Remembering Pearl Harbor

A good clip featuring people who were at Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941.

Surrender

Whoa.

This is a huge shift in foreign policy:

AP: President Barack Obama is prepared to accept some Taliban involvement in Afghanistan's political future and appears inclined to send only as many more U.S. troops as needed to keep al-Qaida at bay, a senior administration official said Thursday.

The sharpened focus by Obama's team on fighting al-Qaida above all other goals, while downgrading the emphasis on the Taliban, comes in the midst of an intensely debated administration review of the increasingly unpopular eight-year-old war.

McChrystal wants troops. The President doesn't want to send them. Solution? Don't declare the war's over - declare an enemy isn't an enemy.

As for the "increasingly unpopular war" stuff, it doesn't always mean what the media wants it to mean. If they mean "increasingly unpopular and pull out now," they're wrong. If they mean "increasingly unpopular with the way it's being fought," then they're on the money.

Eight years ago, the Taliban provided a haven for fanatical religious thugs to get boned up on how to shoot guns and knock down buildings. Eight years later, the US is prepared have them involved in Afghanistan's political future. Spin it any way you want, but this action only has one label: surrender.

Time: Last month, Taliban fighters in Kunduz, in northern Afghanistan, hijacked two NATO fuel tankers. The robbery escalated into an international incident because NATO aircraft, following a German request, bombed the two stranded tankers while civilians were siphoning free fuel. The death toll — more than 125 Afghans perished, nearly half of them civilians — overshadowed the gruesome fact that the Taliban had beheaded one of the tanker drivers. Beheadings and killings of NATO supply drivers are a common occurrence, according to several private security contractors.

Wonderful ally, that Taliban. Man, the outlook for the political future in Afghanistan looks pretty good, huh?

The Bus Idles - McChrystal

From the Telegraph:

According to sources close to the administration, Gen McChrystal shocked and angered presidential advisers with the bluntness of a speech given in London last week.

The next day he was summoned to an awkward 25-minute face-to-face meeting on board Air Force One on the tarmac in Copenhagen, where the president had arrived to tout Chicago's unsuccessful Olympic bid...

Word is the president is furious over McChrystal's speech. A taste:

[McChrystal] told the Institute of International and Strategic Studies that the formula, which is favoured by Vice-President Joe Biden, would lead to "Chaos-istan".

When asked whether he would support it, he said: "The short answer is: No."

He went on to say: "Waiting does not prolong a favorable outcome. This effort will not remain winnable indefinitely, and nor will public support."

That may be, General, but it isn't your problem. Your problem is to follow orders from your civilian commanders. Public support and long term strategy are concerns of the president. Your job is to carry out orders until you retire or get canned.

I may agree with McChrystal's assessment, but you can't have a military commander mouthing off in another country about how much smarter he is than the president. It smacks of insubordination and brings up memories of MacArthur vs. Truman. Didn't end so well for MacArthur.

One more speech like this and expect the bus to arrive for McChrystal.