Posted on 10/11/2009 7:54:30 PM PDT by VRWCTexan
One phrase that always comes up in the administration's (AFGAN) strategy sessions is "PUBLIC OPTION," one participant told McClatchy .
White House officials are minimizing warnings from the intelligence community, the military and the State Department about the risks of adopting a limited strategy focused on al Qaida , U.S. intelligence, diplomatic and military officials told McClatchy
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Fight to win.
I don’t think it’s a must read. It’s just another set of opinions to further cloud what is exaclty going on.
Never send a Lawyer(s) to do a mans work.
... mine is that it is the first time in (so called) MSM print that it's been openly admitted the Afgan policy decision is directly driven by obama’s vote counting for the “public option”
Sorry that I wasted your time....
Real men do not pick other men's pockets.
"The Indo-Pakistan issue looms like a dark cloud on the horizon...."
The list, ping
Agreed - and we are laid bare for at least 3 years and 3 months to the possible outcomes as obama will wimp out when the chips are down.
While you say "Obama will wimp out", I will say that Obama is relying on the Realists such as Gates and Jones, not to mention others such as Scowcroft and Powell.
NATO should turn to the Collective Security Treaty Organization and possibly the Shanghai Cooperation Organization
Our military still pushing back on this-— they want their voice heard!
U.S. intelligence, diplomatic and military officials told McClatchy ——
“This administration is minimizing the threat from radical Islam in South and Central Asia , which is much worse today than it was eight years ago, in order to defend a minimalist policy that it’s settling on for domestic political reasons.”
This official said that the White House has been “spoon-feeding distorted information” to a few news organizations in an effort to build public and congressional support for a policy that another U.S. official said “rests on the nonsensical notion that you can separate some of the Taliban from other Taliban , al Qaida and other groups, when in reality those groups are more closely allied today than they’ve ever been.”
____________________________
Indeed if that is your personal assessment as to how best to address the global terrorism base known as Afghanistan - then in fact I agree that we “do not agree”
Wow. Ubama is worse than just a scumbag. That p.o.s. has blood on his hands.
.... and thus has almost nothing to do with what will ultimately best protect America from global islamo-terrorism
Again JMHO....
I know what the NeoCons want. Send US troops out to do some nation building even if they do get shot up in the process.
Certainly the top military commanders are not doing this to enhance their own careers - rather they are putting their careers on the line for what they see as a “do or die”
Certainly having the powerful SCO police Afghanistan will discourage Islam-terrorsts from ever waiting to bring the “great Satan” America to our knees
yes; this continuing “dialogue” with the BHO adm is not a career enhancer.
The oath BHO took and the military lives being sacrificed never cross his mind; our military commanders can’t think of anything else but-—their oath and their men.
bttt
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.