Our second subscription drive ended succesfully on Friday.  Our critical goal now is to build readership.  We're a young site and we simply must double or triple our readership to become stable.  Please e-mail or speak to friends and relatives about Urgent Agenda.  We're gratified by the readers who have done so, and sent us copies of their e-mails.  The more we build, the better our product.

-----------------------------------------------------

SNIPPETS, our daily collection of short items and comments, is here.

--------------------------------------------- 

Answers to the last "Current Question" are here. The new "Current Question" is here, in the right-hand column.

----------------------------------------------------

Audio commentaries are posted periodically.

I HAVE A NEW PIECE UP TODAY AT THE HUDSON NEW YORK WEBSITE.  IT'S CALLED "MEDIA MISCHIEF."  SHOULD YOU BE INTERESTED, GO HERE.

TODAY'S URGENT AGENDA QUOTE

"The left needs two things to survive. It needs mediocrity, and it needs dependence. It nurtures mediocrity in the public schools and the universities. It nurtures dependence through its empire of government programs. A nation that embraces mediocrity and dependence betrays itself, and can only fade away, wondering all the time what might have been."

- Urgent Agenda

TUESDAY,  NOVEMBER 11,  2008

TIME MARCHES ON

Posted at 8:26 p.m. ET

There are wack jobs, and then there are the kings and queens of the wackdom, one more wacked than the other.

With a hat tip to NewsBusters, a case in point:  One Nancy Gibbs of TIME.  She reports on Obama's election this way.  I'm not kidding:

Some princes are born in palaces. Some are born in mangers. But a few are born in the imagination, out of scraps of history and hope. Barack Obama never talks about how people see him: I'm not the one making history, he said every chance he got. You are. Yet as he looked out Tuesday night through the bulletproof glass, in a park named for a Civil War general, he had to see the truth on people's faces. We are the ones we've been waiting for, he liked to say, but people were waiting for him, waiting for someone to finish what a King began.

You have something to look forward to.  It gets worse:

Barack Hussein Obama did not win because of the color of his skin. Nor did he win in spite of it. He won because at a very dangerous moment in the life of a still young country, more people than have ever spoken before came together to try to save it. And that was a victory all its own.

This is high-school journalism.  But, look, we've come to accept it.

And who said this country needed to be saved?  Isn't that the language of fundamentalism, which reporters like Gibbs probably despises? 

He let loose a deep blue wave that washed well past the coasts and the college towns, into the South through Virginia and Florida, the Mountain West with Colorado and New Mexico, into the Ohio Valley and the Midwestern battlegrounds: you could almost walk from Maine to Minnesota without getting your feet wet in a red state. After months of mapmaking all the roads to 270, Obama tore right past with ease.

Ms. Gibbs, of course, would not bother our little heads with complications like the economic meltdown, in which Mr. Obama's party played a huge role through its Fannies and Freddies, nor would she admit that reporters like her played an equally huge role in boosting Obama every chance they could.

A nation doesn't much need a big President in small times; it needs one when the future is spitting out monsters. We've heard so much about Obama's brand-new voters that we easily forget the others he found, the ones who hadn't voted since Vietnam or who had never dreamed they'd vote for a black man or a liberal or a Democrat, much less all three. But many Americans are living through the worst decade of their lives, and they have anger-management issues.

The worst decade?  How about a decade, say, from 1935 to 1945, when many Americans went without shoes, then saw thousands of their brothers killed in a few days of Pacific or European battles?

This is just too embarrassing.  Journalism needs a maturity bailout.

UPDATE AT 8:28 P.M. ET:  From Adweek:  NEW YORK With a handful of higher-ups already out the door, Time Inc. is moving to the rank-and-file as it, like other publishers, seeks to reduce its workforce in the face of dropping ad revenue.  Some of Time Inc.’s biggest magazines have put out the call for at least 83 volunteers to take buyouts, according to memos and staffers at the company.

COMMENT:  I have a nomination.  See the previous paragraphs.

November 11, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 7:20 P.M. ET:  From The Politico:   President-elect Barack Obama wants a high-profile point person to oversee reforms in the ailing auto industry, according to members of Obama’s transition team.  Specifics about the proposal remain unclear. But the transition team says Obama suggested to President Bush on Monday that aid to the auto industry could be coupled with the appointment of “someone in charge of the auto issue who would have the authority” to push for reforms. The details came from a more extended readout of the White House meeting provided Tuesday.

COMMENT:  Does the auto industry need reform?  To quote a recent candidate, you betcha.  Should the government be overseeing these reforms?  There's the rub.  Basically that's a huge step toward socialism.  It is a terrible precedent.  And yet, if the industry gets the federal bailout it wants, the American people will insist that the money is wisely spent.  What we have here is the collision of two bad things - the Democratic Party's urge to control the universe from Washington, and the auto industry's history of sloth, cynicism and lack of imagination.  But what change can we really believe in?

FURTHER UPDATE AT 7:25:  WASHINGTON -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she will push legislation next week to help the ailing auto industry.  "I am confident Congress can consider emergency assistance legislation next week during a lame-duck session, and I hope the Bush Administration would support it," the California Democrat said in a statement.

COMMENT:  We are heading into the unknown here.  Careful, Nancy. 

UPDATE AT 4:49 P.M. ET:  The Dow closed down about 176.  Remember that we are now entering the Thanksgiving/Christmas season.  If retail sales are in the tank, that could accelerate a market drop.  Also, if the auto industry continues on a crash course, that will dramatically affect the market.  Mr. Obama better have some plans ready, even if they give his left wing a group coronary.

UPDATE AT 12:47 P.M. ET:  Nov. 11 (Bloomberg) -- Crude oil fell below $59 a barrel in New York for the first time since March 2007, and gasoline tumbled, on speculation the International Energy Agency will cut its 2009 oil-demand forecast because of slowing economic growth.

COMMENT:  Always look for the silver lining, even if it's soaked with oil.

UPDATE AT 12:07 A.M. ET:  The headline at Drudge says it all: 

BUSH ANGER:  OBAMA AIDES LEAK CHAT DETAILS.

It is a longstanding tradition that talks between the president and the incoming president be strictly private.  Please note that, last week, Obama had a phone talk with the president of Poland, after which Obama's talkative "aides" contradicted a public statement about the talk by the Polish president.  This was a diplomatic flap, although the in-the-tank media barely noticed, still drunk on its racial obsessions. 

Now we have this.  It bespeaks a certain arrogance by the incoming administration.  These are not people who respect tradition or propriety.  The signs are not good.  We still hope Mr. Obama can rein in the bulls around him, and that his cabinet appointments will reflect thoughtfulness, not vindictiveness.  He knows he has the press on his side, and that may lead to miscalculation and adventurism. 

Mr. Obama should call Mr. Bush to apologize, just as he had to apologize to Nancy Reagan for an off-the-cuff remark last week.  Of course, after a time the apologies can wear thin. 

Not good, not good.

UPDATE AT 11:47 A.M. ET:  The Dow is off 252.  There is now serious talk of a possible bankruptcy for General Motors.

PATRIOTISM

Posted at 7:45 a.m. ET

It is Veterans Day.  Sad to say, for too many of our countrymen Veterans Day is a time for good store sales.  It is especially upsetting when young people, some of whose peers are on fighting fronts today, have little notion of the meaning of the day.

I looked for something appropriate to quote, and, ironically, found it in a British newspaper, the Daily Express.  Consider, and contemplate:

The question was put to me with stark simplicity. “What was it all for?” asked the elderly lady, a wistful look in her eyes.

“The country that they died for has gone,” she continued, glancing down at the red poppy on her lapel.

Do we not sometimes have that same feeling here?

She explained that she had lost close relatives in both World Wars and as a teenager had endured the horrors of the Blitz. Mixed with her admiration for family heroes who had lost their lives in conflict, she also felt utter despair at the state of Britain and a profound sense of betrayal.

That is what happens when things we used to call "constant values" stop being constant.

Her insistent question – “What was it all for?” – has also been echoing through my mind as I research a book about Bomber Command during the Second World War. It mounted perhaps the most bloody and dangerous British offensive of the conflict, as crews of the heavy bombers flew night after night over Germany through vicious flak from the ground and from Luftwaffe fighters.

Long-term chances of survival were minimal. More than half of all men who served in air crews were killed in action.

But...

They died for their nation but that nation barely exists any more. It has been destroyed by the politicians, its sovereignty handed over to an unelected continental bureaucracy, its economy sold off to foreign interests, its heritage traduced or ignored...

This is a warning to us, isn't it?

...what is largely missing today is a respect for that instinctive devotion to Britain which inspired so many millions to take up arms in defence of our country. Patriotism is now a dirty word in too many of our civic institutions, where the Union flag is seen as an offensive symbol of xenophobia and the national anthem is hopelessly uncool.

And...

It is precisely because the political elite has lost all grasp of British patriotism that our nation is now so fragmented and purposeless, a place without a soul, our once green and pleasant land swallowed up by mass development, our justice system left in tatters by the imported human-rights culture.

And the "human-rights culture" often has little to do with real human rights.

During my research, the most moving passages I uncovered were the memories of bomber pilots who flew back British POWs from Germany just after VE day.

All of them said that, as the planes approached the white cliffs of Dover, the ex-prisoners would alternately cheer or weep.

Today, in a nation that has lost its history, the white cliffs have no such resonance. 

The American nation, last week, turned its back on a former POW who has served his country with distinction.  We understand the reasons, and we accept the outcome.  But I find it disturbing that so few commentators were gracious enough, at the moment of his defeat, to pay some small tribute to what John McCain and his family have given to this country.  We make that mistake at our peril, and the peril for this nation and its heritage is growing day by day.

November 11, 2008.      Permalink          

BAMWATCH - DAY 1

Posted at 7:04 a.m. ET

We are informed by a variety of sources that the president-elect hopes to reverse most of the Bush administration by a series of executive orders.

That is his prerogative, I suppose, but it can turn out to be a terrible mistake.  A new president has two constituencies - his party, and the nation.  (This president-elect seems to have added a third - something called "the world."  We pray he soon outgrows that.)

By every survey taken, we've learned that the American people, last week, did not vote to repeal the Reagan era.  They may favor certain actions the new president takes through executive order, but they may easily see others as payoffs to the interest groups that make up the Democratic Party's base.  They may also see some orders as imperious and arrogant, a reinforcement of Obama's overinflated belief in his own goodness.

There is something solid and ratifying about the legislative process, even in the hands of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, the king and queen of creativity.  The American people like the idea of open debate, and a vote by their representatives.  There is a legitimacy that an executive order, especially one dealing with a controversial subject, normally lacks.

One item apparently on Mr. Obama's agenda would restrict offshore drilling still again.  Brilliant, isn't it?  Just as the price of gasoline is going down, to the relief of the nation, the president would send a signal that we're not serious about developing our own resources.  This would bring warmth to the hearts of assorted mullahs, princes and other managerial types, and the price of gas at the pump would shoot up again.  Before signing such an executive order, to appease radical environmental groups, Mr. Obama might consider the meaning of such terms as "political suicide," "approval rating," and "one-term president."

November 11, 2008.      Permalink          

 

 

MONDAY,  NOVEMBER 10,  2008

UPDATE AT 8:20 P.M. ET:  WASHINGTON (AP) -- Michelle Obama visited at least two well-known private schools Monday as she and President-elect Obama prepare to move their two young daughters to the White House in January.

COMMENT:  No public schools for the Obamas, unlike those peasants who voted for The One.  What will the teachers' unions say?
 

REAGAN LIVES!

Posted at 7:34 p.m. ET

He does live, at least according to Scott Rasmussen, who emerged from the election with one of the most accurate polling records.  Ras is surrounded by a glow.

Rasmussen tries to throw some accuracy at the fantasies that have emerged on the left about the balloting.  No, we apparently did not provide a Marxist mandate.

Barack Obama won the White House by campaigning against an unpopular incumbent in a time of economic anxiety and lingering foreign policy concerns. He offered voters an upbeat message, praised the nation as a land of opportunity, promised tax cuts to just about everyone, and overcame doubts about his experience with a strong performance in the presidential debates.

Does this sound familiar? It should. Mr. Obama followed the approach that worked for Ronald Reagan. His victory confirmed that voters still embrace the guiding beliefs of the Reagan era.

Just don't tell that to the Daily Kos.  Those are sensitive, unstable people over there. Please do no harm.

Mr. Obama's tax-cutting message played a key role in this period of economic anxiety. Tax cuts are well-received at such times: 55% of voters believe they are good for the economy. Only 19% disagree and see them as bad policy.

Down the campaign homestretch, Mr. Obama's tax-cutting promise became his clearest policy position. Eventually he stole the tax issue from the Republicans. Heading into the election, 31% of voters thought that a President Obama would cut their taxes. Only 11% expected a tax cut from a McCain administration.

Are you listening, Republicans?  Or are you going through Sarah Palin's wardrobe, looking for things to return?

The last Democratic candidate to win the tax issue was also the last Democratic president -- Bill Clinton. In fact, the candidate who most credibly promises the lowest level of taxes has won every presidential election in at least the last 40 years.

I repeat the question:  Are you listening, Republicans?

A Rasmussen survey conducted Oct. 2 found that 59% agreed with the sentiment expressed by Reagan in his first inaugural address: "Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem." Just 28% disagreed with this sentiment. That survey also found that 44% of Obama voters agreed with Reagan's assessment (40% did not). And McCain voters overwhelmingly supported the Gipper.

America lives, America lives.

The real challenge for the new president will be attempting to govern with a message that resonates with most voters but divides his own party. Consider that 43% of voters view it as a positive to describe a candidate as being like Reagan, while just 26% consider it a negative. Being compared to Reagan rates higher among voters than being called "conservative," "moderate," "liberal" or "progressive." Except among Democrats, that is. Fifty-one percent of Democrats view that Reagan comparison as a negative. There's Mr. Obama's dilemma in a nutshell.

You mean, The One has problems?   But a saint can't have problems, can he?

Mr. Obama won the White House promising tax cuts, but he will be governing with a Democratic Congress bursting with desire for a more activist government. As he faces this challenge, he might remember the fate of another man who made taxes the central part of his campaign: the first President Bush, whose most memorable campaign line -- "Read my lips, no new taxes" -- was as central to his victory as Mr. Obama's promise to cut taxes for 95% of Americans. George H.W. Bush famously reneged on that promise. Voters rejected his bid for a second term.

Maybe the president-elect should sit down with Nancy, Harry and the gang, and they can all read Scott Rasmussen's column together, chanting certain parts where appropriate.  Then maybe they'd learn.  I doubt it.

November 10, 2008.      Permalink          

ALERT AT 7:01 P.M. ET:  From an Australian paper, presented with caution.  This cannot be confirmed, but I thought it wise to pass it on with that understanding: 

Osama bin Laden is planning an attack against the United States that will "outdo by far" September 11, an Arab newspaper in London has reported.

And according to a former senior Yemeni al-Qaeda operative, the terrorist organisation has entered a "positive phase", reinforcing specific training camps around the world that will lead the next "wave of action" against the West.

The warning, on the front page of an Arabic newspaper published in London, Al-Quds Al-Arabi - and widely reported in the major Italian papers - quotes a person described as being "very close to al-Qaeda" in Yemen.

We are, I'm afraid, not paying attention.

SHOCKING REVELATION AT 3:39 P.M. ET:   Investigators from the International Atomic Energy Agency, which works under the auspices of the United Nations, have found traces of enriched uranium in Syria, a potential sign that the country had been attempting to develop a nuclear program, Reuters quoted diplomats familiar with the IAEA investigation as saying.

According to Monday's report, the uranium was discovered at the same site which was allegedly bombed by IAF jets in September 2007.

COMMENT:  Allegedly bombed?  Who's denying it?  And aren't you shocked by the accusation that Syria would have a secret program?  I think the whole thing was made up by Joe Lieberman.

SCARE STORY AT 3:28 P.M. ET:  Real Clear World, which is a division of Real Clear Politics, is handicapping the possible picks for secretary of state.  RCW ranks them, in ascending order of probability:

5.  Rand Beers
4.  Richard Lugar
3.  Richard Holbrooke
2.  Bill Richardson
1.  John Kerry

Kerry is their favorite, and RCW notes earlier speculation that Kerry endorsed Obama in exchange for the State slot. 

Frankly, picking Kerry would be a farce.  That's just what we need in a sensitive post - an embittered former presidential candidate who seeks vindication and revenge.  And just think of the overseas stories on Kerry, reminding readers that he once denounced his fellow soldiers in Vietnam.  That should immediately endear him to every Marxist teaching assistant at European colleges. 

Kerry has just been reelected to the Senate from Massachusetts.  A day after the vote he expressed public interest in an Obama job offer.  The contempt this shows for his constituents is breathtaking.  But they don't seem to care.  They press that Democratic lever the way a baby goes for a milk bottle, which is a reasonable comparison.

Kerry at State?  Me to the bomb shelter.

WHAT?  SHE SPEAKS?

Posted at 3:02 p.m. ET

There is shock and dismay in the media world today as it was learned that Sarah Palin actually speaks, and can do so without a script.   Reports say that Charlie Gibson has reevaluated his life and cleaned his glasses, and that Katie Couric has promised a demeanor as humble as her ratings.

But, 'tis true.  The Alaska governor has been speaking out, without her minders from the McCain staff.  And you know, the woman is coherent, intelligent and makes a lot of sense.  It won't convince anyone at Yale, but America may see a lot more of her, and may like what they see.  The Politico reports:

“I think the Republican ticket represented too much of the status quo, too much of what had gone on in these last eight years, that Americans were kind of shaking their heads like going, wait a minute, how did we run up a $10 trillion debt in a Republican administration? How have there been blunders with war strategy under a Republican administration?” Palin said.

Okay, maybe she should polish up the grammar, but she makes more sense than a lot of the Ph.D's who are teaching our kids.

Looking back on the race, the Alaska governor said that she was “frustrated” by misinformation spread about her, especially related to her family.

“Some of the goofy things, like who was Trig's mom. Well, I'm Trig's mom, and do you want to see my medical records to prove that? And banning books. That was a ridiculous thing also that could have so easily been corrected just by a reporter taking an extra step and not basing a report on gossip or speculation,” Palin said.

“Just looking into the record. It was reported that I tried to ban Harry Potter when it hadn't even been written when I was the mayor. So, gosh, we have so many examples, I mean every day, especially the first few weeks, every day something that was thrown out there.”

I'm glad to see she's finally fighting back.  She will probably do a book, and I'd imagine it will be a major seller.  Maybe the defeat was a blessing in disguise, although, as Churchill said after his 1945 loss, the disguise is very thick indeed.

Asked about running for the Republican nomination in 2012, the Alaska governor seemed cool to the prospect, pointing out that current polling showing favorable prospects in a potential GOP primary field are likely to shift.

“Look how fickle poll numbers are,” Palin said. “Look where I've gone, up and down, up and down, even in the state of Alaska the last couple of months. We can't pay attention to those numbers.”

Everything will depend on how well Obama does, and how Palin performs as governor and media star over the next four years.  She is not permitting herself to be punched into submission, and that is good.

November 10, 2008.       Permalink          

WE ARE CLEANSED

Posted at 5:45 a.m. ET

There is arrogance and there is extreme arrogance.  Ever since Mr. Obama's election we've had a flood of arrogant, self-righteous, preciously pompous statements coming from spokesmen all over the world, and from self-proclaimed intellectuals.  They inform us that they are pleased, that we have passed one of their "global" tests, that some of us, those who voted right, are welcome back to the bosom of civilization.  We are told that Mr. Obama has restored our soul, a soul that many of these presumptuous yakkers never found in the first place.

There has to be a prize for arrogance.  There are prizes for everything.  For first prize I humbly nominate Desmond Tutu, once a hero in the South African resistance movement, but in recent decades a man for whom democracy and dictatorship seemed roughly equal.  Bishop Tutu condescends to comment, and finds America on the mend.

CAPE TOWN I am rubbing my eyes in disbelief and wonder. It can't be true that Barack Obama, the son of a Kenyan, is the next president of the United States.

Yeah.  True.  We're takin' it pretty much in stride.  Notice no riots in American streets.

...for those of us who have looked to America for inspiration as we struggled for democracy and human rights, these past seven years have been lean ones.

When have you ever struggled for human rights, except in your own country?  And have you noticed that Iraq is now a democracy, extremism is being battled in Afghanistan, Libya has given up its WMD programs, and Muslims come and go in America without harassment?  What's lean about that? 

A few days after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, we had our first shock, hearing your president respond not with the statesmanlike demeanor we had come to expect from a U.S. head of state but like a Western gunslinger. Later, it seemed that much of American society was following his lead.

A few days after September 11th, Bishop Tutu, the BBC was on the air with vicious, anti-American programming.  President Bush was attending a mosque and assuring Muslims that this was not a war against them.  And precisely what "demeanor" did you expect, in the face of an attack that killed more Americans than Pearl Harbor?

When war began, first in Afghanistan and not long after in Iraq, we read allegations of prisoner abuse at Bagram air base in Afghanistan and of rendition to countries notorious for practicing torture. We saw the horrific images from Abu Ghraib and learned of gruesome acts performed in the name of gathering information. Sometimes the torture itself was couched in the government's euphemisms -- calling waterboarding an "interrogation technique."

When war began, Bishop?  How about, when war was forced on us?  And do you have anything to say about the regime of Saddam Hussein?  Any human-rights concern there?  You seem to criticize the United States and Israel, and that's about it.

The Bush administration has riled people everywhere. Its bully-boy attitude has sadly polarized our world.

Against all this, the election of Barack Obama has turned America's image on its head. My wife was crying with incredulity and joy as we watched a broadcast of the celebrations in Chicago. A newspaper here ran a picture of Obama from an earlier trip to one of our townships, where he was mobbed by youngsters. It was tacitly saying that we are proud he once visited us.

Precisely who has President Bush bullied?  Name that person or country.  And why do you assume that "human rights" will have a better outing under Mr. Obama? 

The fact that Obama's Kenyan grandfather was a convert to Islam may -- shamefully -- have been controversial in parts of the United States, but elsewhere in the world, Obama's multi-faith heritage is an inspiration.

This is particularly disgusting.  What "parts of the United States" are you referring to?  What is that a code phrase for?  Devout Christians?  Jews?  Southerners?  Do you have anything to say about the treatment of minorities in Muslim countries?  I guess not.

In the midst of this celebration, however, a word of caution is appropriate. In the first days after 9/11, the United States had the world's sympathy, an unprecedented wave of it. President Bush squandered it.

One of the great myths.  The "sympathy" for the United States lasted a few days, at most.  It didn't take much time for the international left, of which Tutu is a part, to start explaining the "root cause" of the attacks.  The universities revved up almost immediately.  The root cause, of course, was us.

Among other things on Tutu's laundry list for Obama, is this:

And it would be wonderful if, on behalf of the nation, he would apologize to the world, and especially the Iraqis, for an invasion that I believe has turned out to be an unmitigated disaster.

Apologize?  How would that go down with the millions of Iraqis who are now permitted to vote, for the first time in their lives?  Of course, who needs democracy when you have Desmond Tutu to guide you?

Obama's election has given Americans the message that hope is viable, that change is really possible.

My friend, we have always had hope and change here.  It's nothing new to us.  I have no idea what history books you like to read, but they're the wrong ones.

His (Obama's) triumph can help the world reach the point where we realize that we are all caught up in a delicate network of interdependence, unable to celebrate fully our own heritage and place in the world, unable to realize our full potential as human beings, unless everyone else, everywhere else, can do the same.

But when President Bush spoke in precisely these terms, you opposed him.  We have long memories.

Now you know why Desmond Tutu gets first prize for arrogance.

November 10, 2008.      Permalink          

TOUGH GOING

Posted at 5:40 a.m. ET

Urgent Agenda has some awfully good sources.  One of them is an American currently traveling in Asia, with first-hand knowledge of American and Asian affairs.  He has sent us a detailed letter, based on observations and discussions in Afghanistan.  It is quite a remarkable analysis, and we present a section of it here.  This is important, and grim:

Why am I so pessimistic?

NATO.  This system is not working.  I know you have read about it, but it is something altogether to observe at close range that lack of seriousness and commitment displayed by our NATO "brothers."  It goes beyond national caveats that will not allow certain countries to fully participate in necessary operations.  Some NATO countries come here merely to punch tickets, serving in very short rotations (4-6 months) mostly in safe regions and staying as much as possible in safe, fortress-like facilities. Their nations get credit for supporting NATO, but they are doing very little to advance the cause here...

Leadership.  The Afghans lack it, at least the sort of leadership that holds nations together and allows complex organizations to function.  The military is a good example.  The individual Afghan soldier is a formidable fighter, brave and committed.  Unfortunately, this is not enough.  To lead, organize, train and equip an army that is going to soon exceed 100,000 soldiers, you need people who have time horizons that exceed the next ten minutes.  I am exaggerating for effect, of course, but sometimes it does seem that way.    Afghans must attain the ability to run logistics systems, plan large-scale operations, oversee campaigns that will cover months and even years and train and empower the successors who will have to execute them...

American "can-do."  We all know the famous T.E. Lawrence quote that says it is better for the native to do it poorly than for the outsider to do it well.   We put this in our literature and we hang it on our walls, but we surely do not follow it.  We do EVERYTHING for them.  We will not allow them to fail.  It is not in our nature or our training to allow them to fail.  We constantly step in to bail them out, allowing Afghan muscles to atrophy by always stepping in to carry the load.  And this will certainly get worse as the same inadequate leaders are left in charge of a larger and larger Army...

Ethnic divisions.  I believe the ethnic divisions and historical grievances are much deeper than we would like to believe.  Afghans know they must sing the right songs about ethnic diversity to keep the billions flowing.   I have detected hints that these divisions will not be healed in the short time we are here.  They took thousands of years to develop and a decade of semi-peace will not paper them over.  I suspect that within a year of America's inevitable departure they will flare up violently, undoing much of the good we have tried to bring them...  

Drugs.  Though narcotics bring in only a pittance, it is their only pittance. And you can disregard any harsh words coming out of NATO, asserting a new willingness to attack the nexus between the drug market and the insurgency.  This has always been the policy, but the international community has always been too squeamish to execute it.  95% of the world's heroin supply comes from Afghanistan and it touches and corrupts every aspect of Afghan civil life.  No one here as the political will or incentive to do anything about it...

Pakistan.  The Pakistanis can do almost nothing about the sanctuaries from which attacks are more and more frequently being launched into Afghanistan.  They are about to be insolvent, rejecting IMF stipulations for further support.  The ISI (Pakistani intelligence) is allied with Pashtun warlords who benefit from uncertainty and unrest along the Afghan border...

So, some influential voices will be arguing that since Afghanistan will never be a nation...why should we continue to pour troops and soldiers into a losing proposition?  Instead, why not simply use special forces to decimate the leadership of the most dangerous of the terrorist organizations..?

The problem is that this shift could be labeled a NATO failure and preclude any future serious or threat of use of NATO power.  In the face of a rejuvenated and cantankerous Russia, could our president (no matter how naive) allow this?  Possibly not.  I think this will be the main reason that the Petraeus/McKiernan plan to introduce new units will be approved.

It is discouraging.  We're getting more and more reports like this every day.  Mr. Obama has a huge task in Afghanistan.  He doesn't seem to have much of a plan.

November 10, 2008.      Permalink