Michael O'Hanlon makes a strong case for McChrystal speaking his mind regarding his recommendations for Afghanistan. Still, although I agree McChrystal probably did not go too far, judging how far he went should have less to do with the wisdom of his words than the propriety of speaking up as a person in a chain of command.
Anyway, here's O'Hanlon's piece.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Monday, October 5, 2009
COIN in Afghanistan
Interesting CSMonitor article on the use of counterinsurgency warfare in Afghanistan. Seems a bit more critical of COIN, but interesting nonetheless. Here.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Bio of Creigh Deeds
From the Washington Post, their long bio of VA-Gov candidate Democrat Creigh Deeds.
Afghanistan
Interesting take by fired Galbraith.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/02/AR2009100202855.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
Granted, this is just his perspective, but I would be incredibly insulted if I - or my family members - were fighting on behalf of a cause that had a major lie behind it. IF Galbraith is right and accurate, something is VERY wrong there. And the fact that UN leadership was more than willing to let electoral fraud be packaged as legitimate is sickening. Heaven forbid someone I knows dies for something so dishonest. Maybe even worse yet, as Galbraith points out, by not addressing the fraud, the Taliban is given a victory. Ugh.
Maybe Ignatius offers the "third way"?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/02/AR2009100202889.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
His account points out why it's still worth the effort. Leaving means the US is signing the death warrant of so many innocent people. That is the real bitter pill to swallow as I become increasingly cynical of our efforts over there. If people don't want our help, how many must we send over "there" to make "them" want it? And again, reading this article about a happy kid who DOES want it, makes it seem worth it (along with Filkins's recent NYTM article on helping some folks over there).
The ultimate frustration of all of this is summed up by the headline of Traub's piece: "The Distance Between ‘We Must’ and ‘We Can'"
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/04/weekinreview/04traub.html?_r=1&hp
Bruce Ackerman, a legal scholar, offered an interesting op-ed. McChrystal may be over-stepping his authority by publicly pressuring a president to adopt a policy. Frankly, after the mass-criticism so many generals took for not standing up to the Bush Administration, I don't blame a general for not wanting to get stuck enforcing a policy he believes is doomed to failure. But there is a fine line between pushing for success and abiding by the chain of command.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/02/AR2009100203939.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/02/AR2009100202855.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
Granted, this is just his perspective, but I would be incredibly insulted if I - or my family members - were fighting on behalf of a cause that had a major lie behind it. IF Galbraith is right and accurate, something is VERY wrong there. And the fact that UN leadership was more than willing to let electoral fraud be packaged as legitimate is sickening. Heaven forbid someone I knows dies for something so dishonest. Maybe even worse yet, as Galbraith points out, by not addressing the fraud, the Taliban is given a victory. Ugh.
Maybe Ignatius offers the "third way"?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/02/AR2009100202889.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
His account points out why it's still worth the effort. Leaving means the US is signing the death warrant of so many innocent people. That is the real bitter pill to swallow as I become increasingly cynical of our efforts over there. If people don't want our help, how many must we send over "there" to make "them" want it? And again, reading this article about a happy kid who DOES want it, makes it seem worth it (along with Filkins's recent NYTM article on helping some folks over there).
The ultimate frustration of all of this is summed up by the headline of Traub's piece: "The Distance Between ‘We Must’ and ‘We Can'"
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/04/weekinreview/04traub.html?_r=1&hp
Bruce Ackerman, a legal scholar, offered an interesting op-ed. McChrystal may be over-stepping his authority by publicly pressuring a president to adopt a policy. Frankly, after the mass-criticism so many generals took for not standing up to the Bush Administration, I don't blame a general for not wanting to get stuck enforcing a policy he believes is doomed to failure. But there is a fine line between pushing for success and abiding by the chain of command.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/02/AR2009100203939.html
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
