U turns only

from the london times online.

seems the lincoln of our times is going to continue to delay acting on general mccrystal's request for more troops in afghanistan. according to times reporter jenny booth, and white house chief of staff rahm emmanuel, THE ONE does not yet want to make a decision, as the result of afghanistans election is unclear, and they don't feel the country has a "credible government''.

emmanuel appeared on CNN's state of the union and said, it's not “how many troops you send, but [whether] you have a credible Afghan partner for this process that can provide the security and the type of services that the Afghan people need”. rahm further said ,"the end result must be a legitimate and credible government to the Afghan people. That’s what’s important. It’s the Afghans making a decision about what type of government they’re going to have and what road they’re going to take to that point.”

appearing to echo emmanuel was a true genius in all matters military, john "reporting for duty" kerry, (he's a viet nam vet). lurch said, "It would be entirely irresponsible for the president of the United States to commit more troops to this country when we don’t even have an election finished and know who the president is and what kind of government we’re working with," said mr. kerry in an interview from kabul. “When our own commanding general tells us that a critical component of achieving our mission here is, in fact, good governance, and we’re living with a government that we know has to change and provide it, how could the president responsibly say, ‘Oh, they asked for more. Sure, here they are?’.


i only have two, really three questions here; 1.) why is it critical for afghanistan to have a , "credible, legitimate government", when it can be argued we don't have one here at home? 2.) is it just me or does anyone else see an" illegal war" being fought by us in pakistan? isn't this something botox john bitched about after his tour in viet nam/cambodia/laos. DO NOT get me wrong, if al quada can be found hiding across the border, and we send a couple hellfires up their ass, i see no harm. i'm just saying where is the MSM on all the civilian casualties they cried soooo loudly about during W's administration?
3.) how disingenuous is it for us to tell afghanistan how to run their elections, and how to interpret the results, but sit on the side lines as iran and venezuela fucked their people through electoral fraud?

i thought the president agreed to send 13,000 troops earlier in the month, but i guess he backtracked on another promise, again. i have figured out a new strategy for dealing with b. huessein, however. get him to tell you no to something you want, then when he reverses himself, you get what you were looking for in the first place.