantial increase in the military force there. "The situation in Afghanistan is serious, but success is achievable and demands a revised implementation strategy, commitment and resolve, and increased unity of effort," McChrystal said on Monday. August was the deadliest month for U.S. troops in Afghanistan since the war began, claiming the lives of 49 -- more than one-fourth of all U.S. troops killed this year."
He was told not to request more troops in this recent assessment. But "he is soon expected to ask for a substantial increase in the military force there."
The request for more troops should have been in the assessment, but what the hell is this "Calling for a new strategy that focusses on protecting civilians"??????
WTF????????
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/general-troops-afghanistan/story?id=8457131
blerch, you are right.
alexonian, I am not going to argue you out of your cynicism but I'll say this much. No social engineering required but human desire for profit n peace will prevail and cultures learn from each other, even the most regressive ones. Do you want the direction to be from enlightened to regressive or from regressive to enlightened? If you don't take action, I promise you you will find losing your own enlightenment rapidly. It's either-or. There's no middle ground. There never has been.
Sorry, I'm in the George Will camp on this one.
blerch,
That's much too narrow and trite a summation of the views of both Buchanan and Palin.
Sarah Palin is not pro-"free trade" to the point of sanctioning our massive trade deficits and loss of domestic industrial jobs, which is also Buchanan's point.
Sorry folks, but focussing on protecting Afghanistan's civilians is not one of my priorities. I'm slowly but surely working my way to the exit door on this bs.
Unless Obama wakes up, which I doubt will happen. Where's a Petraeus when you need him?
Sarah Palin swayed to a postition? Are we talking about the same person?
If she is a neocon then she always was one. I don't think she has ever been, is or will become one.
She is simply saying if we are there then equip the troops and have enough troops.
I am not as smart politically as many of you here are. I read your comments and am greatly educated by them. One of the many reasons I love C4P, but I am not worried that Palin signing on to this letter is the beginning of some new Sarah that we do not recognize showing up. I think we are making her signing this way to complicated, but I suppose I make things too simple sometimes.
Sarah is a consevative. Cut the neocon BS.
It's obvious that this letter is to put pressure on Obama to fight this war right and with all the resources at his disposal. That's just plain common sense and good tactics.
K, guys, help me out:
On Sarah's Facebook, the former "donate" tab, now says FBML.
What does that mean?
CharterOakie-
I'm sorry that I do not have enough space to write an entire dissertation of the trade views of Sarah and Pat Buchanan. The bottom line is that they do not see eye to eye on trade issues. That was the point I was trying to make. I see that as a good thing because I am more in line with her views rather than his.
First of all, I do NOT believe Sarah Palin is a Neocon (using military power to bring democracy to other countries) but that list IS a virtual phonebook of prominent Neocons. The only ones missing are Cheney and Wolfowitz.
Do you want the direction to be from enlightened to regressive or from regressive to enlightened? If you don't take action, I promise you you will find losing your own enlightenment rapidly. It's either-or. There's no middle ground. There never has been.
When we contained Communism within its existing borders we didn't fall to its evil. The reason that Communism fell in most of the world is that it imploded of its own inconsistencies and it wasn't propped up by the West as we "engaged in trying to change them."
If you want to see radicalism eradicated the best way is to let these Islamic radicals set up a 7th Century Caliphate, block them within their own borders, and let them live their lives according to their own wishes. I guarantee you that there will be a serious rejection of that world view, the religion which enables it will undergo reform, and there will be a revolt and repudiation of that world view. You've heard the expression, "give them enough rope to hang themselves."
As it is right now, in too much of the West, the West isn't rubbing off on many immigrants, rather, we see things like this:
new research showed Pakistani families produced an alarming 30% of the UK's genetically diseased children.
The research, conducted by the BBC and broadcast to a shocked nation on Tuesday, found that at least 55% of the community was married to a first cousin.
This is thought to be linked to the probability that a British Pakistani family is at least 13 times more likely than the general population to have children with recessive genetic disorders.
The research found that while British Pakistanis accounted for just 3.4% of all births, they had 30% of all British children with recessive disorders and a higher rate of infant mortality.
In this new era of multiculturalism, the principle of assimilation is frowned upon, so we see greater levels of accommodation of cultural practices that are foreign to host cultures. These cultural practices from Islamic nations need to be resolved within the confines of their host cultures by the people themselves, rather than have solutions imposed by outsiders (Westerners) and have the solutions being resisted because they are imposed by outsiders.
Anybody sees anything that Pawlenty essentially said the same thing and he's backing up Sarah too? looks like the battle lines are being drawn as we speak.
Also, Ahmadinejad (sp?) has challenged Obama to a debate at the UN later this month.
A great time for Palin to finally deliver the great speech she was to give last year - before Clinton made a stink and pulled out - causing the organizers to disinvite Palin?
http://www.examiner.com/x-770-Breaking-News-Examiner~y2008m9d24-Palin-Ahmadinejad-Must-Be-Stopped
------RAM HAMMER.-----
I luv it, Fox keeps calling Van Jones a czar.
Hi Hank...I'm Mia...I have a dog named Hank...Is it just me...or is it something in the name Hank...
You know...Like chasing your tail...drooling...tongue hanging out...begging for attention...hmmm...
wisetrog,
I think there is something on Politico.
Purely speculating here, but it seems to me that Sarah Palin's libertarian streak is too strong for her to be a Neocon.
I know it's a cliche, but I really do believe she is a Reagan conservative.
(cue enthusiastic Dean-scream) (:
who the hell is Penry guy? Shoot your emails to him.
"Every event we go to, the event organizer tells us it's the biggest event they've had, but I have to close the deal," Penry said. "I think Sarah Palin created tremendous enthusiasm because she was new and didn't necessarily close the deal with a lot of people."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/26787_Page2.html#ixzz0QSpV3fNI
Hank,
I wonder if Slick Sarah will push to get her son from behind his cushy desk job in Iraq and go fight on the front lines in Afghanistan with the children of those other parents she's pushing to commit. My guess is no way.
Don't let the facts burst your bubble:
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's eldest son, Track, will perform security duties for his brigade's top officers.
"He's just like any other infantry soldier here," said Army Col. Burt Thompson, who heads the 1st Stryker Brigade Combat Team at Fort Wainwright, Alaska. "He tries to remain as anonymous as he possibly can."
Beau Biden, who is Delaware's attorney general, is a captain in the Delaware National Guard and will work as a military lawyer in Iraq.
Palin's unit is believed to be headed to Diyala, among the most dangerous of Iraq's 18 provinces. It extends from the northeastern suburbs of Baghdad to the Iranian border. Diyala has proven to be difficult to control because it is heavily mixed with Sunni Arabs, Shiite Arabs and Kurds.
Diyala was the fourth most violent of Iraq's provinces, averaging more than 3.5 attacks each day, according to figures from June. It has not been returned to Iraqi control and probably won't be before next year.
Palin's job appears to be riskier than Biden's.
Now 19, he enlisted last year and is assigned to the 1st Stryker Brigade's Delta company. That's in Palin's home state. The Army says his being posted there was luck of the draw.
In military parlance, Palin is a "dismount." He and other soldiers operate armored vehicles called Strykers. Their job is to ensure brigade commanders and their communications remain protected as they move around the country. The Stryker is an eight-wheeled truck that weighs 19 tons.
"They're the secret service for the brigade commander," said brigade spokesman Maj. Chris Hyde.
So when you're talking about a cushy desk job you're actually talking about the Vice-President's son.
I love it when stupid Leftists try to fire a rhetorical weapon, and like most idiots who handle weapons, they shoot themselves in the foot.
Bank is the true definition of a dumb ass. Can someone ban this moron already. I'm sick of seeing his ugly face roaming around here. Every time I see one of his postings I understand how Obama got elected
Sorry, meant Hank, NOT Bank
He's a door gunner in a Stryker batallion in Diyala, no cushy job, moron, and she's quite aware he could end up in Afghanistan, fool,
that's why it's not the easy choice, but the right one.
Blerch, she followed Steve Forbes back in 2000, the farthest thing from an isolationist
I do not see any "Specials" about 9/11 or any programs commemorating the date on any TV station on Sept. 11. It is strange.
Im happy with Sarah's signature on this letter and her position on the war effort... truth be known, she might have preferred calling for an increase in troops, a surge.
A thing of certain is this!... Sarah would never play politics with the lives of our troops like Obama... diminishing Americas strength of conviction would not only be off the table... it would never get out of the waste basket!
This letter holds Obama accountable, now and in the future... chewing on his own words if you will... the decision he makes poses risky personal political consequences for him... something Sarah.. a true Statesmen, would never consider and would say... If I die I die politically, Im doing the Right Thing!
Sarah knows what she is doing and she has earned my Trust.
Key quotes, in chronological order:
"However, we remain convinced that the fight against the Taliban is winnable, and it is in the vital national security interest of the United States to win it."
"With General McChrystal expected to request additional troops later this month, we urge you to continue on the path you have taken thus far and give our commanders on the ground the forces they need to implement a successful counterinsurgency strategy."
"There is no middle course. Incrementally committing fewer troops than required would be a grave mistake and may well lead to American defeat."
"We will not support half-measures that repeat the errors of the past."
Besides demanding that Obama take off the gloves and get serious, it paves the way for a demand for a pullout if (more like when) he doesn't.
"We will not support half-measures that repeat the errors of the past."
bestbud, bravo!
@diletanti,
Fox news will show 9/11 attack commercial free on Sept. 11
I don't trust the current administration with any war. They should cut out and let Sarah take over in 2013 :) Then we can win.
The only time he talks about victory is in his own campaign.
I Won.
I'm Present.
Shut up.
Me.
I.
My.
We are present in Afghanistan, that is what he is as the president. Present.
Hank,
Election thieving fascists is more like it. Now you guys are trying to thwart the mandate Obama was given to bring this country back on track from almost decade of Republicans running it into the ground.
1.) It's impossible for conservatives to be fascists considering that fascism is a variant of leftist politics.
2.) Obama can't "bring this country back" by initiating socialist change. That would imply that we're going back to socialist roots, and I know that you're historically illiterate, so let me give you a clue, we never had socialist roots, so Obama isn't bringing this country back to what it once was, rather he's leading us over a cliff.
OT: Anyone notice that Huckabee looks like a middle-aged Gomer Pyle?
Aye Aye... Mr President...
Now I get it...
wisetrog,
Thanks
I just get livid when thinking how Obama thinks- as he looks in the mirror...
Has this decision been poll tested?.. what do I gain?...Michelle and the kids like this house... Im cool and I too like this house and my plane?
EdFab....hehehehe...
I just read Andrew McCarthy's essay linked in the open thread. I agree with his take. It makes for interesting reading.
OT: Bob Beckell was on Hannity's radio show and they were talking about Obama's big speech on Wednesday. Sarah had nothing to do with it, then Beckell brings her name up and starts calling her "Sarah Pathetic". Twice he called her "Sarah Pathetic."
This makes me LMAO! Is Beckell 5 years old? And if she's so irrevelent, then why even talk about her?
Beckell and the rest of the liberals in Washington are scared to death of Sarah. I wonder if the O-man will bring her up by name in his speech on Wednesday. That would be hilarious....the President of the United States elevating a private citizen to his level of power and prestige.
Nancy
It's a Sickening feeling isn't It... a guy bimbo!.. BOTUS in charge!... can't wait to see BOTUS, doing his- Im cool, strut down the stairs of Air Force One, and tumble onto the Red Carpet below.
I read mark Levin's rejoinder as well and I find it more to my liking. The GReat one is usual, great.
This Penry guy, seems legit, I don't know why he would strive to put such a negative spin on her, could have been part of a larger quote, as I found from Adam:
You guys sure Sarah signed this? I agree with the general thrust of the letter, but it just doesn't have that Sarah ring to it. Why would she sign something a bunch of others have signed on to. Including David Frum? YIKES
alexonian - Being around military everyday I disagree with your assessment of Iraq. Bottomline you can't set the conditions to stand up a Government and infrastucture until security is in place. This is in GEN Petraeus counter-insurgency manual. THe problem was we had forgot that in Iraq and that is when things went bad. The Iraqi Army is doing more and more of the missions. That is the name of the ultimate end game. When Iraq can provide their own security. THat is what ultimately has to happen (same in Afghan though likely more difficult there, way more complicated).
Now to say in the end that Iraq will have some great Democracy maybe, kind of sort of but we have to let them set up the Government best for them. Security is the issue.
Afghan is a tougher fight I assure you. Iraq had infrastructure to build from. Afghan did not. Iraq has oil revenue. Afghan has opium and that is about it.
Surprisingly the surge in Iraq (despite fears led to more violence across the board. It is giving us the time and space now to rebuild their army (another different topic).
I guess what I am telling you ALexonian is my knowledge of what is happening in Iraq and how situation is improving are from soldiers returning from there. A lot better source than anybody else.
Gov. Palin has stake out her position and that is to support the troops. I would expect nothing less from Gov. Palin. Therefore, I support Gov. Palin and the position she has taken within this letter.
Another signatory is Margaret Hoover. Isn't she one of BOR's Culture Warriors?
Rove and Palin appear in the Ride2Recovery charity.
Rove and Palin sign this Afgan statement.
I'm thinking it's coincidence 'cause I still don't get that Rove supports her. I would guess he's still with the Bushes.
And did you see Laura Bush backed BO's speech to the schools today? I know she's big into education, and she's still infinitely better than MO, but I really wish she hadn't gone out of her way and out of retirement to support BO. Not necessary IMO.
Hank - If you don't know what Track Palin's job was in Iraq the STFU. For that matter due to your ignorance on what a Stryker Infantry soldier does get the fu#$ off this site.
Track's job was security for the Brigade Commander. That meant he left the FOBs every single day and was under the threat from the enemy. His tour in Iraq was riskier than mine. Commanders security is almost sitting targets for enemy attacks often. I would not be surprised if he was not in firefights while deployed.
Beau Biden - Look the military is a big organization with many different roles but he is a JAG officer in a Signal Brigade. His entire job would have been on a FOB behind a desk. His job is important but the risk factor for a JAG officer for a Signal Brigade is as low as you can get in Iraq (if he didn't spend most his time in Kuwait). I trained individuals in Beau Biden's unit. I KNOW FIRST HAND what Signal officers do (I am one) and I know what his unit does. If he was ever in a firefight he screwed up and was trying to be a hero and do what was not his job.
Sorry this is not to disrespect Beau Biden it is just the facts of comparing the 2.
hrh - I am not too worried about Obama's school speech now. He was forced to change the speech and requirement. DOE already admitted they were wrong in their approach that they would do. This was because of pressure from COnservatives and getting called out.
Just saw that Pawlenty supports increased troop level in Afghanistan.
I am probably going to get flamed for this but here it goes:
I don't care what a soldier is doing in Iraq. ALL of them are heros. Whether it is a "safer" job like Biden's or one that is prone to be much more dangerous like Palin's. They are all serving their country. They are all away from their families. They all have mothers who go to bed every night praying that they will be OK.
It is high school to nah, nah, nah, my job is risky and yours is not.
As long as Daddy Biden or Mama Palin did not pull strings to get them cushy jobs (that I WOULD have a problem with) then I will not compare one to the other.
ANY soldier there is a HERO. PERIOD.
alexonian - How long were Andrew McCarthy and George Will Deployed in Iraq? I am going to keep my cool here but the Captains I see everyday have forgotten more about what is happening in Iraq than these 2 combined while they sit behind their desk in DC. Oh and one or both did pop in for a week and come back claiming to be experts I laugh at them. Have one of these people do a year tour there and then they have the moral high ground. Until them they are clueless talking heads.
WHo do you think knows more a class of 40 officers just back from there or two windbags in Washington?
Oh and I would trust the assessment of GEN Odierno and Petraeus over any of these clowns.
PEC, I forget what area of Iraq, you were stationed in, I'm familiar with the work of 124th
NG division, through it's commander
Hector Mirabile, and it's press spokesman Jason Stanwyck, how they
worked Ramadi, but as with McMaster
in Tall A Far, there were never enough forces to hold the territory, until the Anbar Awakening and Petraeus's surge
Great conversations today, Barbarians. Much food for thought from all of you, McCarthy, Steyn, Will et al who were linked.
My understanding is that the only way muslim armies have ever been defeated is with overwhelming, brutal force. That is no longer acceptable to the U.S. as a whole and it would certainly make our presence in the Arab world even more dangerous no matter what our goal or motivation.
Never has a nation at war gone to greater lengths to avoid civilian casualties than we have in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunately, the resultant politically determined rules of engagement have hamstrung our warriors on the battlefield and put them at even greater risk.
I don't see an easy answer.
Usually I’m online around the clock waiting to hear something form Sarah and nothing... I go away for one day and BANG she's right on it. I miss all the fun.
Sarah if you’re reading this can you please be kind and give me a heads up ja quick email will be fine twitter would do to.
Guys, she's coming, Oh Yeh!
Lipstick
I second that, I doesn’t make a difference what the particular duty of a solider is, the military is made up of various positions and duties some include people working in fancy offices, they all need each other to make it work. It’s they who are serving the country to protect us and whether it’s done by being on the front line or by coordinating things in an air conditioned office they are heroes and I will always honour them for their service.
God Bless them ALL!
No one has ever won a war against Afghanistan.
Lipstick...Right On...
I agreed with those who don't want to see Sarah Palin taken into the NeoCon cabal. I believe that Sarah is supportive of this particular statement as a matter of politics against what inevitably will be backpedaling in the a face of stiff left wing opposition to this war by Obama. I think she is trying to go on record as keeping Obama to his word and not to mention, it dovestail with her own statements at the RNC convention, in which she said that Obama would forfeit right when victory is in sight.
But as a true conservative, as we all think Sarah is, it would be very disappointing if she was a NeoCon. I think she is more of a muscular foriegn policy type in the mode of Reagan and Thatcher, both who won the cold war without firing a shot. I think her concern first and foremost is defending America's interest. And the evidence of her non-NeoCon credential is her push for energy independence. She doesn't want America's interest tied to the stability of the Islam world. With that said I am with Alexonian who advocates a containment strategy vis-a-vis the Islamic world. I think that combined with a preemptive strategy of denying sanctuary/comfort to AL Qaeda and denying them WMDs, is the best going forward. Where I part with Alexonian is that I believe defeating the Taliban in Afghanistan is essential in denying Al Qaeda sanctuary/comfort and in preventing WMDs (from Pakistan) from falling into their hands. It wasn't too long ago that the Taliban were on the verge of major gains in Pakistan. So we have to insure that Pakistan remains stable and secure, just as we need to insure Iran doesn't develop nukes.
Although there are Neo-Conservatives on the list who advocate very interventionist policies for the USA, the fact that Sarah signed a document that basically says, "Hey, let's fight this 100%, not in a half-ass way like we are doing now." does not mean that she is a neo-conservative. It means she is for fighting to win, not like LBJ did in Vietnam. Our soldiers shouldn't be used that way.
Neo-conservatism is about getting into conflicts more often and THAT could be trouble for ANY future politician going forward, Gov. Palin included.
I was marginally against the war in Iraq and for taking down the Taliban to get at Al-Qaida in Afghanistan. However, it is becoming evident that the Afghan people don't seem to be up to self-government and effectively fighting the Taliban on their own.
I have seen no evidence that Sarah Palin would have supported a war of occupation and nation-building from the very start. If anybody has any past remarks, etc. from her we'd appreciate it.
The American people may be for a 'surge' in Afghanistan, but hopefully we can take more soldiers out of Iraq as that country becomes more independent and able to hold it together.
Gov. Palin must make it clear she is NOT a Neo-Conservative, meaning too easily sucked into foolish foreign adventures rather than conflicts that are truly in our interest to pursue 100%. She must prove as a conservative that she is prudent with how our military is used, yet not an isolationist like the Paulites.
narciso - I was in Mosul. When I returned from Iraq the news that was happening over there both from the left and the right was SOOO BAAAD I literally quit watching news for months. I don't care if it is a George Will or Paul Krugman, I take everything they say on Iraq, Afghanistan etc from a prism of they don't have a clue what they are talking about and just have their own little agenda. They sit behind their desk in their cushy little chairs and think they know what they are talking about. I remember the scene in "Gettysburg" when the Union Calvary Commander was talking of how the Union would make a mistake and get a lot killed and the he says "men in top hat in Washington will pat their chest and say what a brave charge that was". He then preceded to make sure that didn't happen. The Will's, McCarthy's and Krugman's are the Washington crew of today.
Who is this obnoxious idiot?
Its time for Hank to go over and do Track's job...Talk about Wee Wee...Hank would advance to Giant Boom Boom... before he boarded the Plane...UGH!
'Cuda 2012
Steven,
Excellent point about decreasing our dependency on foreign sources of energy which then will lessen the need or pressure for foreign adventures.
Anybody who thinks energy independence does not help national defense is in limbo.
That's why I can't stand the Sierra Club, because they want us to be dependent on foreign oil by denying us all sources of domestic energy other than windmills and solar which fall WAY WAY WAY short of meeting our huge energy needs.
I received my copy of "Rules for Radicals" about two weeks ago from Amazon. I already have and read "Liberty & Tyranny" by Levin.
That's pretty weird given some here were talking about it.
We got to all get up to speed in fighting a full-court press like our little and ferocious Gov.
There were three major Afghan Wars,
1837-1841, which endeddesastrously,
1877-1881, which was more of a stalemate, which included the battle of Maiwand commemorated in fiction by Dr. Watson's injury, and the third one that mostly occurred in Waziristan, in between there were many incursions from the Raj into the NorthWestFrontier,
Unbeyla in 1863, the Black
Mountains in 1881,1888,1898, Tirah in 1895, and famously Malakand, in 1897 whereWinston Churchill earned his stripes; so we will likely there for a long time.
Puma and all I am quite aware of Afghans History. If we have an advantage over the others it is if things stabilized there we would be out in a year. The others tried to conquest.
Now if one of these "supposed" Washington Desk Chair Generals would talk some true issues dealing with Iraq then they would have an ounce of merit in my book. Instead I just heard a bunch of blow hards who will guide Soldiers to their death and not have to do what I have done and look that widow in the face and look that 3 year old in the face that would never see their father.
They need to STFU and let the General's (who I have seen tear up in their eyes over the loss of their soldiers) make an assessment.
Oh and don't give me I am a Warmonger. Far from it. Bush and his team were a bunch of old Cold War Mentality types (NEOCons) that didn't have a clue of the new battlefield. Cheney (useless), Powell (Useless) and Rumsfield (Horrific).
I would put more weight in Assesments of Gates (he means business), Petraeus, Odierno and McCrystal than any of these other individuals.
Hank makes Harry Houndini...Look like an amateur...
If you really want to know how neocons swrewed the pooch, they literally set fires everywhere: ukaraine, georgia, taiwan, a dozen soviet republicans. it wasn'nt enough for them to take on iran, n.korea n two active wars in afghanisthan n iraq. no they have literally prod china in the eye by egging taiwan intoa confrontational posture. there was an news item in corner a few years ago about this.
i think that's where neocons fail to meet the test. they're too trigger happy and they lit fires everywhere without strategy and or prudence.
iraq n afghanisthan are both winnable wars and we can win them. Go Sarah!
Does anyone else think Hank types his comments while mumbling to himself, and we're only getting in on part of the conversation?
Oh no I don't want to see Sarah with anybody from the Bush team but I don't think this is the case here. She just has the wisdom to know Napolean Maxims of trusting the General on the field.
Rove don't want her close to. Frum and Senor much the same. I group them with the Will's, Krugman's and Obama's for being useless.
Hank...as my father use to say...
VAFFANCULO...
alexonian - How long were Andrew McCarthy and George Will Deployed in Iraq?
I have no clue how much time they spent in Iraq and for me it doesn't matter. I form my own opinions, I don't rely on these two fellows. I've been throughout much of MENA and cumulatively have spent about 4 years of my life directly in region and am very familiar with the history, religions, economics and political thought that characterizes much of the region, so I tend to argue my points without relying on outside pundits.
The only reason I pointed to McCarthy's essay is that he had the opportunity to express his thoughts over 6 pages and I'm plugging away in comments. He's right when he says that they've considered our way of life and rejected it - they have their own belief and value systems. The region has a HUGE chip on their shoulder about their station in the world community and think that they are being held down, and purposely so, by the West. They'll never come to the conclusion that they're their own worst enemy until there is no enemy standing by volunteering to be the scapegoat for the region's failings. We're that enemy scapegoat. Once they are complete masters of their own destiny then there will be no one to point to as the culprit for their lack of influence, just as what happened with Communism.
Sarah has signed onto this letter and nothing else. The letter says fight the damn war the right way.
If they plan on doing a half ass job then we need to get out of there. I think that is Obama's plan a half ass job. Obama has already proven he is a weak man.
iraq n afghanisthan are both winnable wars and we can win them. Go Sarah!
Then define the conditions of victory.
Hank - I was and I am in the military and yes I have done my time in Iraq so don't even start to go there. You showed how clueless you were when you said an Infantrymen in a Stryker Brigade was behind the desk. That may have been your job in the military but not Track's. A Commander slept right to where I did in Iraq so I know what the security detail did so you can STFU.
Pay no attention to Hank the Troll. You cannot converse with brainless and heartless robots. He is irrevelant.
Good Article: " The Death of the Soviet Union was Not the Death of Communism" Andy McCarthy
"The selection of Van Jones is who Obama is and what he is about. Bad things are not happening to our president, our president is doing bad things - as we should have known he would."
From the day this imposter stepped on the political stage, I knew he was a radical and a pathological liar. Nothing he as done to date has changed my first impression. The only thing that I have noticed is that this man is merely a shell with no visible inner core. He is merely a talking mouthpiece for a much stronger either group or Wizard of Oz type pulling his strings. I would venture to guess that he gets his orders from George Soros. Didn't Soros once say, I own the Democrat Party - I bought it.
Soros is an old man. Should the unthinkable happen and we get government helathcare forced upon us, I hope that the first casualty is George Soros. One truly evil man.
McCarthy, I have a lot of respect for, for his understanding of Islamist tactics and strategy. Maybe democracy doesn't work, but
as Mark Steyn points out, endorsing
tyrants like Mubarak and the Sauds
hasn't worked wonders either. Many of the neocon players were on the losing side of the Iraq card, the
gambit with the Saudis that in part
gave us Afghanistan as we see it now, with AQ and the Taliban. It is very hard to disengage from such places, because they will follow us back, convinced that they've won a round
hehehe...Hank's a persistent DF...
alexonian - Iraq can come around just not how we think. They are secular for that region.
What we need to learn is much of how they do business there is different than us. Their culture is very different and the miltary does not even tell soldiers to try to change them (once again can't speak for the loons in Washington). We have extensive culture training and you learn much while there. AN example is there business is very of mafia style. Certain people have the turf and they aren't into our style of capitolism. To try to change them would be like trying to change Sicily. Not going to happen. Afghan is very tribal based. Once again no need in trying to change. WOrk within getting their culture to excel not making Western style. THere are issues that limit presence in Afghan but I cannot discuss those on C4P (sorry guys).
Anybody wondering what those three questions were on national security that Gov. Palin hit out of the park?
I sure would like to know.
Not the questions but the answers.
Maybe democracy doesn't work, but
as Mark Steyn points out, endorsing
tyrants like Mubarak and the Sauds
hasn't worked wonders either.
I agree. Both outcomes arise from wanting to engage in the region. Look, all that PARTS of the region really have to offer the rest of the world is oil. When's the last time someone bought software developed in Libya, bought pharmaceutical drugs developed in Yemen, watched a TV series filmed in Saudi Arabia, listened to music recorded in Kuwait, bought consumer electronics manufactured in Iraq, etc.
No one is talking containment because it's too harsh and politically incorrect in that it acknowledges these facts.
What we need to do is construct a strategy which protects the flow of oil and simultaneously restricts contact with the region. It may be difficult to achieve both goals but Islamist societies really need time and space to run their lives the way they best see fit and to suffer the gains and consequences that arise from running their societies according to their philosophies.
We won't have 9/11s if we don't have flights going to the region, if we don't allow immigration and travel from the region, etc. This was done in the past. We didn't have wide spread integration with the Soviet Union. We didn't have Western business investment in the Soviet Union. We didn't go vacationing in the Soviet Union.
My assessment of what Sarah answered is...
You Mess with the USA...your History...
sorry, just jumping in right in the middle, haven't really been following, but
the mideast would be a dust bowl without oil. energy independence for USA would put them on the third world country status, which they are in now excepting their stranglehold on Pelosi and McShame.
Hank,
I don't believe that you served. This is the internet and people have been known to make stuff up.
There is a culture that permeates much of the military and being a flaming leftist, as you appear to be, is mostly incongruous with what the military men and women usually believe.
alex - Iraq is when they can secure themselves. Whatever Government they want is up to them. Agree with you they are not going to be like the West. Not in their culture. But Iran is too secular to become like Iran. Even the Shias are not that close to Iran.
Afghan will be a tougher nut to crack and define victory. I know Petraeus would be happy with working with the tribal leaders and even some of the Taliban (sorry guys that is Petraeus style). When they are rulling their areas and have no desire for terroist camps then we need to exit stage right.
We can't turn Afghan into a War on Opium. That is their problem and not ours. With that if we have to deal with some drug lords just keep in mind just because it is illegal in the US we have no business making such laws for other countries.
PS Alex. I do respect your opinions and I know you are an extremely smart individual. I just defend my fellow soldiers from Petraeus (who I have served under) to Track Palin.
Hank is like a scratch on a record...UGH
I agree with Wisetrog in regards to the numbers of casualties he alludes to.
They are so small compared to past wars. And, we have a nation of 300 million poeple.
Obama is Hope, Hope for the Taliban/AQ because he will be quicker to run and cut losses. Note how his 'surge' in Afghanistan is still pretty minor. He has not even decided yet if he wants victory. He is still wobbly.
Sarah will not be a wobbly leader in war, I'm convinced of that. But she'll listen to those commanders who know what's going on in the field.
And Lipstick,
Don't get too worked up about the perceived contribution of Biden's son with Palin's son. That argument is more of a guy thing. I don't mean that to be sexist, but it is something that men do since the Fall. We are always trying to one-up the other guy.
Let the boys hash it out. We'll be OK.
We know all our Palin women love Sarah and our soldiers equally and we appreciate it.
We do.
Hank -Obama is President and guess what.
a. Haliburton is in Iraq.
b. Soldiers are in Iraq (have them going from my class and frinds leaving tommorrow for a year tour.
c. We are still in Afghan.
WIth your criteria we need to not vote for Obama.
Oh didn't Obama campaign saying we would be out of Iraq in 6 months? How do you like being lied to?
This is like barely interactive spam, from the "Argument Clinic"
You're shooting blanks there, troll.
Hank's entire Brain.. is a Blank...
I wonder if Hank's keyboard vibrates???hmmm...
Hank is in a panic I see.
By the way, I'm seeing a lot more of this type of behavior in the comments sections from leftists/statists now that Obama is really proving to be as bad a POTUS as they thought.
The left is lashing out wildly because they cannot accept the truth that the USA is a center/right country and will not accept government control of healthcare knowing it would be a huge disaster for the country.
Oh and Hank if you had ever heard Sarah then you would know she has made clear that we better not be fighting Wars for Oil while we have it untapped in the States. No I am afraid you have been duped.
In fact the only way I would be duped would be to believe you served in the military.
Oh you say you served. When? Where? MOS? Last Rank? Where were you stationed? Who were your Commanders?
Whatever Government they want is up to them. Agree with you they are not going to be like the West. Not in their culture. But Iran is too secular to become like Iran. Even the Shias are not that close to Iran.
Here's the problem in a nutshell - government has to be a neutral arbiter for citizen conflicts and that's impossible to achieve in Islamic and/or Arab cultures which are heavily defined by cousin marriage and tribal practices. Me against my brother; me and my brother against my cousins; me, my brother and my cousins, against the related tribe; me, my brother, my cousins, and the related tribe against the unrelated tribe. When someone's relative is in charge of hiring for a government office it is unheard of that they will hire the best qualified person instead of hiring someone from their family or tribe.
All justice comes from tribal networks, not from centralized, neutral, and respected government agents.
You've been in Iraq so you've seen this even if you haven't anchored it in a whole scheme of the world. This same dynamic extends far beyond the borders of Iraq. In come regions of Saudi Arabia the rate of cousin marriage is over 80%. These family and tribal networks run very deep in the fabric of their cultures.
Hank - Name the only US Senator that is currently serving (he has the same Branch as Beau Biden) is a clue?
Oh and when did Obama serve? When did Biden serve? Hell as bad as it was at least Bush was in the NG.
Obama Serve? Right...
BO BO is Weak Sauce..
I think Pawlenty has realized that he lost the veep spot because Sarah beat fair and square over national security questions. I think he's toughening up and beefing his profile in that regard. There's bound to be some disappointment and he's recovering from that and I still seem him as a good addition to Sarah's ticket. BTW, we should pound that meme strong and hard. Palin was chosen because she won over Pawlenty on national security questions.
Alexonian, all you see are problems, not solutions.
Alex - You are 100% correct. They really have to be a very decentralized Government. We have at the lower units Problems as Lietenants are technically in charge but they have more respect and will listen to the Platoon Sergeant because they listen to the elder (though in charge the Platoon Leader is noramally out of College while the Platoon Sergeant has been in the military 15-20 years.
You are correct their culture is soo different. That is where the military is ahead of what many of the Civilians back in Washington. We are not Westernizing that Culture and it would be a shame for us to even try. I guess my point is and I saw first hand the Petraeus's of the world get this.
Oh and I don't know if you are aware but Petraeus got his Masters and PHD from Princeton in Foreign Affairs. He really looks at things past just the normal military aspect and he is huge on the culure aspect.
PS I meant Iraq is too secular for Iran.
Doug Brady and Ed Fab ... you are right. Let's not read more into this than necessary.
Sarah is right to join others in asking Obama to live up to his rhetoric. Remember his styrofoam speech in Denver? "McCain says he would follow Bin Laden to the gates of hell, but he won't even follow him to his cave in Afghanistan."
Obama made fighting the war in Afghanistan the central plank in his attack against McCain, even to the point of idiocy. He and Biden spoke of troop build up in Afghanistan while denying that they would call for a SURGE. What the hell is troop build up, if not a surge?
So Obama played politics with a vital national security interest, now let's see if he has the guts to follow through.
Sarah, as always walks the talk. She calls on Obama to do the same -- instead of jeopardizing our men and women in uniform for political posturing.
Wisetrog - Layoff Alexonian. She is talking from knowledge and has a good grasp of the area. I can really tell in her recent posts that she and her opionion is to be repected. There is a huge Culture divide and that is what she recognizes.
As far as Sarah signing on this memo I think the key thing is her trust that the McCrystal's and Petraeus's stance and nothing else. From that view I agree.
Everyone here knows I am a proud Texan.
My boy loves the books "Hank the Cowdog". They are so funny. Hank is head of security on a small Texas ranch. They are written by a Texan, John Erickson. Anytime we go on a long road trip I check one out that is on CD to listen on the way. We are all rolling they are so funny.
Hank is not very bright yet thinks he is. His side kick, Drover, is actually smarter than him yet Hank treats him as if he is dumb.
If you have kids you should check them out. There are well over 40 of them. They are LOL.
I'm scoring this thread as:
C4P-5 hooks
C4P-7 uppercuts
C4P-4 jabs
C4P-6 combinations
C4P total-22 punches landed
Troll-wishing he had worn his cup
Troll-putting icepack on bruises
Troll-curled in a ball
Troll-looking for teeth that flew out of his head, like chiclets.
Troll-crying like a little girl
Troll Total-(just a minute I have to put my popcorn down) An embarrassing display.
Very entertaining, but, nonetheless, embarrassing.
I can't help but invision Hank the Cow Dog typing some things on here.
Alexonian
There is no other definition for victory than to destroy the enemy. The Taliban have reconstituted control of too much territory in Afghanistan. Removing there control in those areas and establishing Afghan government control would constitute victory.
Nancy...LOL!!! My favorite...
Troll-wishing he worn his Cup...
I'm Sick..
The problem is that Bin Laden, if he is alive (the fact that AL Zawahiri,Al Liby & co, seem to be doing most of the speaking, makes me doubt that) is not an cave, just like KSM, Zubeydah, Al Shibh weren't in caves either, when they were nabbed. They are probably in some secure compound in Waziristan or Chitral, with wifi,T-1 servers and the works, and you really can't reach them through predators and cruise missiles. We're still fighting a defensive operation in Helmand, Paktika, or Kunduz
provinces, as the latest casualties
from Ft. Richardson should indicate
wisetrog,
Alexonian, all you see are problems, not solutions.
I see solutions, but they are not what most of the pundits see as solutions.
What is going on is best described as the South Park Underpants Gnomes. Here is the video.
All you see are solutions, but you have no phase 2 to get to the solution.
What I'm doing is identifying the problem, setting up a course of action and saying that, just like an intervention for a addict, these regions and cultures have to hit bottom before they find it within themselves to initiate reform from within, and then, and only then, will a solution arise.
PEC
Layoff Alexonian. She is talking from knowledg
Ahem, I'm a dude. :)
PEC, what have I done? We're indulging in debate. I am not as good debater as Alexonian is but I am not name-calling her, so i don't see the problem.
As for this culture argument, i don't buy it. Isn't it intersting that all you guys keep carping about multicultarism and all, yet none of you had nay problem shedding blood of millions when killing Germans who were whites but are getting squeamish to shed some blood when they are brown people? i find it ironic to say the least.
I come from more or less an adjunct culture and I find it disheartening that people should be using culture argument to chicken out of their responsibilities.
Sarah needs to give a youtube address in response to obama's speech. imo.
ALex- One thing about Iraq is yes there is still the tribal issue but surprisingly not as relevant as Saudi. They are a little more Secular. Take Mosul. There is a lot of Mafia style. You only do business with a certain person depending on where in town you were. They are still into loyalty and once a friend they will do anything for you. We had an Iraqi that worked in our Command Post. You had to be careful what you said around him. One of the Captains said he would like a new digital camera and the next day the Iraqi came in the CP with one. It was half his months salary and we were between a Rock and a hard place because to not accept it would be to disgrace him. worked it out in an odd way but man.
Oh and they are good people in Iraq. Had some good friends. Repect their culture and the respect and friendship will go both ways.
Saudi Arabia - We need to become Energy Independent. I will leave it at that.
Post a Comment