
![]() | |
March 2010
February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003
|
Greetings! You are reading an article from The Mudville Gazette. To reach the front page, with all the latest news and views, click the logo above or "main" below. Thanks for stopping by! September 1, 2009 Some questions are hard,By Greyhawk...but this one isn't:
Maybe it shouldn't surprise me that this question was asked - but the guy who asked it has been deeply involved in developing strategy for Afghanistan, so maybe he's serious about being perplexed. Perhaps a lot of folks who agree with (or bought into) the "Afghanistan is the REAL central front of the war" argument are. Detailed answers can be provided, but if anyone thinks they can offer one that isn't simply a long-form version of my three-point response, feel free to give it a shot: 1. War sucks. 2. Every dollar spent on war is a dollar not spent elsewhere. 3. A lot of people are expecting a lot of "elsewhere". Any "pro-war" argument that doesn't take those into account will fail to capture the support of the masses. I'd add that for a lot of people "elsewhere" very specifically means "my pocket", which gives them a sense that they are paying for the war, whether they are or not. This works in favor of the opposition, who can offer a message of "just imagine all the wonderful things we could do over here with all that money we're spending over there". It works as long as the "promise" is vague - "imagine" is the key. There will always be a majority in favor of something else. That's true of anything on which money is spent, but it's especially effective when it's war - see my point one. Right now much of that opposition is anticipated (imaginary, one might say). But if enough people don't get some previously "promised" free stuff PDQ it will grow. Update: The days of Afghanistan as military strategy question could be ending (and probably are). Lotsa folks with little recent background will be weighing in soon, sharing their feelings. Resulting alliances could be surprising and unpredictable, and could be interesting to watch (in a train wreck sort of way). What Obama needs now is a statement from Sarah Palin opposing his handling of the war in Afghanistan - something like "Well, gollygosh, you know, that ol' Russ Feingold really makes sense" posted on her Facebook page ought to do the trick.
Posted by Greyhawk / September 1, 2009 11:04 AM | Permalink 1 TrackBackTrackBack URL: http://www.mudvillegazette.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/16594 ...with a C-, at best. Not good news for the President: "A majority of independent voters disapprove of how Barack Obama's handling his job as president, according to a new national poll." The Party faithful, however, remain faithful:According to the p... Read More 2 CommentsLeave a comment |
March 17, 2010Dawn Patrol 03/17/2010 [Mrs Greyhawk]
Welcome to the Dawn Patrol, our daily roundup of information on the War on Terror and other topics - from the MilBlogs and various sources around the world. If you're a blogger, you can join the conversation. If you link to any of these stories, add a link to the Dawn Patrol too and your trackback will be added to the list. Hat Tips to the Dawn Patrol are greatly appreciated.Refresh for updates.
![]()
AFGHANISTANSuicide attackers killed in Afghanistan -- [CNN] US kills 8 terrorists in 2 new airstrikes in North Waziristan -- [LWJ - Bill Roggio] S.N.A.B.U. = Situation Normal All BAF-fed Up -- [Afghanistan My Last Tour - in Afghanistan] Post Office Doesn't Like Me -- [Afghanistan My Last Tour - in Afghanistan] Danger Room Explainer: Outsourced Intel in Afghanistan -- [Danger Room] IRAQIraq Votes - Part VI -- [MEMRI] Mission Accomplished: Astroturfing Baghdad -- [Danger Room]
U.S. AND OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLDAllies everywhere feeling snubbed by President Obama -- [Washington Post] Chahar-Shanbeh Souri -- [Planet Iran]
WAR ON TERROR /TERRORISMIf bin Laden is found, he'll be killed, Holder says -- [AP] ACLU files lawsuit for information on US Predator program -- [Threat Matrix] SUPPORTING THE TROOPSArmy Suicides Grow, but This Soldier Was Saved -- [Politics Daily] Silver Star Winner Reprimanded for Afghan Battle -- [ABC]
MILITARYArrrrrrmy Training, SIR! -- [This Ain't Hell] WELCOME HOMEBushrod honors were not misplaced -- [Fredericksburg.com] They're Coming Home! -- [KBND]
THE MEDIA/CULTUREIt's just some ribbon. -- [From my Position...]
POLITICSGE and Ronald Reagan: The Mutual Gift That Keeps On Giving -- [Politics Daily] Petraeus Testifies About DADT
The Petraeus briefing: Biden's embarrassment is not the whole story -- [Foreign Policy Blog] HUMOR/SATIRE
Iraq, Afghanistan, War, Terrorism, Military, Politics, Media, MilBlogs, dawn patrol Mudville
|
The Mudville Gazette is the on-line voice of an American warrior and his wife who stands by him. They prefer to see peaceful change render force of arms unnecessary. Until that day they stand fast with those who struggle for freedom, strike for reason, and pray for a better tomorrow.
![]() I like having visitors to my house. I hope you are entertained. I fight for your right to free speech, and am thrilled when you exercise said rights here. Comments and e-mails are welcome, but all such communication is to be assumed to be 1)the original work of any who initiate said communication and 2)the property of the Mudville Gazette, with free use granted thereto for publication in electronic or written form. If you do NOT wish to have your message posted, write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the subject line of your email. Original content copyright © 2003 - 2009 by Greyhawk. Fair, not-for-profit use of said material by others is encouraged, as long as acknowledgement and credit is given, to include the url of the original source post. Other arrangements can be made as needed. Contact: greyhawk at mudvillegazette dot com ![]() |
"Perhaps a lot of folks who agree with (or bought into) the "Afghanistan is the REAL central front of the war" argument are. "
Well, I left a different comment on a different post, but I basically said that people looked into a mirror during the last election and saw what the wanted (or rejected what they saw, in my case). I do think some folks agreed with the above and are now completely surprised. I still think a lot of the strategy questioning had to do with the dynamic of, wait for it, announcing a new and improved strategy from a new and improved president. Afpak in spring, requests for things in the fall.
I don't know. Someone needs to get their act together, though.
The Democrats are worried about opposition from the Left over Afghanistan the same way Republicans worry about opposition from the Right over immigration reform. You may not be able to win elections with only your base but you will surely lose without your base firmly in line. And these things can have a cascade effect.
Anyway, I don't believe opposition to the War in Afghanistan is driven just by the dollars. I believe it is also and perhaps primarily driven by the casualties. In this, I believe the left is only echoing what many Americans are starting to think. August was the worst month to date for US casualties: 47. It's been going up every month since we escalated (I know, probably a Vietnam War kind of word and I shouldn't use it).
It is probably going to be hard to convince a majority of Americans that we should lose more of our military for that pile of rocks inhabited by people who seem to prefer living in the stone age. Maybe it would be easier to swallow if we hadn't just gone through 5+ years of seeing our war dead shipped home from Iraq on a daily basis.
We aren't the only ones losing men and women in Afghanistan. Other countries are as well. And while the reason we're there --to keep AQ from using that country as a base-- is clearly worthwhile, the terrorist attacks around the world since 9/11 demonstrate that AQ and its allies can find bases anywhere. There's nothing unique about Afghanistan in that regard.
I don't have the answer (of course) but I'm one of those who don't care about the cost in treasure. It's the price in blood that worries me. But maybe I just don't understand the question.