WaPo: White House forgot that they told McChrystal to defeat the Taliban

posted at 6:45 pm on December 5, 2009 by Allahpundit

To set the scene, this comes from the October 8 war room meeting on Afghanistan, with McChrystal teleconferenced in from Kabul to explain what he’d been doing since receiving his orders in March. Smart power:

In June, McChrystal noted, he had arrived in Afghanistan and set about fulfilling his assignment. His lean face, hovering on the screen at the end of the table, was replaced by a mission statement on a PowerPoint slide: “Defeat the Taliban. Secure the Population.”

“Is that really what you think your mission is?” one of the participants asked.

In the first place, it was impossible — the Taliban were part of the fabric of the Pashtun belt of southern Afghanistan, culturally if not ideologically supported by a major part of the population. “We don’t need to do that,” Gates said, according to one participant. “That’s an open-ended, forever commitment.”

But that was precisely his mission, McChrystal responded, enshrined in the Strategic Implementation Plan — the execution orders for the March strategy, written by the NSC staff.

“I wouldn’t say there was quite a ‘whoa’ moment,” a senior defense official said of the reaction around the table. “It was just sort of a recognition that, ‘Duh, that’s what in effect the commander understands he’s been told to do.’ Everybody said, ‘He’s right.’”

“It was clear that Stan took a very literal interpretation of the intent” of the NSC document, said Jones, who had signed the orders himself. “I’m not sure that in his position I wouldn’t have done the same thing, as a military commander.” But what he created in his assessment “was obviously something much bigger, and more longer-lasting . . . than we had intended.”

They told him — in his official orders — to come up with a plan to eliminate the enemy and, dummy that he is, he thought that meant he was supposed to come up with a plan to eliminate the enemy. Then they told him he didn’t have to. Six months later.

They held another war room meeting the next day, this time with The One himself in attendance:

On Oct. 9, after awaking to the news that he had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, Obama listened to McChrystal’s presentation. The “mission” slide included the same words: “Defeat the Taliban.” But a red box had been added beside it, saying that the mission was being redefined, Jones said. Another participant recalled that the word “degrade” had been proposed to replace “defeat.”

Already briefed on the previous day’s discussion, the president “looked at it and said, ‘To be fair, this is what we told the commander to do. Now, the question is, have we directed him to do more than what is realistic? Should there be a sharpening . . . a refinement?’ ” one participant recalled.

So it goes for our supposedly Spock-like president, who made such a pageant during the the past three months of deliberating over Afghanistan lest he waste time and lives by rashly adopting the wrong strategy. He wanted to show his commitment to the war early on, so he installed McChrystal, handed him 22,000 extra troops, stuck him with orders he either didn’t think carefully about or didn’t believe were feasible (Bush-lite?), and then forgot about it for half a year while he went off to chase his health-care dreams. Even more surreally, the only way McChrystal could have misunderstood the orders is if he’d had so little contact with people at the top — Obama, Gates, and Jones — that the occasion never arose for them to clarify that “defeat the Taliban” actually meant “degrade the Taliban.” Remember in September when he said he’d only had one teleconference with The One since taking over in Afghanistan in June? I guess this is the result. Question: How come closing Gitmo was such an urgent priority that Obama sent down the word literally two days after his inauguration, but appointing McChrystal and getting him started on a full strategic review — which would necessarily take weeks — had to wait until late March?

Speaking of confusion, here’s Jones telling the BBC that while some token withdrawal will begin in July 2011, ain’t no way, no chance, no how we’re leaving the country that year. Someone had better tell the left. Click the image to watch.

jones


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Circular reasoning, leads directly to military victory, right before the 2012 elections. The perfect plan, for reelection.

These jokers can’t even figure out how to create a private sector job.

Winning a war seems a bit lofty of a goal for them to try for.

Dark Eden on December 5, 2009 at 8:35 PM

The filter didn’t like Ork*n Man?

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 8:35 PM

Oh well. Not complaining. Jest tryin’ to learn the rules

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 8:36 PM

Which is it: ObaMao doesn’t know why we are in Afghanistan OR ObaMao doesn’t agree with why we are in Afghanistan?

Why all of the waffling, dithering, half-measures?

onlineanalyst on December 5, 2009 at 8:40 PM

Oh – just a hiccup in the website, I guess. So my long comment posted twice. Sorry! :-(

Seriously folks, help me out. Rookie question, I guess, but is there a language filter here at HotAir?

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 8:40 PM

I think so, but I haven’t seen a list published of what you can or can’t say.

I do know that links sometimes hold up comments, especially if you try to put 3 or 4 in a comment.

Did I miss an open registration lately?

cs89 on December 5, 2009 at 8:43 PM

I do wonder if the situation is too screwed up now in Afghanistan to win with half-measures. As the old saying goes, “strike while the iron is hot,” maybe now it’s all or nothing.

Total war or go home with a threat to use nukes if we have to come back?

Of course, total war should always be the goal, IMO, but maybe after all this time the situation has resolved into a stark choice, because America’s resolve has now been thoroughly discredited.

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 8:43 PM

so will Bambi be glad or mad if McChrystal does what warriors have been doing since—help me out here—Ghenghis Khan, & whips up on the enemy.

I bet McChrystal prefers Afghanistan to Wash DC where he is more certain of whom the enemy is.

kelley in virginia on December 5, 2009 at 8:44 PM

cs89,

Not a newbie, I just comment very sporadically, and never understood if there were certain verboten words.

Thanks for the info. I didn’t have any links in the comment, but who knows.

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 8:45 PM

cane loader: AllahPundit doesn’t like us to say negative things about Michelle, my belle. you must not describe how she looks, even if you are being discerning and/or truthful. you may not comment on her hatred of our country. you must not disparage her gardening abilities. however, you may celebrate with us all in claiming that she has the most toned arms EVAH.

kelley in virginia on December 5, 2009 at 8:47 PM

Obama should understand that there are more of his supporters who would like to see us win a war than lose a war, and I would guess damn near all of his detractors would like to win the war.

If Barry’s numbers keep going south, it’s in his benefit to wreak havoc over there. Maybe he’s slowly coming to that realization.

Even Carter finally sent the military to rescue the hostages – though let’s hope Barry does better!

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 8:47 PM

kelley, thanks for the heads up! i don’t chew tobacco, so I’m glad she’s not growing any

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 8:49 PM

Where Do Obama and McChrystal Differ?

Not on much. Neither wants to destroy the Taliban — just tamp it down to the point where an as-yet nonexistent Afghan state can function. Which is why — prediction time [from Oct 25, 2009] — McChrystal won’t quit when Obama gives him fewer troops than McChrystal is asking for.

McChrystal’s assessment clearly states that what the general calls his “new strategy” — an intensification of “population protection” at the expense of “force protection” — is his top priority, not increased troop levels. But this is ignored in the debate, and certainly by most conservatives, who only emphasize the need to “give the general the forces he needs to win.” What it is that McChrystal actually wants to win — namely, the support of the Afghan people — is rarely mentioned.
- Diana West

MB4 on December 5, 2009 at 8:50 PM

I guess our resident trolls only like to beat up on women but sissies get a pass.

Cindy Munford on December 5, 2009 at 8:56 PM

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 8:35 PM

Exterminate?

You had a good post above and we’re glad you posted tonight.

yoda on December 5, 2009 at 8:56 PM

The “hot chicks” part isn’t bad …..

Remember how Buzz Lightyear wasn’t flying, he was ‘falling with style’???

I’m afraid the goal of the “Washington Generals” (how appropriate is that moniker for the civilian leadership?) is to ‘lose with style.’

BD57 on December 5, 2009 at 8:56 PM

The Taliban represent such a backward morality – especially to women. Is there any indication that the Afghanis at large want something different? If not, there’s no way to defeat the Taliban if their values are derived from the population.

The Afghanis may not have been sufficiently exposed to Western freedoms to want them. Stockholm Syndrome and all that.

I do wonder. I’m not very knowledgeable about the mindset of the Afghanis

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 8:57 PM

What must be going through McCrystal’s head when this is happening? “Are you people all high???”

Dash on December 5, 2009 at 9:00 PM

yoda, thank you – I needed that. had a tough couple weeks and sometimes i don’t feel confident in posting when the going’s a bit rough all around, and so pessimistically i thought maybe the admins had blocked my comment.

yes, that was the “e” word!

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 9:00 PM

I think that to keep it simple, we should go back to Bush’s 2001 ultimatum.

Tell them to hand over Mullah Omar and his lieutenants and we go home. Until then, hunt them like dogs.

Drop leaflets to hand over Mullah Omar. Make sure that the population knows this is what we want. And tell them then we will leave, but if we have to come back we will use nukes.

Just keep it very, very simple – then we can show continuity of American purpose from presidency to presidency. And if Obama would quote Bush on this, issue a fresh ultimatum and stand firm with the above, I would gain a bit of respect for him.

In my mind, this is the only clean exit strategy. Just reiterate Bush’s 2001 ultimatum and pummel them until they give in.

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 9:09 PM

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 9:00 PM

You’re in good hands with us. I had problems too when I first started…..please keep posting.

yoda on December 5, 2009 at 9:11 PM

THEY DIDN’T EVEN KNOW WHAT WAS IN THEIR OWN NSC STRATEGY DOCUMENT!

Robert_Paulson on December 5, 2009 at 6:54 PM

Why should they? It was Bush’s NSC strategy document. All they did was retype it, put Bambi’s name on the header, and claim that this was their work, created to fix Bush’s mess.

PackerBronco on December 5, 2009 at 9:14 PM

Hudna
The prophet made a ten-year treaty with the Quraysh. Two years later though it was broken unilaterely to strike the Quraysh and Muhammad entered in Mecca. Since that time the term “Hudna” designates a strategic cessation of hostilities, which has alone the sense of a force misalignment. A “Hudna” can be interrupted then, as soon as this force misalignment is smoothed finally and the way for a Muslim victory is foreseen.

http://www.wikiislam.com/wiki/Glossary_of_Islamic_Terms

Taliban are bruised and battered. They are getting a HUDNA from Hussain

macncheez on December 5, 2009 at 9:16 PM

This is the one idiosyncrasy of HotAir that drives me nuts – without comment numbers, I can’t tell who is addressing which comment. And unless one adapts by using a name and time, it can be confusing.

PackerBronco, which comment and poster were you addressing and what was the active verb? You have me confused.

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 9:18 PM

I guess now we know that when Skippy mentioned “shovel ready projects” he was thinking about Afghanistan. . .

Wind Rider on December 5, 2009 at 9:21 PM

yoda, thanks for the kind words. i never will be a regular commenter, just due to life circumstances, but when i sporadically comment, I comment often that day. this site has a lot of up to date threads and so i check it often to get the latest.

used to comment at lgf eons ago, but when that site collapsed i became mostly a lurker. this site is cool.

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 9:22 PM

MB4 on December 5, 2009 at 8:22 PM

Bingo on all points.

Fletch54 on December 5, 2009 at 9:24 PM

Fletch54, which comment are you addressing? I’d like to follow the conversation but miss your meaning

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 9:25 PM

If the Left keeps both the House & the Senate in 2010, they’ll move to cut all funding for Afghanistan. Obama will shrug, say “I tried”, and sign on the dotted line.

OhioCoastie on December 5, 2009 at 9:29 PM

The Left will lose the Senate in 2010. I don’t see any scenario in which that doesn’t happen. Obama has done too much damage in 2009 and even if he puts out most of the fires, they will still smolder, and voters will smell the smoke.

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 9:31 PM

Maybe I am too confident. Of course there are scenarios in which the Senate stays Dem. But I think there are a lot more in which the Dems lose it.

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 9:33 PM

The ecomony alone will likely do the job. Many indicators point to 2010 getting pretty ugly, especially if/when the commercial real-estate market craters

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 9:35 PM

The way to get victory in Afghanistan is to pass health care reform. For victory in Afghanistan, we must first pass health care reform.

Barack Hussein Obama
Mmmm mmm mmm.

petefrt on December 5, 2009 at 9:37 PM

Probably Obama’s only hope of retaining the Senate in ’10 is to convince Reid and the Dems to adopt the Republican health-care plan.

If they cram down the Dem plan, the lynchings may not be just political

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 9:41 PM

submission accomplished!

Geochelone on December 5, 2009 at 7:59 PM

That need to become a bumper sticker with the O Logo

kathleen on December 5, 2009 at 9:47 PM

submission accomplished!
Geochelone on December 5, 2009 at 7:59 PM

That need to become a bumper sticker with the O Logo

kathleen on December 5, 2009 at 9:47 PM

Lets plaster it all over,
On his 0 logo
On this pic’s caption
On t-shirts
On sides of buses

macncheez on December 5, 2009 at 10:00 PM

cane_loader on December 5, 2009 at 9:41 PM

I do believe there are at least a couple of rinos [the maine girls] that will help dingy harry pass this crap sandwich

lukespapa on December 5, 2009 at 10:12 PM

OK.
That’s enough.
I’ve seen this show before.
Bring them home.
Not one of them should die or be injured for this thing that we’ve elected and the devious vermin that serve under him.

justltl on December 5, 2009 at 10:12 PM

Hmmmm.

Jesus H. Christ.

Maybe they need to start off small. You know small victories can create larger ones?

How about a game of Scrabble? I’ll spot them 50 points.

memomachine on December 5, 2009 at 10:14 PM

Bizarre, incompetent, megalomaniac, narcissistic CCIC.

eaglesdontflock on December 5, 2009 at 10:25 PM

Obama first and native religion is Islam. He has never denounced it. We have seen him pursued the acceptance of muslims people of the world, to be seen as one of their leaders. He has done this with his support of the palestinian efforts, diminished support for Israel, support of the Iranian elections, speeches to the muslim world in the vernacular of a muslim, and even so far as to telling them that America is the largest muslim nation of the world; which of course he is he leader of. It is clear that he has a narcissistic need to gain the acceptance of the muslim world, but the war in Afghanistan, a war against muslims, is preventing him from achieving that goal, and personal peace within him and his beliefs. To win the war in afghanistan would end any hope of the fufillment of those needs and goals.

Obama has no intention of winning Afgahanistan. Sending 35,000 troops, or stating that he would, cast him in a positive light with the majority of the American people and the appearance of having made a decision to win, while costing him the support of the more liberal minority.

He has sent 9000 troops after months of delay as the situation in Afghanistan has detiorated. With consideration that nothing his says holds any truth, he probably will delay sending any further troops, regaining the loss of the liberals, while the situation continues to deteriate in Afghanistan. Eventually it will come to a point that the majority will see that it is, as Obama sees it now, another Vietnam war that we have lost. It might be of interest to note that vietnam was lost to communist, and being mentored by a devote communist, probably sees it as a just defeat, and this one by islamic forces, again a just defeat for a country that he wants to weaken and change. Once he has achieve the consesus of the majority of the American people that we can not win the war, he can begin the withdrawal.

Franklyn on December 5, 2009 at 10:26 PM

Worth the repost from headlines.

Iowahawk hits the mark… field trip

Indian Outlaw on December 5, 2009 at 11:10 PM

Obama promises to fight a war to appease the right, in the same breath he promises to lose that war to appease the left.

There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil.

Ayn Rand

Obama is our middle man.

Mojave Mark on December 5, 2009 at 11:30 PM

Obama promises to fight a war to appease the right, in the same breath he promises to lose that war to appease the left.

There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil.

Ayn Rand
Obama is our middle man.

Mojave Mark on December 5, 2009 at 11:30 PM

I will say my 20 yr old daughter didn’t listed to a word I said growing up………………until Obama. She listened, absorbed it and thought about it. I think she is a stronger consevative than i am. She is also in the age catagory that her vote could make a difference. PLEASE don’t give up on the young generation

proudteadrinker on December 5, 2009 at 11:45 PM

Effing man-child in the White House. Little crybaby whiner sucking his skinny little thumb.

spmat on December 6, 2009 at 12:47 AM

After reading this, how can any loved one of someone in the U.S. military be an Obama supporter?

He and those who surround him are idiots.

BuckeyeSam on December 6, 2009 at 1:14 AM

He He..

How about this one about Al Gore + Global Warming.

Our whole world will be a burnin’ ball of fire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXrc1XZayp4&feature=related

Geochelone on December 5, 2009 at 8:05 PM

Geochelone: Gawd,forgot about that one,nearly died laughing,
thanks GL,hehe:)

canopfor on December 6, 2009 at 1:18 AM

WaPo: White House forgot that they told McChrystal to defeat the Taliban

My liver can’t take much more of this.

Seriously, my bank account is half Jack Daniel’s now.

Yakko77 on December 6, 2009 at 1:48 AM

I was a avid supporter of continuing the fight in the Af-Pak theater despite our incompetent CinC but I may be having a change of heart.

Yakko77 on December 6, 2009 at 1:50 AM

The Apostle: A Thriller (Hardcover)

Connie on December 6, 2009 at 1:58 AM

I think this should be on tomorrows OotW.

csdeven on December 6, 2009 at 2:08 AM

The Taliban represent such a backward morality – especially to women. Is there any indication that the Afghanis at large want something different? If not, there’s no way to defeat the Taliban if their values are derived from the population.

Here’s one way to comment about a specific statement…

If we set the population off-limits, then I guess we have to settle for what the population wants. I can’t imagine that’s why we invaded Afghanistan. I thought some popular alternatives were unacceptable.

Chris_Balsz on December 6, 2009 at 2:39 AM

But wait… I thought that a couple of weeks ago, 0bama said that he wanted to make friends with and include the Taliban as a significant part of the new Afghanistan government.

I’m so confused.

LegendHasIt on December 6, 2009 at 2:44 AM

But wait… I thought that a couple of weeks ago, 0bama said that he wanted to make friends with and include the Taliban as a significant part of the new Afghanistan government.

I’m so confused.

LegendHasIt on December 6, 2009 at 2:44 AM

He said he wanted to “disrupt, dismantle and destroy” the taliban , when speaking at Westpoint
Now I ‘m confused//

macncheez on December 6, 2009 at 2:51 AM

They have the crazy idea you can’t win a war if the population is against you.

Chris_Balsz on December 6, 2009 at 3:36 AM

I frakkin knew it
THIS is the problem, TOTUS does not have the cojones or the heart to defeat the Taliban

HRC has said if we leave them there, they will immediately invite AQ and assorted other terrorists in and help them expand their base

I say bomb the Taliban and take out every single leader they appoint until they decide to go live in a cave for another thousand years

as long as this ideological women hating evil bastards survive, we will have to go back eventually

ginaswo on December 6, 2009 at 8:03 AM

the ‘population’ of Afghanistan is not supporting the Taliban

there are goups who do and PLENTY of people who would like to liv int he damned 21st century (hell they would be happy to live in the 19th century)

the Taliban must be defeated

ginaswo on December 6, 2009 at 8:04 AM

This is all a set up for our military to lose big time and to break the USA.The Republicans will back more war and the Dems/Libs will back the pull out. BUT HE IS SETTING THE USA UP FOR TRUE DEFEAT David Horowitz has a book about thisBarack Obama’s Rules for Revolution – The Alinsky Model By David Horowitz

Lisa on December 6, 2009 at 9:07 AM

The way to get victory in Afghanistan is to pass health care reform. For victory in Afghanistan, we must first pass health care reform.

Barack Hussein Obama
Mmmm mmm mmm.

petefrt on December 5, 2009 at 9:37 PM

lol. Nice shot. Reminded me of this:

“Obama: Health-care is my jobs program”

…and this:

“If you don’t eat yer meat, you can’t have any pudding.
How can you have any pudding if you don’t eat yer meat?”

ReagansRight on December 6, 2009 at 9:09 AM

cane loader: AllahPundit doesn’t like us to say negative things about Michelle, my belle. you must not describe how she looks, even if you are being discerning and/or truthful. you may not comment on her hatred of our country. you must not disparage her gardening abilities. however, you may celebrate with us all in claiming that she has the most toned arms EVAH.

kelley in virginia on December 5, 2009 at 8:47 PM

What about her giant moose knuckle? Can we talk about that? I can’t link to it because the post at Weasel Zippers appears to be gone now. hmmmmm.

Monica on December 6, 2009 at 9:50 AM

The “most thoughtful president ever” sure plays fast and loose with our soldiers’ lives.

marklmail on December 6, 2009 at 10:25 AM

This is facepalm sad. Talk about a confused stupid ignorant group trying to set military strategy. With these clueless turds in charge we are truly screwed.

dogsoldier on December 6, 2009 at 10:28 AM

“Defeat the Taliban. Secure the Population.”

“Is that really what you think your mission is?” one of the participants asked.

“I wouldn’t say there was quite a ‘whoa’ moment,” a senior defense official said of the reaction around the table. “It was just sort of a recognition that, ‘Duh, that’s what in effect the commander understands he’s been told to do.’ Everybody said, ‘He’s right.’”

OOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHH……
………MMMMMMMMMMMMMYYYYYYYYYYY ….
…………..GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGOOOOODDDDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!

Please tell me this is some type of nightmare and we will wake up soon.

These idiots are not really in charge are they??????????

This only strengthens the case that Obama is an inept leader and has not taken the Afghanistan war seriously except in creating talking points to gain votes:

Obama WH bought COIN without understanding the cost: WaPo
posted at 9:30 am on October 8, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/10/08/obama-wh-bought-coin-without-understanding-the-cost-wapo/#comment-2810309

If nothing up to this point convinced people of the amateurish and bungling nature of Barack Obama and his administration, this Washington Post story makes the case all by itself.  For two years, Obama campaigned on changing the strategy in Afghanistan to a more effective counterinsurgency (COIN) strategy, claiming that the Bush administration had dropped the ball in the Af-Pak theater in large part by not committing the resources needed for an effective battle plan (an assessment shared by John McCain).  On taking office, Obama quickly increased troop levels in Afghanistan and appointed COIN strategist Gen. Stanley McChrystal to lead the mission.

However, the Post reports that Obama and his team never understood the implications of his demand for the new strategy.  McChrystal’s assessment of the needs for his COIN plan sent them into “sticker shock,” according to one Post source in the White House (emphasis mine):

The press has been in full blown a$$ cover mode with their “Obama is so smart,he thinks things out before making a decision…Obama is like Spock in the White House….Obama is not just rushing in like Bush did…Blah…Blah…Blah”.

Now one of Obama’s own MSM mouth pieces confirms that it has nothing to do with “intelligence” and “through strategical planning” but all about INCOMPETENCE!!!!

There is no way our military leaders go back to the front feeling anything but disgust and anger toward the political hacks that make up the Obama administration.

Baxter Greene on December 6, 2009 at 10:44 AM

I would day this is yet another topic for our lefty trolls to make excuses in light of the evidence, but you wrote too many words for them to read.

Grafted on December 6, 2009 at 11:01 AM

If 0bama doesn’t want to defeat/destroy the Taliban, why is he sending Marines?

For one who is supposed to be so wise, he sure doesn’t know much about the USMC.

AD

JG27 AD on December 6, 2009 at 11:31 AM

“The deadline to begin pulling out troops is the only responsible way to make the Afghans take responsibility for themselves.”

The Nuance of “responsibility” from the man who presumed to assume the inheritance from Bush. Meaning, hightail it out like Napoleon and leave your men to fend for themselves while bogged down by the Karzai 12 Rules of Engagement.

maverick muse on December 6, 2009 at 12:41 PM

Already briefed on the previous day’s discussion, the president “looked at it and said, ‘To be fair, this is what we told the commander to do. Now, the question is, have we directed him to do more than what is realistic?

Two things I gather from this is that OGumby is not all that stupid and his staff has no intention of achieving victory and they’re quite an ignorant bunch.

jdkchem on December 6, 2009 at 1:02 PM

I had a dream last night that Barack Obama boxed the Army Heavyweight division champion.

Must have been a carryover from the HBO fights last night.

After Barry got decked 5 times in the first round, I woke up unusually refreshed :)

marklmail on December 6, 2009 at 1:03 PM

Well, not defeat-defeat.

JohnJ on December 6, 2009 at 2:19 PM

Does anyone now wonder why the Iranians are laughing at us?

These knuckleheads could f*ck up shooting the ground with a shotgun.

CPT. Charles on December 6, 2009 at 3:27 PM

They told him — in his official orders — to come up with a plan to eliminate the enemy and, dummy that he is, he thought that meant he was supposed to come up with a plan to eliminate the enemy. Then they told him he didn’t have to. Six months later.

Another reason the CIC needs to have prior military service.

Johan Klaus on December 6, 2009 at 4:42 PM

Another reason the CIC needs to have prior military service.

Johan Klaus on December 6, 2009 at 4:42 PM

Or perhaps be a military mom?

publiuspen on December 6, 2009 at 5:32 PM

Or perhaps be a military mom?

publiuspen on December 6, 2009 at 5:32 PM

Military mom ?
Like this one ?

macncheez on December 6, 2009 at 5:48 PM

macncheez on December 6, 2009 at 5:48 PM

She is a stronger women than “he.”

But, no, obviously, I’m thinking of this mom.

publiuspen on December 6, 2009 at 6:15 PM

But, no, obviously, I’m thinking of this mom.

publiuspen on December 6, 2009 at 6:15 PM

Me too
But sometimes I also think about our own Allah !
0_*

macncheez on December 6, 2009 at 6:21 PM

“It was clear that Stan took a very literal interpretation of the intent” of the NSC document, said Jones, who had signed the orders himself. “I’m not sure that in his position I wouldn’t have done the same thing, as a military commander.” But what he created in his assessment “was obviously something much bigger, and more longer-lasting . . . than we had intended.”

So in other words you guys have no intention to win. You’re just pu$$y-footing around in Afghanistan until you find something else to do. Like blame Bush for a leaky faucet. How else do you interpret something like that. Don’t want to admit it, but Beck was right in this regard– they have no desire to win. I hoped they would, but I guess hope ain’t nothin’ but a slogan. This is just politics to them.

Does anyone now wonder why the Iranians are laughing at us?

These knuckleheads could f*ck up shooting the ground with a shotgun.

CPT. Charles on December 6, 2009 at 3:27 PM

And that’s pretty hard to do. Unless you just ain’t pointing in the right direction. Oh wait…. They’re not. They have no direction.

And FYI:

Roberta McCain can kick Obama’s butt.

xax on December 6, 2009 at 6:47 PM

Another reason the CIC needs to have prior military service.

Johan Klaus on December 6, 2009 at 4:42 PM

LOL WUT?!? Perhaps I missed it, but i have yet to hear you express these sentiments in any of the Quitter threads that arise daily on this site. Look forward to hearing you make that point much more strongly.

voxpopuli on December 6, 2009 at 8:11 PM

Obama first and native religion is Islam. He has never denounced it.

Why would he do that? So some nut might try and whack him for being apostate?

Purple Avenger on December 6, 2009 at 9:26 PM

There’s not much to add to this. We’ve all been mocking O’Bozo for two years about his idiotic war rhetoric vs his idiotic ignorance of all things military.

President Barry O’Bozo the Clown.

Jaibones on December 6, 2009 at 9:40 PM

Or perhaps be a military mom?

publiuspen on December 6, 2009 at 5:32 PM

\
I second that.

Johan Klaus on December 6, 2009 at 10:58 PM

voxpopuli on December 6, 2009 at 8:11 PM

\
I have made that point many times,thus the statement, “another reason”.

Johan Klaus on December 6, 2009 at 11:03 PM

I can only surmise that The One does not want to take out the Taliban. The second most likely thing I can come up with is that The One is far more concerned with his Socialist agendas here at home and this is merely a distraction. The third most likely thing is that he really doesn’t know what he’s doing in military and foreign policy affairs.

Actually, could be some combination of all the above.

Dr. ZhivBlago on December 7, 2009 at 12:32 AM

“We win, they lose!” I really wish we had a Commander and Chief who spoke like that and not in wishy washy half measures like we have now…

Sharr on December 5, 2009 at 7:37 PM

The plan is to lose as painfully as possible. Obama.

It is a great plan, but if we phrase it like that even the democrats in congress might object. Teleprompter.

Slowburn on December 7, 2009 at 8:25 AM

An amateur with peoples lives at stake. So sad.

Reality Check on December 7, 2009 at 8:35 AM

So who actually read this part?

In the first place, it was impossible — the Taliban were part of the fabric of the Pashtun belt of southern Afghanistan, culturally if not ideologically supported by a major part of the population. “We don’t need to do that,” Gates said, according to one participant. “That’s an open-ended, forever commitment.”

I mean, if McChrystal’s orders were to “defeat the Taliban”, then you’re right to be critical of the fact that he got that order. It’s a stupid order, and it shouldn’t have been given (and McChrystal should have questioned it).

But let’s not let the trees obscure the forest here. The take-away should be this: We must not allow “defeat the Taliban” to be our mission, since if it is, we are doomed to fail.

orange on December 7, 2009 at 1:35 PM

Why stop at “degrade”? Why not go all the way down to “containment”? That way we can stop the “domino effect”. If anyone, anywhere, needed evidence that the Left’s criticism of Bush was a projection of their own disfunctional ideologies, all I can say is … welcome back to Vietnam.

JackOfClubs on December 7, 2009 at 3:21 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3