I Wonder How Hillary Would Handle It - Or Sarah

I hate war! That's not new information. What makes them even worse than we see on the news is what goes on behind the scenes. I'm referring to the coziness between Hamid Karzai and the Taliban. Supposedly to get lower level members to switch sides and join the fight against al Qaeda. I figure it's little more than a pact with the devil.

There's an evil, sordid side to it. When one chooses to deal with the devil they know versus the one they don't, it's sometimes forgotten both are devils. Such is the case, according to The Wall Street Journal, with the Taliban when it comes to women. While they are no longer throwing acid in the faces of schoolgirls, women are still facing peril. In what are being called "night letters" because they are delivered at night, women who have jobs are being told to stop working or die. Those who have resisted the bullying have indeed been killed.

Activists are trying to get explicit guarantees for women's rights into the negotiations but even if successful it's doubtful anyone will abide by them. Such is the nature of the culture. We can no more do anything for the rights of women than we can make Islamic extremists like us. Yet we continue to try as our young men die.

I find it interesting that even technically savvy and civilized Japan is but beginning to level the playing field when it comes to women. Just recently they have appointed the first branch manager of a bank and announced the first female pilot! They have been hovering with Malaysia and Cambodia when it comes to gender equality. Two you'd expect to be near the bottom of the barrel. But Japan? With truths like this how are we going to help Afghan women? Realistically.

One the bright side, those with the highest ranking are Iceland, Finland, Norway and Sweden. Cold. Tough climate. If a woman were up to the task as President I'd have to give the nod to Hillary. Cold. Tough. Warm and fuzzies won't cut it.

Seriously though, I don't think a woman, no matter how able in our culture, could sway the likes of these people who feel just as strongly about their stand as we do ours. It's perhaps better left to the men. They seem to like tilting at windmills. Where, however, are we going to find one who is cold? And tough. And will actually fight for the issue.

Well, Duh!

I had to laugh when I read the headline for a story in The Wall Street Journal yesterday: Corruption Suspected in Airlift Of Billions in Cash From Kabul. We are well aware that we are supporting a very corrupt government headed by Hamid Karzai. We are well aware that his brother is one of the biggest offenders with his connections to the opium trade.

So why is it that suddenly officials are surprised that the millions of U.S. dollars packed in suitcases and stacked on pallets at the airport for transfer elsewhere might just be tied to corruption? Especially when much of it is slated for banks in Dubai?

What really frosts me and seems to be forgotten by the powers that be, this is U.S. taxpayer money. Yours and mine! You know, the money sent to create the jobs we don't have here, to build the infrastructure there while ours is falling apart, schools, hospitals.

It goes into Afghanistan as aid. It goes out as bribes. It's all perfectly legal with no accountability. They are shocked, shocked that it might be due to corrupt activity!

There is a new general in charge now to fight this useless war. We're told the ambassador, the special emissary and the State Department will no longer butt heads with the military and that the soldiers may again be permitted to defend themselves. That's all fine and dandy but it will be meaningless if in the end Karzai and his ilk will follow the money, our money, to their secret accounts in Dubai and elsewhere and ultimately leave the country to the Taliban.

Should that happen our entire government should be charged with aiding and abetting the enemy. After all it is our money making it all possible!

Not So McChrystal Clear

Subordination, it was said. Not as much as sheer stupidity. Having read the Rolling Stone article, I found the offensive comments to be no more than what most of the military who are frustrated with these unending conflicts might say to one another in their bull sessions. To relay it to a reporter is sheer stupidity. Or is it?

McChrystal surely marches to his own drummer just as does our President. As a military man, however, the President is his Commander-In-Chief. He is to serve. Not critique unless asked to do so. Which I'm certain he was on many occasions. Coming up on the short end of his requests, I wonder if this whole episode was designed to make public just what the upper echelons of the military think of the ambassadors, the Vice President and even the President. The whole mess. Even at the cost of a career. Never mind that he'll make millions on the lecture circuit.

McChrystal wasn't my favorite General. He was the one who decided to do away with the base fast food outlets that were such a reminder of home for the troops. It was under his command that the troops were to be awarded medals for restraint. Don't shoot unless you're sure a body is really a combatant. Come on! That's no way to fight a war. WAR!

Regardless of my opinion, McChrystal is a General of some note. The President can ill afford to be shown as weak or wrong, especially with his ratings as low as they are. He can accomplish that all by himself. It is not the General's place to do so. Discipline is essential. Chain of command is essential.

The days of Patton and Montgomery as showboating military leaders are long gone. War has been politicized to the extent, just like Obama's commission on the oil spill, that there are too many fingers with no appropriate expertise in the pie. Obama promised to listen to his generals. He may have listened but he didn't hear. The McChrystal incident shows the outcome of the thinking because of it.

For better or worse, the war is now truly Obama's. He can no longer blame any of it on Bush. The generals are his, the ambassadors are his and the strategy is his. What he now needs to do is get them on the same playing field and quit letting Karzai captain the team.

Can This War Be Won?

Does anyone remember exactly what the war in Afghanistan is all about? Is it to keep the Taliban from regaining it's leadership? Is it to dismantle al Qaeda? Is it to find the ever elusive Bin Laden?

I do know we've spent a lot of time pacifying Karzai. We've made it a fight by permission to appease his complaints about civilian deaths. We've kept his corrupt government in place and are allowing them to negotiate with the Taliban. Excuse me. Negotiate just what? I've never quite been able to figure that out.

Now I learn in this morning's paper that he's okayed a major security crackdown in Khandahar, birthplace of the Taliban! The half million people living in the region are scared it will bring more bloodshed. Bet on it. Yet he makes a public relations tour trying to get them to put aside their fears. Right.

What isn't clear to me is just who the crackdown is aimed. Insurgents. Would that be al Qaeda or Taliban? Criminals. Does that include Karzai's thugs? Wealthy power brokers. They could be just about anyone. What a impressive task they've set for themselves. I hope no civilians are harmed. I'm not sure criminals and power brokers are not civilians!

On the other side of the coin a report says Pakistan is arming and training the Taliban. Strange bedfellows for a U.S. ally. They of course deny it. Never the less, it is known that Pakistan intelligence agencies have kept contact with the Taliban just as their government supposedly denounces them. Talk about forked tongue!

Meanwhile our troops continue to be killed. Today is flag day. Ours is flying. My hope it is one day it will fly to honor those who served, past tense, rather than those who continue to serve and die. For what?

Hillary And Hamid - Here They go Again

Why, oh why, do they bother? Karzai is in this country to make nice and Hillary is patting him on the head and telling him being a bad boy doesn't mean she doesn't love him. Boy, I'm getting tired of the charade.

In fact, The Wall Street Journal tells us, these differences only showcase the strength of the relationship. Heck, he's even going to Arlington to pay his respects. You might think all is well when Karzai says, "Afghanistan is known around the world for being a country that remembers a friend - and for long." I never knew Afghanistan was known for that. It's barely even known as a country! I also question the sincerity. They may indeed remember a friend, but are we one?

On the very same day, we get to see a report issued by the International Crisis Group that spells out the escalating corruption and ethnic rivalries within the Afghan military. You know, the guys that are supposed to be training to protect their own country so we can leave.

To make matters worse NATO is proposing a Courageous Restraint Award for those who show restraint when civilians may be present. Imagine how popular that one will be when awarded posthumously!

It's no wonder our allies are taking a good hard look at us and deciding to cool the relationship. Troop levels are being reduced; there isn't much stomach for this war even though all our allies suffer the same threats of terrorism. Many have suffered far worse than threats yet they have little stomach for this war.

Is it possible they have a better way of dealing with it? Is it possible for this administration to realize that it's strategy isn't working and that listening to advice from others might be prudent?

Nah. Not this administration.

Foreign Policy By Appeasement And Spin

To say that this administration has a complex foreign policy would be an understatement. After months of complaining that voter fraud tainted the recent Afghanistan election, it seems now we're acquiescing to Karzai's "poor me" stance. Hillary Clinton even went so far as to call him a reliable partner !
I wonder if Ahmadinejad does too since his visit! This man who threatens to join the Taliban, whose brother is one of the major drug lords in the country and whose cabinet is chock full of corruption! So now we're going to play warm and fuzzy with this 'strong and vital American ally' because his feelings have been hurt. We're to express sympathy for the pressure he feels as commander in chief of a warring nation!

Well, he wanted the job! He threw the election once and was well on his way to a second time when his opponent withdrew. What's the adage about not standing the heat?? Heck, he wasn't even in the kitchen!

As all of this is carefully placed in the sound bite archives, Hillary comes back on stage to tell us we need fear that al Qaeda is obtaining nuclear weapons material. That's a little different than Iran seeking the big bomb. Which, by the way, we have yet to stop. You see, al Qaeda isn't even a country! Their figure head of a leader supposedly lives in a cave and their weapon of choice seems to be explosives strapped to one's body and detonated, or not, at the appropriate time!

For the sake of argument, however, let's say they get what they need for a bomb. And learn how to build it, enrich the fuel rods and explode it. Where will all this take place? My guess is they will choose a country that the U.S. has pledged no retaliation against other than with conventional weapons. I would. Heck conventional weapons haven't put them out of business yet as they blend into the populations of where ever they choose to be!

To surge or not to surge, to criticise or pacify, to fear acquisition of nuclear material by those who are capable of using it or those who are not. Talk about a spin zone. I wager even Bill O'Reilly has trouble keeping up!

The Enemy Within

If anyone still thinks the war against al Qaeda and the Taliban is winnable, think again. At least that part of it being fought within the borders of Afghanistan.

President Hamid Karzai seems to be making a career of bashing the West in it's efforts to save his sorry excuse of an administration. He's at it again, according to an article in The Wall Street Journal, with a threat that is particularly mind boggling. First he's running around telling the tribal leaders of Kandahar, where a major offensive is planned, that there won't be an operation unless they are happy about it. Happy about it? Kandahar is the birthplace and spiritual center of the Taliban! They're going to welcome a full fledged offensive with open arms?

Then there is the usual whining about the number of civilian deaths and the outrage he feels about the West objecting to his attempt to take over the elections commission. What a sweetheart of a guy. And to think he had an opponent we could have backed that would actually have supported us! Oh well, it's the Obama way to back the wrong party. It's happening here. It happened in Iran. It happened in Honduras. Is there a pattern forming?

This is all pretty much business as usual for Karzai. He must realize his rantings are beginning to be greeted with a, "ho hum, there he goes again" attitude. He's added a new wrinkle. He's said if the efforts by the West to "undermine" him aren't stopped "he, himself, would be compelled to join the other side", the Taliban, if his Parliament didn't back his actions.

You know, Obama wants to cut our nuclear arms supply to reach his goal of a nuclear free world. Never mind the rush to have nucs is escalating like topsy in the Middle East, beginning with Iran. Never-the-less, here's another politically incorrect Dogwalk solution. Drop the surplus Obama thinks he has on Afghanistan and put the whole bloody region out of it's - and our - misery!

It makes no less sense than the rest of his foreign policy. If you can call it that.

Generational and Ideological Disconnect

I was quite dismayed when I read that General McCrystal is closing down what few reminders of home and better times our young soldiers have at Kandahar Airfield.

The area, known as the boardwalk, has a Burger King, Subway, TGI Friday's and a Cold Stone Creamery, a hockey rink and basketball court along with other amenities bringing a bit of the U.S. to the unforgiving surroundings of Afghanistan. What better to keep some some semblance of morale?

Well, no. The rationale is it will free up much needed space for the incoming troops. Gee, I guess being fresh from home their morale will be just fine. For awhile.

Closer to the truth is that McCrystal is trying to convey that the U.S. has no intention of Americanizing Afghanistan. Don't our kids count? After all, they're over there trying to appease the Taliban while Karzai is wheeling and dealing with them at the same time. Probably working a deal to let him stay in office after the Americans leave in return for leaving the Taliban alone. Just saying.

Meantime, the youth of Afghanistan have other ideas. According to a story on the BCC there is a rock band calling themselves Kabul Dreams that is making quite a name for themselves. The three members are of different ethnicity's so they sing in English to convey unity. They are proud young Afghan men who want to show the world that Afghanistan is more than just a war torn backwater. Let's hear it for the young men!It's worth following the BCC link and listening to what they have to say along with some pretty darn good music!

I had high hopes that a younger generation in Washington would make a positive difference. Not this one. Pride is not conveyed by appeasement. Let's look to the next where the Afghan's choose western ways.

Maybe our young GIs and the young musicians from Kabul should get together and work out the whole sorry mess. I'm sure the Afghans would enjoy a Whopper or some of TGI's wings. I'm sure our young warriors would love the Afghan's music. After all, it's western in nature, instruments and all.

It's the old men of ego and war that are perpetuating it. I'd much rather see music and the ideas of youth as the great equalizer!

Can A War Be Won By Appeasement?

While we await tomorrow's latest act of political theater, we should not forget about the rest of the world. Like Afghanistan.

President Obama started what is becoming a trend in the way we address the rest of the world. Other than showing how dysfunctional we are for all to see, we also are making a habit of apologizing.

It has long been the habit of Afghanistan's President Karzai to wag his finger under our nose and scold us for incurring civilian casualties. He seems to be taking great glee in this even though he knows full well there are two facts about war that will never change. People die. Civilians die.

We are now in the midst of a surge to take Marjah, a longtime Taliban Stronghold, where they use civilians as cover. We all know this. It has been going on since day one. Yet he goes before his Parliament waving a picture of a dead young child with his usual tsk, tsk. What happens? General McCrystal goes on Afghan TV and apologizes. What a way to fight a war.

The rules of engagement have changed to the point of making us far less effective than we could be. If an enemy combatant takes out three men then drops his rifle we cannot fire at him. We cannot call in air strikes until there is confirmation of a legitimate threat and collateral damage can be minimized. It is insanity.

We are propping up Karzai's government for some unclear reason. He literally has no army so why are we afraid of him? We allowed him to take office after a badly flawed election on the promise that he would clean up corruption. Why would we ever believe that he actually would?

He is throwing it in our face yet again. A commission was set up after the runoff election which put Karzai back in office to prevent another 1 million vote fraud. Three foreign members were appointed by the UN. Karzai has now signed a decree allowing himself the sole power in appointing commission members, relegating the UN experts to the sidelines.

He has also delayed anti-graft legislation which was to be completed by the end of February.

We can try to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people all we want. We may actually succeed here and there, but to what end? To provide them with a functioning, democratic government out from under the thumb of the Taliban but under the thumb of Karzai and his thugs? Some choice. I would guess the people will side with whichever entity is most likely to just leave them alone.

As we keep the Taliban at bay Karzai has the time to strengthen his hold. When we leave, just as in Iraq, everything will be up for grabs. Some choice. Taliban rule or a dictatorship under Karzai.

Will we ever "cowboy up" and do what needs to be done and let the chips fall where they may? We have to stop worrying about what rogue governments think about how we conduct a war. Or we shouldn't fight them.

Catch A Falling Star

My take on Obama's speech at West Point isn't very different from what the press is reporting today. Blame Bush, generalities, blame Bush, campaign mode. What took around forty minutes could have wrapped up in ten.

Several things caught Hub's and my attention. The obviousness of the secret service. One would think they might be a little less apparent at the U.S. Military Academy. Forget about party crashers.

The number of cadets dozing off during the speech. We begged the cameramen to quit panning the audience fearing the cadets would get in trouble. But then officers present were also having trouble keeping their eyes open. As did Hillary. We were so riveted, we both noticed the gray showing in the brushed back locks over her ears.

What really lacked was fire. There was none. There was a sense of detachment in his delivery and certainly a lack of specifics. Of course it's hard to be specific when there is little of substance.

So where are we? General McCrystal gets far fewer than the number of troops he deemed necessary. The likelihood of NATO countries ponying up the shortfall is slim to none. The talk of training the Afghans to stand on their own sounds vaguely familiar. After disbanding the Iraqi army we tried the same there and they still aren't up to snuff. We're starting with far less in Afghanistan.

So. We're supposed to crush the Taliban, dismantle al Qaeda, cure Karzai's corruption, rebuild the Afghan army plus the country and withdraw all in 18 months! This is the stuff of Obama campaign rhetoric. While still a campaign, it is of a different sort. This is the real world. The world of war.

The Republicans don't like the time line. The Democrats don't like war period. Neither do our allies who we'll be looking to for support. There is no money. What if the Chinese decide they don't want to lend us any more? There is health care, talk of another stimulus, jobs and, of course, war. It may be a war within if this keeps up!

I leave the most important observation until the end. How others in the world viewed the speech. From Spiegel Online's Gabor Steingart. He in essence has said, none to kindly, the Obama magic no longer works.

Remember how people around the world gathered to see him in tremendous throngs during his campaign? They were curious as to who this bright rising star from America was. No more. They've figured it out. The problem is the longer it takes for us to follow on, the worse off we'll be.

Whack A Mole In The Mideast

It's a snowy Sunday morning. Everyone must be online for even our high speed is slower than molasses. That has given me time to peruse the headlines. I wish I had made a snowman instead.

We have two more holidays of the semi-religious sort before we get into the 'traditional' holiday season. Thanksgiving, which is self-explanatory, and Black Friday which is a pagan tribute to the shopping gods.

So how is the world faring as we look forward to December? Let's begin on our own shores. The Bishop of Providence Rhode Island has revealed that he asked asked Representative Patrick Kennedy, back in 2007, to refrain from taking Communion because of his political stance on abortion. It seems to have resurfaced due to it's inclusion in health care reform which, as a good Democrat, Kennedy supports. "Your position is unacceptable to the church and scandalous to many of our members." Well, they should know all about scandals - both the church and the Kennedys!

Moving on across the ocean the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury had to sort out some differences about the alleged recruiting by the Catholic church of unhappy Anglicans.

Then there is the news from the Middle East, the confluence of religions. We have Israeli jets bombing 'suspected' weapons factories in Gaza and Palestinians lobbing rockets into Israel.

We have al Qaeda doing it's best to cripple the Iraqi government as U.S. troops withdraw and the Iraqi government itself is ramping up attacks against what's left of Saddam's loyalists, the Baathists, before the January elections.

I won't even get into the stalemate in Afghanistan while the troops anxiously await their Thanksgiving and Christmas MRE's. It's getting difficult to keep track of the violence as the most holy of days approaches.

Most holy of days. I got to thinking...

holy |ˈhōlē|
adjective ( holier , holiest )
1 dedicated or consecrated to God or a religious purpose; sacred : the Holy Bible | the holy month of Ramadan. See note at divine .
• (of a person) devoted to the service of God : saints and holy men.
• morally and spiritually excellent : I do not lead a holy life.
2 informal used as an intensifier : having a holy good time.
3 dated or humorous used in exclamations of surprise or dismay : holy smoke!

and

holiday |ˈhäliˌdā|
noun
a day of festivity or recreation when no work is done : December 25 is an official public holiday.
• [as adj. ] characteristic of a holiday; festive : a holiday atmosphere.
• chiefly Brit. (often holidays) a vacation : I spent my summer holidays on a farm | Fred was on holiday in Spain.
verb [ intrans. ] chiefly Brit.
spend a holiday in a specified place : he is holidaying in Italy.

Note their is no mention of 'peace' in either definition.

peace |pēs|
noun
1 freedom from disturbance; quiet and tranquility : you can while away an hour or two in peace and seclusion.
• mental calm; serenity : the peace of mind this insurance gives you.
2 freedom from or the cessation of war or violence : the Straits were to be open to warships in time of peace.
• [in sing. ] a period of this : the peace didn't last.
• [in sing. ] a treaty agreeing to the cessation of war between warring states : support for a negotiated peace.
• freedom from civil disorder : police action to restore peace.
• freedom from dispute or dissension between individuals or groups : the 8.8 percent offer that promises peace with the board.
3 ( the peace) a ceremonial handshake or kiss exchanged during a service in some churches (now usually only in the Eucharist), symbolizing Christian love and unity. See also kiss of peace at kiss .

Have I just stumbled upon the missing link?

"Failure Is Not An Option"

Have we really come to this? Both the President and the Attorney General have stated, unequivocally, that Khalid Shaikh Mohammad and his co-defendants will be found guilty and executed. What an appalling statement.

It's not just the fear a lot of Americans have about these terrorists being brought to New York City to be tried in Federal Court. It's what the rest of the world is seeing. The reason behind this faulty exercise is to showcase how wonderful our justice system is. How the United States is the shining beacon on the hill of fairness.

Well, perhaps at one time. Whatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? Even the most heinous of criminals, those we know are guilty, are given that right. So what about these self admitted terrorists? They've already confessed. Because there has to be a trial in a death penalty case even when one confesses. However, with those admissions having been obtained while they were under duress, how will it muddy the pool of evidence?

How can they possibly seat a jury of their peers? Or does that go by the wayside? What if no Muslim is in the jury pool? Would that be reason for appeal? Then add to it all that I've written in previous posts. It's a difficult situation now made more difficult.

It seems we're at a point where we see a decision not being made because Obama is "thinking things through" or a decision being made, credited to an underling, that has provoked a horrendous backlash. The underling, Mr. Holder, is bearing the brunt of the decision.

The troops in Afghanistan are bearing the brunt of the "thinking things through" mode. Now the delay in troop deployment is being extended while an exit strategy is being examined. I'm to the point I want to hear no more about how poorly the Bush administration handled Iraq. Obama is doing no better in his war of necessity.

Yesterday I stated my lack of regard for anything Sarah Palin including the opinion she is not nor ever will be Presidential material. I'm beginning to wonder the same about the man who currently holds the office.

What? Two Karzais?

No wonder the administration wants to see how the run-off works out in Afghanistan! There is a problem. There are two Karzais to deal with! If Hamid loses what will we do with Ahmed? According to The New York Times little brother Ahmed has been on the CIA pay roll, in essence, for most of the past eight years! He denies it, stating any help given to the U.S. was his duty as an Afghan. Right.

Like his big brother, Hamid, he is reputed to be as corrupt as the day is long. He's heavily involved in the country's major export - drugs. So. How do we win the trust of the people if we're supporting the likes of these men? Hamid will undoubtedly win the run-off. So we will still have him and his brother, who seems to me to be a double agent, to deal with.

I don't envy Obama. He's already made it clear complete withdrawal is not an option. So now we'll have a third front. Not only the Taliban and al Qaeda but the Karzai boys.

I know what I'd do. I'd send the troops the Generals want and wipe up the whole mess as quickly as possible. Inclusively. Then get out. That would give the opposition time to strengthen, the security forces time to be trained and we'd be gone along with the Taliban, al Qaeda and Karzai and his cronies.

I hate war. I hate it. But since we're in it, as I've been saying, if we're going to do it, let's get it done.

By the way, whatever happened to the Obama who said he'd listen to his Generals? You hoo! They're speaking to you! They've been speaking to you!

The Other Consideration - The Afghan People

There are three people who I listen to knowing they tell it like it is because they are in the midst of everything going on and have been since the outset. They are CNN's Michael Ware, NBC's Richard Engel and CNN's Peter Bergen.

Mr. Bergen had some interesting observations today on CNN.com .

We already know the American people have little taste for the war in Afghanistan. For that to change the President is going to have to leave the golf course and step up to the plate and make a decision on our mission there. Not only to satisfy the American people but, as is Mr. Bergan's second point, to provide the Afghanistan people a degree of security.

He points out that the last time they had any was under the oppressive rule of the Taliban. Otherwise they are subject to the whims of roaming gangs of ethnic and tribal factions engaged in their own civil wars.

The problem is, no matter who wins the run-off election, there are no Afghan forces anywhere near ready to provide that security. Thus it falls into our lap. Since al Qaeda has a friend in the Taliban, we're really fighting to hold back both factions from regaining ground in Afghanistan.

If this is the mission selected it's going to be a long, difficult slog, but at least the mission would be clear. To the American people, to the troops and to the Afghan people. If the commitment is made and the necessary troops deployed, the Afghan people may be more inclined to side with us for there will be tangible hope.

Perhaps it's time to suck it up and do what is necessary to stop the Taliban and al Qaeda aggression in it's tracks. It will be a long, difficult haul but at least an end will have been defined; a mission explained. Pussy footing around the issue has gotten us little but frustration and lack of morale. Not only from us and our troops, but the people of Afghanistan. It's time for the Americans' to be all that we can be, if the Army will permit me to use their phrase, and do it right. If it means more troops, then let's do it. What's the popular adage? Lead, follow or get out of the way. That's the American way. Or at least it used to be.

I Have To Agree With Cheney!

I watched Obama sign into law a sweeping reform of our veterans' health care programs. I applaud that along with all the work that went in to making it possible.

On the flip side, if we'd stop wars we could get control of the need and therefore the cost. Oh well, it was a thought. It doesn't seem to be in the human gene pool. Humans solve their differences with war. Period.

So. If we're going to wage war, let's commit the troops necessary to win it. That means developing a strategy and sticking with it. One can make adjustments within a strategy I should think.

That's why I agree with former Vice President Cheney's rather terse admonition of the President. We have troops in Afghanistan waiting for help and clarification of their mission. Reports of injuries and casualties come out on a daily basis. Adding to the costs for the Veterans Administration! The war isn't put on hold just because Washington isn't sure which direction to go. It would be nice. Okay, everyone go home for the Holidays while we decide what to do and we'll send the appropriate number back.

The excuse that we don't know how the new election will play out doesn't seem to me to be a valid excuse. Karzai is likely to win and we already know what we're dealing with, with him. He's corrupt up to the tip of his Karakul hat! Re-election will only validate it in his mind. Should Abdullah Abdullah pull an upset we may find a more accommodating leader, but the war will continue.

Is our mission not different than theirs? We want to secure Afghanistan from again becoming the training headquarters for al Qaeda. That means picking them off as they try to exit Pakistan. One way or another. It really has nothing to do with who runs Afghanistan because they have nothing to give to our fight.

Then there is the problem if al Qaeda decides to stay put in Pakistan. What then? The Pakistan army is busy fighting the Taliban. Oops. Time for a new strategy. Put the war on hold while we decide what to do. Don't worry about those left holding the fort who still get picked off on a daily basis. We'll figure it out in time.

It is said "War is Hell". How true. And you know who makes it so? The leaders who wage it. Not the men and women asked to fight it. There seems to be something terribly wrong with this picture.

President Who?

Sometimes I look back at the also rans in the Presidential sweepstakes and wonder how they would have done. Especially when the winner disappoints.

Usually I exhale a sigh of relief for many times the loser also fails on many levels. This time around look at Chris Dodd and John Edwards as examples. What if one of them had won! My thinking on John McCain at this point is that he'd probably not be trying to do as much as Obama is. That probably would have been a plus.

When Senator John Kerry ran against Bush it was one of those, "Is this the best we can do? " moments. I chuckled when I read a preview for CNN's State of the Union due to air tomorrow. Kerry chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee but still seems to be in Commander-in-chief mode.

It is his contention that it would be "irresponsible" to send additional troops to Afghanistan at this time reasoning it would be misguided to have a troop buildup to achieve a mission of "good governance" since the election fraud has yet to be sorted out.

The last I heard the mission has yet to be decided causing the requested troops to be put on hold. The last I heard both are decisions the President is to make. You know, the guy holing up with his national security gurus trying to figure it out? His name is Obama - the last I heard.

The one saving grace is winter is nearly upon Afghanistan. The war will slow on both sides because of the weather. Even the expected presidential runoff may have to wait until spring since many of the villages will be isolated throughout the winter months.

Ah, politics. The President has time to agonize a while longer, Kerry has time to posture a while longer and our troops will have a while to try to remember what it's like to celebrate the holidays at home with family. Even Karzai will have a while to figure out how to rig the election one more time.

One wonders what spring will bring. It's the season of runoffs. From the winter snows. Will we run off the bad guys? Will we be run off? Will Karzai or Abdullah Abdullah win the runoff? Will Senators continue to run off at the mouth? Will the whole story be run off the front pages? If that happens, it will be time for all of us to run off!

They Just Don't Get It Do They!

It has become known today that we seniors will not get an increase in Social Security this year but instead will get a bonus of $250. Whoopee. That won't cover a month's prescriptions for many of us! Where do these guys get their economic bona fides? Or better yet, how do we become one of their pet projects? Then we'd get all the funding we need!

Let's look at the war - again. The President hasn't yet decided if, or how many, troops he's going to send to Afghanistan yet the Senate has striped the funding of fuel, ammunition and training and diverted it to 778 pet projects of their own!

Earmarks, they're called. I thought Obama was going to eliminate at best, or cut down on them at worst. Oh well.

How much are the troops being short changed here? According to The Washington Times $2.6 Billion. With a capital B !

Where is it going? Well, $25 million to a World War II Museum. Fitting isn't it? A museum dedicated to war long past with funds diverted from the one we are currently fighting.

Then there is $20 million for an "educational institute" to be named after Ted Kennedy in recognition for the years he spent on the Armed Services Committee where he fought to see that our troops received top notch equipment such as body armor and Humvees. How much body armor would that $20 million buy for our troops right now?

One Senator had 35 earmarks totalling more than $206 million while yet another had 48 worth $216 million. And we get $250.

Is there something wrong with this picture? What is the matter with these people? They huff and puff and try to justify these expenditures, which the military did not ask for nor want. Meanwhile combat pilots training to deploy are getting half the flying hours they got during the Vietnam war and tank crews get less training than during the Clinton administration when we were not at war!

If you honestly think these people are capable of reforming health care, overseeing climate change and reviving our economy, we'll never be on the same page.

Instead of hoping, week in and week out to no avail, that we might win the lottery, maybe I could just worm my way into a Senator's brain and chant 'fund medicare', 'fund the troops' or 'take a pay cut' until it becomes a pet project. Then we'd all be in fine shape.

In my dreams.

What A Way To Fight A War!

I would think after eight years in Afghanistan, we'd know what our objectives are. First it was al Qaeda, then the Taliban, then al Qaeda again. Let's not forget al Qaeda is holed up in Pakistan for the moment.

Whatever, the troops in country aren't enough to achieve much of anything other than getting maimed or killed. So the General asks for enough troops to accomplish whatever goal the President sets forth. When that decision is going to come is anyone's guess. No rush. We have several months yet. While the soldiers continue fighting a losing battle.

Even though Senate Majority Leader Reid says he and House Speaker Pelosi will be behind whatever the President decides, Mrs. Pelosi bristles at the assumption. Too many House Democrats are against sending in more troops.

Then there is the infighting among the National Security team with the Vice President pushing hard for reduced troops, more targeted attacks and the increased use of drones.

That will get Karzai all upset again when civilians are accidentally killed. Of course, he's stolen the election and is as corrupt as the day is long which makes one wonder why we even listen to him in the first place.

It seems like we aren't even sure why we're there at all. To prevent al Qaeda from returning to use it as a training ground? Well, as I said, for now they are in Pakistan. If they're pushed out of there they can move on to Somalia where they also have bases and followers. Are we going to keep invading country after country while they play hide and seek with us?

The President sure doesn't know. Every one he asks for advice is at odds with one another. Meanwhile the troops are staying the course as best they can. The upshot is their morale is rock bottom. They won't tell you but the Chaplin's will! You know what the biggest demoralising issue is? Not knowing what the mission is. What they are fighting for or trying to accomplish.

We sit here watching the debate over a massive health care overhaul. An effort to reduce costs, we're told. Think of the cost that's going to be incurred with the continual flow of the mentally and physically injured as a result of a war with out a cause! Stop the war. Watch health care costs plummet. I know I'd feel a whole lot better!

The War Within

If you have doubts as to who's running the country you need look no further than Nancy Pelosi. As third in line, she's sure showing she's got the toughness it takes.

The The Wall Street Journal headlines the fact the Pelosi is seeing reluctance in Congress to send additional troops to Afghanistan.

It interests me to watch this woman. In some instances she seems little more then an obstructionist. I guess it depends whether or not your on her side of the battle. She's as tough as nails and as cold as steel.

General McChrystal, the relatively new commander in Kabul was instructed by Secretary of Defense Gates to not ask for increased troops in his recent assessment of conditions. It was not timely. McChrystal acquiesced. It's coming now. Bear in mind this is the administration's hand picked commander. The President contends this is a "war of necessity" and it is escalating faster than a blink of the eye. A fair chunk of Congress does not agree, including a strong coalition of Democrats.

The problem might be that Congress was burned with the "War of Choice", as Obama portrays it, in Iraq, and are reluctant to get burned again by supporting the escalation of this one. Maybe they recognize we can't afford it. Maybe they recognize the dollar cost isn't worth the end game. Maybe they realize a strategy is a must. We can't afford another open ended conflict.

Many Americans are against it. The Russians failed and the British before them. We're short of resources; how can we possibly do better? We're still fighting an enemy who is besting us with far less than we have. Why is that? Is it because we're fighting in a conventional manner while the enemy is not?

We're seeing another battle of wills between the White House and Congress. This time, rather than butting heads with the Republican minority over health care, plus a few maverick Democrats that are giving them fits, they're facing strong opposition from within their own party! That does not bode well for the administration.

I think the country is just plain war weary. Whether it's domestic "war" against unpopular policies or fighting war in lands we know little about. We're weary of an economy that shows too few signs of improvement. We're weary of looking for jobs comparable to the ones we once held. We're weary of looking for jobs period. There's likely not to be any employers left to participate in Obama's grandiose health care schemes at the rate we're going. We're just plain weary of worrying.

We're most weary, however, of sending our young men and women off to war torn areas of our own making and having them not return. Ms. Pelosi may win this battle. The "war" however, is far from over.

Policy - Where's The Substance?

I'd like to think, above all, in his speech last night to Congress, President Obama was throwing down the gauntlet to Nancy Pelosi as well as chastising everyone else. The house bill is the only bill actually out there and what he described as what he expected, or assured, is far from H.R. 3200. For instance he assures us illegal aliens won't be covered, yet in H.R. 3200 they are.

Part of trying to do a great deal in a compressed time frame brings problems. Nothing really gets done, or if it does, it doesn't get done well. I won't rehash all the bailout deals, cash for clunkers, nor the stimulus program. All that has been speaking quite eloquently of their shortcomings for themselves.

I still have grave concerns about foreign policy. The Financial Times points out he has yet to take strong action on many of his campaign promises. The Afghanistan war is escalating and the death toll increases on a daily basis. More troops are to be requested for the "war of necessity". Yet, as is the case in Iraq, from where will they come? At one time Obama stressed that we must prevent al-Qaeda from regaining a stronghold yet recent press has us fighting the Taliban. They are not one and the same. Al-Qaeda is seeking safe haven, the Taliban seeks to run the country.

Secretary of Defense Gates states the US goal is to train Afghan security forces to take over and for us to recede to an advisory capacity. We see how well that's working in Iraq. Not so well.

Richard Holbrook, the President's special envoy to Afghanistan, says of U.S. "success", "We'll know it when we see it." Not exactly definitive!

In direct contrast to Gate's assessment, the U.S. has also dedicated itself to such goals as advancing women's rights, improving governance and cracking down on corruption and narcotics. Should this not be the roll of the U.S. Military, but rather the Afghan people themselves?

Pair that with an election fraught with fraud, it parallels the recent elections in Iran which returned a corrupt leader, and the powers behind him, to power. As for Iran, their nuclear ambitions are near fruition. What are we going to do?

Let's not forget Israel where Netenyahu has okayed new building in the West Bank in direct opposition to Obama's demands.

It's not looking good in the Middle East any more than it is on the health care front here at home. It is not only we citizens that are awaiting well grounded leadership rather than soaring rhetoric from the President. The whole world is waiting.