Ask a Pakistani why Afghanistan matters

If you want to know, ask somebody: (ht: smallwarsjournal)

Afghanistan: Seven Fundamental Questions by Major Mehar Omar Khan

I know we live in a world that is real and is moved by minds – thinking, manipulating, conniving, conspiring, calculating and masquerading minds. Our world therefore seldom has a place for ‘sentiments’ – pure, sincere, honest and spontaneous as sentiments are. But when it comes to war in Afghanistan, I am not deterred by the tyranny of the trend. I like, in fact I am forced, to think through my heart. What else can you do when you see images of your countrymen; innocent and unsuspecting men, women and children; ripped apart by other human beings exploding in their midst almost on a daily basis? How can I not worry about my daughter when I see a pale and empty face of a mother in Kabul or Peshawar, bent like a broken branch of an old, dried up tree; over the dead body of her child? How can I not cry when the soul of my nation is hit and hurt by violence that is so inextricably linked with bloodshed beyond the snaky Khyber Pass? For us in Pakistan, the ongoing struggle in Afghanistan and astride Durand Line is the most seminal endeavor of our history. If this war is won, the entire world stands to benefit. But if it is lost, one country that will be hurt the most is Pakistan – my daughter’s home and her future. War astride the Durand Line is therefore so personal to so many of us.

This war is also extremely personal for thousands of American mothers who await and pray for the safe return of their sons and daughters: bright young men and women who deserve to live and who must never be wasted just because someone considers it politically expedient to continue to muddle along and because setting the course right needs some statesmanship and may also involve some political cost.

Major Mehar Omar Khan, Pakistan Army, is currently a student at the US Army Command and General Staff College at Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas. He has served as a peacekeeper in Sierra Leone, a Brigade GSO-III, an instructor at the Pakistan Military Academy in Kakul, and as Chief of Staff (Brigade Major) of an infantry brigade. He has also completed the Command and Staff Course at Pakistan’s Command and Staff College in Quetta.

Send in the clowns, oops, they are already there

Hilarious bungling.  Might as well move the White House to Hollywood where image is everything. Is this any funnier, or more pathetic than the faux Grecian temple BO erected in his own honor back in the primaries?

I am eagerly awaiting the spin that shows why this is different than “B-b-b-but Bush’s” foto op on the carrier

Who is the political novice?

It is funny to me to see leaks from the administration trying to undercut GEN McChrystal as being naive about how the Washington game is played.  Seriously, is this the mark of an administration that is in charge of itself?  Is it good policy to be undercutting your own field commander?

This administration ahs no clue about what to do. Obama said 6 months ago that he had carefully studied the situation and had a plan. Now, not so much.

There is public support by the CJCS, GEN Petraeus and GEN McChrystal for the McChrystal plan. It is fully in line with current thinking about the conduct of COIN.

There is no political will in the admninistration to face reality, so instead they blather and treat foreign policy as if it were Chicago ward politics.

We just saw how sueful Chicago style politics is on the world stage where no one cares about your life story. So, who are the naive ones?

GEN McChrystal is a very savvy general: as a commander, as a warrior, as a professional.  His experience in Washington is on par or superior to any of the clowns in the current administration and he has been our most lethal general for years as commander of global SOF forces.

He made the speech he made in London as a way to force the administration to act in public on his plan. He is too savvy to be their fall guy. Whatever the decision is made, it will be the administration’s, and it will be pinned firmly to Obama: once he gets done wasting time on trivial issues.

Taking nominations for the leader of the free world

A telling compare and contrast moment:

Mr. Obama’s address was the predictable mix of criticism of the past policies of the United States, self-praise for correcting said policies and vague calls to united action on matters of collective interest. It sought to ingratiate rather than offend. But Mr. Netanyahu chastised the United Nations for its “systematic assault on the truth.” He spoke truths that Mr. Obama would never whisper regarding the regime in Iran, which is “fueled by an extreme fundamentalism” and an “unforgiving creed.” Mr. Netanyahu rebuked those members who countenanced Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s diatribe before the same world body, rightly calling it a “disgrace.”

Mr. Netanyahu repeatedly paid tribute to the blessings of liberty and “the allure of freedom.” He marveled at the technological advances freedom made possible. He asked if the international community would support the Iranian people “as they bravely stand up for freedom.” He envisioned a future of Israel and Palestine, “two free peoples living in peace, living in prosperity, living in dignity.” Mr. Obama, meanwhile, touted the imperative of responding to global climate change and mentioned as an afterthought that democracy should not be an afterthought.

Which one is the adult?

Obama: “We must never stop until we see the day when nuclear arms have been banished from the face of the earth.”

Sarkozy: “We live in the real world, not the virtual world. And the real world expects us to take decisions.”

The rest of Sarkozy’s remarks:

“President Obama dreams of a world without weapons … but right in front of us two countries are doing the exact opposite.

“Iran since 2005 has flouted five security council resolutions. North Korea has been defying council resolutions since 1993.

“I support the extended hand of the Americans, but what good has proposals for dialogue brought the international community? More uranium enrichment and declarations by the leaders of Iran to wipe a UN member state off the map,” he continued, referring to Israel.

The sharp-tongued French leader even implied that Mr Obama’s resolution 1887 had used up valuable diplomatic energy.

“If we have courage to impose sanctions together it will lend viability to our commitment to reduce our own weapons and to making a world without nuke weapons,” he said.

Mr Sarkozy has previously called the US president’s disarmament crusade “naive.”

So, where is the US press on this story?

The power of projection

by uttering a single word “liar” at an inopportune moment, first Maureen Dowd, the well known mind reader, and now Jimmy Carter (who’s anti-Semitism has been well documented by Christopher Hitchens) have authoritatively detected racism in Joe Wilson.

As if it is inconceivable for opposition to the Dear Leader could possibly be on policy grounds.

I guess you see and hear what you insist on hearing and seeing. i think it says everything about Dowd and Carter and nothing about Joe Wilson

Bush speechwriter insights to the world of strategic policymaking

Republican loyalists will seize on the behind the scenes reporting to indict the young speechwriter for disloyalty.  i say however that Bush asks some good questions about the policies his staff are bringing him to support that clearly violate his guidance.  It indicts the President for not having the right people around him, a responsibility he may not evade, but I thgiunk it reveals that he was savvier than he is given credit for.

He was right about Hillary’s behind, Obama’s naivete, and Palin’s as well, and that McCain is a nut.

The most important indictment, one not addressed, is just how stupid it is to grant unchecked authority to anyone at the highest levels. Paulson comes actross as a loose cannon, out of synch with anything remotely resembling policy. i dont care which party is in office, they ar eno match for a self-regulaitng market

Speech checklist

• Blame Bush? check
• Call republicans lying, scaremongering politically expedient hacks? check
• Then invite republicans to be reasonable and cooperate? check
• Use fuzzy unsupportable numbers?  check
• increase the partisanship? check
• have more other hands than an economist? check
• gloss over disconfirming facts (like CBO analysis)? check
• characterize opposition as haters and obstructionists and toadies to powerful interests? check
• surround yourself with grinning halfwits like Biden and Pelosi? check

Palin’s false choice

“Many just accept that lame duck status, and they hit that road,” Palin said. “They draw a paycheck. They kind of milk it. And I’m not going to put Alaskans through that.”

So the only choice she sees is quit or be a lame duck? how about doing the job she was elected to do in spite of friction and politcal games. Does she think any elected office is any different?

Is that the kind of “stick-to-it- iveness” she’d demonstrate as a President?

How about enduring the slings and arrows in order to serve? If it’s too hard as governor, what would she do as president?

She is already a footnote, diminishing by the day.

“How sad that Washington and the media will never understand; it’s about country,” the statement said. “And though it’s honorable for countless others to leave their positions for a higher calling and without finishing a term, of course we know by now, for some reason a different standard applies for the decisions I make.”

Save it for your tell all book, and the safety of a circle of your die hard supporters.

Biden discovers that the economy is worse than anyone thought

naturally, this is something they inherited.

In other news, water is wet.

Surely the next thing is to jump on the Krugman bandwagon and spend more money that we dont have. No policy recommendation coming out of these clowns has any recognition that if they are wrong on their presscriptions that we have committe an unrecoverable error.

Shouldn’t Biden’s admission of lack of foresight be evidence that they cant be trusted with even more money?

Centralized solutions make the oscillations wider and wider until the center of gravity can no longer support the structure.

we need less government intervention not more.

Never mind, keep giving the drunk more money, all he needs is one more bottle to fix his drinking probelm