Af-Pakistan on brink-- of what?
When the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs goes to Pakistan and the Defense Secretary to Afghanistan on the same day, as they did yesterday, you have to know they are either mighty worried or up to something big.
Which is it?
Realism says these twin problems are thorny enough we couldn't possibly be thinking of launching another war. But Cheney and Bush have never been limited by "reality". They make their own. Their goal never was to "win" any of these wars, or install stable governments, but simply to weaken every state that might be a threat to Israel, the final one being Iran.
They have 120 days to get Osama dead or alive.
Nah, usefully only 47.
Helena,
The Independent lets drop the other shoe:
US seeking sole command of Nato's war against the Taliban
Western allies risk public backlash if Washington commands troops
I am sure, as Jefferson above has said, that the simultaneous visits are to do with the plan to put everything under US home command. I marvel at this plan, typical US. To the extent in fact that I wonder whether it is 100% true.
I couldn't imagine anything that would go down worse with the NATO allies than to insist on US home command, not even a US commander in Afghanistan.
However, in the present atmosphere, I would doubt that they would refuse openly. More likely prevaricate, but never actually say that they would refuse US command.
However this story is single source, I think, and whatever the qualities of the Independent, we need to have confirmation.
The Unacknowledged Author of Our Imperial Happiness
"Yet on the most consequential issue of Bush's second term, as most of the administration remained wedded to a losing strategy of handing control as quickly as possible to an incapable Iraqi army, HADLEY pushed for change -- for a counterinsurgency strategy that would provide enough security, especially in Baghdad, to give political reconciliation a chance.
"Hadley wasn't alone in his insight. Sens. John McCain and Joe Lieberman, former senator Chuck Robb, NSC staffer Meghan O'Sullivan, strategist Frederick Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute, retired Army general Jack Keane and a few others were pushing in the same direction. Eventually it would take the new leadership of Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker in Iraq to translate opportunity into actual strategy.
"It was HADLEY, though, who made something happen."
==
Cf. P. Lang , who attributes that unsigned Washington Post editorial of 15 September 2008 to "Fred Hiatt, the neocon editor of the Post's editorial page."
Mr. Lang also talks about blissful prospects in Central Asia:
"[T]he supply crisis that has long been dreaded in Iraq is upon us in Afghanistan. NATO forces in Afghanistan are inadequate. The outgoing NATO commander says that 400,000 men are needed. Where such forces would be found is anyone's guess."
Happy days. (And gettin’ happier all the time, by gum!)
So now we know
More Brits to Afghanistan
Funny enough they were reporting that half the Army wants to resign becasue of overstretch a couple of days ago.
When shakin' their bustles like ladies so fine,
The guns o' the enemy wheel into line,
Shoot low at the limbers an' don't mind the shine,
For noise never startles the soldier.
Start-, start-, startles the soldier . . .
If your officer's dead and the sergeants look white,
Remember it's ruin to run from a fight:
So take open order, lie down, and sit tight,
And wait for supports like a soldier.
Wait, wait, wait like a soldier . . .
When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
An' go to your Gawd like a soldier.
Voting with the feet
More Brits to Afghanistan
Ah yes, Frank, I am sure you are right, but your link is no proof. An article in the Telegraph, of all papers, citing only Robert Gates, hardly a disinterested party.
Alex
Looks like the MoD preempting.
They got away with a few helicopters, as far as we know.