
![]() | |
July 2010
June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 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! November 14, 2009 War Costs MoneyBy Greyhawk...that's why a "senior administration official, who requested anonymity in order to reflect the details and tone of confidential deliberations, said these concerns had added to the president's insistence at a White House meeting on Wednesday that each military option include the quickest possible exit strategy." Exit strategy is a fine talking point, clearly it polled well among Democrats back in 2006 and '07 - and getting Democrats to support the war in the US is reportedly an Obama admin goal. (Republicans are reliably - if increasingly reluctantly - on board. For now.) That's domestic politics, but in war your willingness to quit is something you don't advertise, among other reasons because it sends enemies and allies (and those still choosing sides) alike a message that you aren't really serious. For one of those groups it's also inspiring. Which is why Gates has already signaled his concerns. Once again. Update: And I just got around to reading the latest from Kilcullen:
"Leaks" are part of the game - nothing leaks that isn't approved, and there have been far too many to believe otherwise. (Note the Gates story is purportedly about leaks, too.) But while normally I'd experience some satisfaction in seeing I'm not the only one thinking what I'm thinking it's diminished completely by the fact that I'd prefer to think everything I wrote above was wrong. Send half the needed troops and advertise an "exit strategy". Hella plan. I've learned to never underestimate what the men and women of the American military can do, but that's going to get an awful lot of them killed. Next: War costs money (2). Posted by Greyhawk / November 14, 2009 7:03 PM | Permalink 1 TrackBackTrackBack URL: http://www.mudvillegazette.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/16963 This post was mentioned on Twitter by TheTweetTank11: Mudville Gazette http://bit.ly/4uz0g9 Read More 3 CommentsLeave a comment |
July 19, 2010Dawn Patrol 07/19/2010 [Greyhawk]
Welcome to the Dawn Patrol, our ongoing roundup of information on war and other topics - from the MilBlogs and other sources around the world.
Always updating - refresh for updates.
AFGHANISTANProspects for stability in Musa Qala: challenges and possible solutions -- [Bill Ardolino /Long War Journal - in Afghanistan] Exploding Culverts -- [Kandahar Diary - in Afghanistan] Arbaki -- [Free Range International - in Afghanistan] Weather -- [A Major's Perspective - in Afghanistan] Fête Nationale -- [Field Notes: One Soldier's Perspective - in Afghanistan] Goodbye "FaST" Food (and good riddance) -- [FaST Surgeon - in Afghanistan] IRAQOn The Iran, Iraq Border -- [J.D. Johannes - in Iraq] WAR ON TERROR /TERRORISMSenators Look For Smoking Gun In BP-Lockerbie Link -- [AP] No Link Between BP And Lockerbie Release: UK Envoy -- [NPR news blog] UK's Cameron: Releasing Lockerbie Bomber Was Wrong -- [AP] U.S. AND OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLDAs Cameron and Obama Meet, BP Will Be Top Issue -- [NY Times] Afghanistan tops agenda for British PM's visit -- [Washington Times] WELCOME HOMEHomecoming -- [Rajiv Srinivasan - home from Afghanistan] STRATEGY & TACTICSISAF, SCR Address Military ROE and Tactical Directives -- [ISAF] SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGYRaytheon's pain gun finally gets deployed in Afghanistan (update: recalled) -- [Engadget] Pain Ray Recalled From Afghanistan -- [Noah Shachtman/Danger Room] The Active Denial System: the weapon that's a hot topic -- [The Telegraph (UK)] World's Fastest Helicopter Boosts Battle Against Insurgents -- [ISAF]
POLITICSIs it time for a real GI Jane? -- [CNN] HUMOR/SATIRE(Need more? Dawn Patrols Archives are here.) 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 ![]() |
For a politico...he has to be seen to answering those questions. At least if he is going to keep the leftards on board.
Nothing really changes if he decides today or next month to deploy more troops to Afghanistan. The way the rotations will work out no one will hit the ground until February or March anyway. The first few brigades of an 'Afghan Surge' already have the heads up.
Any president is the national salesmen. I don't like this one but I understand the necessity to sell it to the leftards.
The plan for Afghanistan is going to go like Iraq...dramatically increase the training resources and dramatically increase the size of the Afghan Security Forces until the killing gets to a level they can handle it on their own.
How one sells the Bush 'Iraq Surge' plan to those still convinced it can't work is President Obama's problem.
"The way the rotations will work out no one will hit the ground until February or March anyway."
- Yes. And I agree with what you're saying re: the Afghan surge all around. I'm not certain McChrystal will get what he asked for - I am certain that whatever he gets will be described as all he asked for. One of last weekend's "leaks" already demonstrated that.
And I agree that the president feels he has to "sell" that to reluctant Dems. Certain members of Congress from devout anti-war districts are probably pressuring hard for that.
Television and newspaper reporters are already doing their part for the PR effort, but the problem comes from using a message al Qaeda and the Taliban would appreciate even more than Democrats as the sales pitch. In fact the avowed anti-war wing of that party isn't any more likely to accept it than al Qaeda members are likely to convert to Judaism.
Beyond that, it's a message that won't convince those "on the fence" (in Afghanistan, Pakistan, the US and NATO countries) to come down on our side.
The pieces I'm focused on is General Odierno et al were pretty firm about holding at 12 BCT's in Iraq until after the Iraqi Elections. Then without fanfare it became apparent that he was going to cut to 10 brigades by the Iraqi elections. Effectively freeing up two brigades to go into the Afghan rotation pool.
So that adds 2 brigades + support = 20,000 troops shifted to the Afghan deployment pool.
For anything beyond 20K troops shifted to Afghanistan one has to assume the continued draw down of troops in Iraq will go to plan. Or be willing to go back to 15 months deployments.
As the Iraqi elections draw closer a more informed decision can be made....just a few weeks ago there wasn't even a firm date for the Iraqi elections.
I agree about the mixed messages be communicated. It's not particularly useful.
Of course protesters in the street send their own messages and various congree critters threatening to defund various efforts(and coming close to having the votes) also has sent mixed messages.
Absent trying people for treason and sedition I'm not sure we can do anything about it other then attempt to 'manage' dissent.
Sometimes a way to manage dissent is to publicly acknowledge peoples concerns and anguish over a solution. Even if no solution is found it tends to make people feel better. Bill Clinton was a master of "Feel your pain".