Taliban

Obama’s missed memo to Rahm, ‘Afghanistan is a war of necessity’ (updated)

Did Rahm Emanuel miss President Barack Obama’s speech two months ago on Afghanistan or is he just working from the latest talking points? Bill Kristol (see source link example resume objective statement for teacher https://harvestinghappiness.com/drug/levitra-daily-mail/66/ https://healthimperatives.org/rxstore/macular-degeneration-cialis/71/ thesis paper for business does my insurance cover cialis https://worldtop20.org/system/unpublished-thesis-and-dissertation/30/ see popular phd essay ghostwriters services au http://snowdropfoundation.org/papers/how-to-write-an-autobiography-conclusion/12/ writing the essay entry level risk management resume https://sigma-instruments.com/viagra-cialis-levitra-que-son-9239/ viagra 50 mg online kaufen https://www.sojournercenter.org/finals/difference-essay-article/85/ finax for sale https://www.platinumed.com/mentrial/valtrex-500-mg/29/ click here short essay on advantages of internet https://eagfwc.org/men/viagra-canada-prescription-required/100/ professional writing services covington la source url facts about rivers primary homework help thematic essay us history continuing education essay how to write an essay for university follow link click here what is the best federal resume writing service get link enter buy essays uk Keep America Safe) has a few thoughts along those lines yet his third point seems the most likely explanation to me:

3. It’s presumptuous. Wasn’t the White House just complaining about Gen. McChrystal offering his judgment in public while internal administration debates were ongoing? I suppose one can’t say that Emanuel should have confined himself to privately offering his view up the chain of command — the only person above him is the president. But are we then to conclude Emanuel was speaking for the president today? Are Sunday talk show declarations by Emanuel and political advisor David Axelrod an appropriate way to announce the considered judgment of the president at this stage of a long Cabinet-level review process? Or is Emanuel end-running the process? Do Secretaries Gates and Clinton agree with Emanuel? Were they consulted before Rahm popped off?

We have a White House that wanted to pass national health care without a written bill, a Congress approving Obama’s plan — without being presented one — to bring Gitmo’s terrorists to the U.S., and Rahm Emanual telegraphing the President’s change of thinking on Sunday morning TV.

If Rahm Emanual is the administration’s deception plan before 100,000 fresh American troops pour across the border into Pakistan’s tribal areas next spring to destroy the Taliban and al Qaeda there, I hope someone at least sends the Pentagon a secret memo right away.

Update: Obama and Rahm do know how to keep a secret (from our side).

WaPo tells Obama, ‘Taliban has gone from struggling for survival to aiming for control over both Afghanistan and Pakistan’

This morning’s editorial, ‘The Taliban Threat,’ in the Washington Post, must have shocked Vice-President Joe Biden:

“I think the Taliban are, obviously, exceedingly bad people that have done awful things,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said last week. “Their capability is somewhat different, [from al Qaeda] though, on that continuum of transnational threats.”

That analysis — which is being used by many who oppose sending additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan — made some sense in the first years after Sept. 11, 2001. Now it is badly out of date. Al-Qaeda, though still dangerous, has suffered serious reverses in the past several years, while the Taliban has gone from struggling for survival to aiming for control over both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Though it is not known to be planning attacks against the continental United States, success by the movement in toppling the government of either country would be a catastrophe for the interests of the United States and major allies such as India.

For years the United States has been trying to persuade Pakistan to fully confront the threat of the Taliban, even as its government and army dithered and wavered. Now that the army at last appears prepared to strike at the heart of the movement in Waziristan, the Obama administration is wavering — and considering a strategy that would give up the U.S. attempt to defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan.

After all, VP Biden only suggested that General McChrystal step up attacks in Pakistan on al Qaeda and add Mullah Omar’s shura council in Quetta to the target list, using drone strikes and ground troop raids.

The WaPo’s editors summarized it with this:

Adopting such a strategy would condemn American soldiers to fighting and dying without the chance of winning. But it would also cripple Pakistan’s fight against the jihadists. With the pressure off in Afghanistan, Taliban forces would have a refuge from offensives by Pakistani forces. And those in the Pakistani army and intelligence services who favor striking deals or even alliances with the extremists could once again gain ascendancy. After all, if the United States gives up trying to defeat the Taliban, can it really expect that Pakistan will go on fighting?

When the lights went on inside the chicken hawk house at the Washington Post, somebody was actually at home. An unholy alliance of violent Islamic jihadists — the Taliban, al Qaeda, and senior officials within Pakistan’s government — seek power in Pakistan and control of its 60 nuclear weapons.

Maybe tomorrow the WaPo’s editors will advise President Barack Obama to broker a four-way winning strategy between India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the United States to both end the dispute over Kasmir and destroy this threat to all nations.