Mobile version

The Talking Point Puppet

by: Magnifico

Thu Oct 02, 2008 at 23:43:41 PDT        
| More


(11 am. - promoted by ek hornbeck)

So in the 2008 vice presidential debate, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin said:

Well , first, McClellan did not say definitively the surge principles would not work in Afghanistan. Certainly, accounting for different conditions in that different country and conditions are certainly different. We have NATO allies helping us for one and even the geographic differences are huge but the counterinsurgency principles could work in Afghanistan. McClellan didn't say anything opposite of that. The counterinsurgency strategy going into Afghanistan, clearing, holding, rebuilding, the civil society and the infrastructure can work in Afghanistan. And those leaders who are over there, who have also been advising George Bush on this have not said anything different but that.

And you know, she's absolutely correct. However, she is only correct because she blew the name of the commanding general in Afghanistan.
Magnifico :: The Talking Point Puppet
Here's a portrait of General George McClellan taken in 1861.

Now, I'm not a U.S. civil war historian, but I suspect it is highly unlikely that McClellan ever said or wrote anything about Afghanistan. Not in 1862 when President Abraham Lincoln relieved him of command. Not in 1864 when he ran against Lincoln for president. Not when he served as New Jersey's governor from 1878 to 1881. And, probably not before he died in 1885.

But, despite Palin being absolutely correct in saying McClellan didn't say anything about the surge not working in Afghanistan, NATO commanding general in Afghanistan, General David McKiernan did say this week, "Afghanistan is not Iraq... What I don't think is needed -- the word I don't use in Afghanistan is the word surge."

Palin's name gaffe caught Senator Joe Biden flatfooted. After she babbled off that bit of nonsense, debate moderator Gwen Ifill turned to him for a response. Biden paused and looked down to mask his disbelief. A second or two passed and Ifill asked "Senator?"

I wonder what was going on in Biden's mind then? I think he was trying to decide if he should correct Palin or not. Ultimately he chose not to, responding — "Well, our commanding general did say that." — and then went on to explain that like Gen. McKiernan, he and Barack Obama have been calling for "more money to help in Afghanistan, more troops in Afghanistan".

"The additional military capabilities that have been asked for are needed as quickly as possible," McKiernan said on Wednesday. Even with an escalation, or troop surge, McKiernan said, "ultimately, the solution in Afghanistan is going to be a political solution not a military solution." He did not rule-out talks with the Taliban in order to resolve the conflict. "So the idea that the government of Afghanistan will take on the idea of reconciliation, I think, is (an) approach and we'll be there to provide support within our mandate," he said.

In his response, Biden added, "John McCain was saying two years ago quote, 'The reason we don't read about Afghanistan anymore in the paper, it's succeeded.'"  As Gen. McKiernan this week described Afghanistan as an increasingly "tough fight". He and many others before him said the war in Afghanistan is not over. Obama has described Iraq as a distraction and by leading the nation into a war of choice in Iraq, George W. Bush has allowed the Taliban and al Qaeda forces to regroup and wage war in Afghanistan. As Biden said in his response, "We spend in three weeks on combat missions in Iraq, more than we spent in the entire time we have been in Afghanistan."

Now, personally I think the invasion of Afghanistan was the wrong action to take after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. But now, the U.S. and our NATO allies are involved in a worsening war there. Obama's strategy is a departure from the approach taken by Bush and McCain because it refocuses the American military on Afghanistan and not the distraction that is Iraq.

Palin and her running mate can advocate an escalation in Afghanistan all they want. But despite Palin hitting the McCain campaign talking points, by getting wrong the name of our commanding general there, she has proven once again that she really is uninformed and clueless. Being able to recite talking points does not make a person qualified to be vice president. Rather, that makes a person qualified to be a puppet.

Somehow, I do not believe John McCain is pulling the strings.

 
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

The Talking Point Puppet | 26 comments
The Civil War (4.00 / 14)
Now, I feel like watching the Ken Burns documentary again.
Maybe there was a limit on the number of note cards... (4.00 / 11)
...like in college, so she (or someone) had to write really small.

I bet-cha.

When all is said and done, what really matters is whether or not you are happy.

[ Parent ]
So just who... (4.00 / 2)
is pulling the strings.

My guess:
That would be Dick Cheney &/or Karl R$ove.

The fierce urgency of now.  Martin

[ Parent ]
Seward's Dolly (4.00 / 10)


All that campaign cash buys a lot of stupid.
She's mocking McCain (4.00 / 9)
Doesn't she know he was a prisoner of war and that's why his face has ticks?
[ Parent ]
LOL (4.00 / 7)
That's Photoshopped, right?

One function of the income gap is that the people at the top of the heap have a hard time even seeing those at the bottom. They practically need a telescope.--Molly Ivins
[ Parent ]
Nope (4.00 / 7)
Straight shot from AP.

All that campaign cash buys a lot of stupid.
[ Parent ]
OMFG (4.00 / 5)
Really?  (OK, not doubting you...just OMFG).  Holy shit.

She looks...unreal.  

One function of the income gap is that the people at the top of the heap have a hard time even seeing those at the bottom. They practically need a telescope.--Molly Ivins

[ Parent ]
What's next? Kissing booth fundraisers? (4.00 / 4)
The washed-up beauty contestent managed to trollop her way through the "debate", parroting her force-fed talking points, gosh-darn-it!  Joe six-pack musta been pretty impressed, I'm tell'n ya!

(BTW--nice lipstick!)

[ Parent ]
Unlike the Iraq war, I do (4.00 / 7)
think there were important reasons for going into Afghanistan.  

(1) The Taliban was supporting al-Quaeda.  Maybe not financially, but allowing it to work its will in the world.

(2) The Taliban was actively evil on the subject of women:
Women were not allowed to practice their professions, or even go shopping for food for their families without a male family representative (brother, father, husband) --and the penalty for disobeying this was often death.

(3) The burqa the Taliban ordered women to wear: I mean, forget about the fashion police: women could barely even see through the tiny eye-slits mandated by the Taliban.

Getting rid of the Taliban counts as a noble cause: even more noble than getting the GOP out of the White House.

My objection is Shrubby and his anti-Midas touch: he couldn't win a war against an anthill; and give me a break that he has an MBA.  When I was in grad school, the apartment next door was filled with MBA students.

They were all dumber than dogshit.

One function of the income gap is that the people at the top of the heap have a hard time even seeing those at the bottom. They practically need a telescope.--Molly Ivins

Was war the best choice? (4.00 / 11)
I do not believe going to war is a noble cause even for the reasons you give.

Yes, the Taliban rule was horrible - evil even - for Afghan women, but that was not the reason American invaded after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. If the U.S. had a moral imperative to help the women of Afghanistan, then the U.S. could have declared war before September 11, 2001.

I think it isn't a reason to go to war, any more than removing Saddam Hussein because he was a bad man and a dictator was a reason to go to war in Iraq.

The first reason may be legitimate, but I think the real reason the U.S. went to war in Afghanistan is because Americans wanted revenge. I think war for revenge is not a legitimate reason. Plus, ultimately I think any military campaign in Afghanistan is doomed to failure. Afghanistan has a way of humbling empires - the British, the Soviets, and now the Americans.

Instead of invading, I think a better approach would have been to follow the strategy laid out by Michael Klare, a professor of Peace and World Security Studies at Hampshire College. Two days after the towers fell, Klare wrote for salon.com, an essay titled: "How to defeat bin Laden".

He argued that in order to capture bin Laden and defeat Islamic terrorism, the United States should abandon the war rhetoric (and by extension warfare) and treat bin Laden as a fugitive from the law.

It's an excellent essay and I'll try to do it justice, but if you have the time, just read the essay.

There are many in Washington and around the country who believe that the United States should declare war on bin Laden... But we must also ask: Will it achieve the goal of eradicating bin Laden's networks and eliminating the terrorist threat to the United States? There are good reasons to suspect that it will not.

Klare goes on to predict that if the U.S. starts bombing and invading Muslim nations, it will only make the problem of Islamic terrorism worse and convince "many ordinary Muslims that bin Laden is right: that the United States is intent on tormenting and subduing the Islamic world." He then argues that not only will such a military response increase terrorism, but even worse it will fail to stop bin Laden.

As an alternative to military action of this sort, I propose a strategy that combines global law enforcement collaboration plus moral and religious combat. It would compel the Bush administration to drop its war rhetoric and instead treat its hunt for bin Laden as a criminal investigation.

It will not be possible to put bin Laden's networks out of operation without the cooperation of police and intelligence personnel all over the globe -- including the Islamic world. The best way to do this is to brand bin Laden and his associates as mass murderers who are sought for trial and punishment under U.S. law -- as has been done with other suspected terrorists...

Furthermore, to prevent the recruitment of additional volunteers into bin Laden's networks (or others of their type), we have to successfully portray him as an enemy of authentic Islam... We must encourage influential Muslim clerics to condemn bin Laden as an enemy of true Islamic belief. Only in this way can we silence him (and his kind) forever.

Klare recognized that the cries of war would increase as the horror of September 11th sunk in, but he pleaded for restraint. I believe that if only Congress had listened to his and others more intelligent ways of countering the very real threat bin Laden and his ideas and actions present instead of just reacting militarily.

On September 11, 2001, even though the World Trade Center towers had crumbled into a smoldering ruin, the United States had the moral high ground and nearly world-wide support.

George W. Bush loved to talk about using his political capital. Well he had the most political capital of any president since FDR and look what he decided to spend it on — two wars that ultimately did not defeat al Qaeda or radical Islam.

America had the moral high ground seven years ago and we let Bush squander it away. More damage has been done by Bush and his wars than bin Laden and his al Qaeda followers could have done these past seven years.

Bush has bankrupted the U.S. both financially and morally. And for what?


[ Parent ]
War is never the BEST choice (4.00 / 6)
so we are agreed on that, Magnifico.

But as early as 1995, I was reading about women dying in Afghanistan because it was illegal for their doctors to look at their bodies.  Of course, they couldn't have WOMEN doctors, because under the Taliban women weren't allowed to be doctors.

It is all very well for you men to decide what's right or wrong.

You don't suffer under male rule.  Indeed, you own it.

I am not angry with you, Magnifico.  You usually make sense, and I agree with you 99% of the time.

But if your rule over your own body was never your choice, only the choice of the women around you--who might want to rape it, or deny your rights to health care--or deny you the right to buy condoms to protect yourself from STDs--you might be a bit more liberal.

Just sayin'.  Not angry with you by any means...but I am angry...and I have been for the last 40 years.  With both men and women who would deny me my lawful right to do with my body as I will.

Do you understand that?

One function of the income gap is that the people at the top of the heap have a hard time even seeing those at the bottom. They practically need a telescope.--Molly Ivins

[ Parent ]
Taliban (4.00 / 6)
So if I understand you correctly, you believe that upon learning of the Taliban's widespread abuse of women in the late 1990s, the United States should have invaded Afghanistan and removed the Taliban regime?


[ Parent ]
Not exactly (4.00 / 7)
Upon learning of the Taliban's widespread support of Al-Quaeda circa 9/12/2001 (and it was well-known before that to every reader of the NYT), PLUS what they were doing to women--which was another major crime against humanity) invading Afghanistan after 9/11 was not the wrong thing to do. Doing it stupidly was wrong.  Allowing the Taliban to regroup there, and allowing Afghanistan to RESUME its role as the #1 exporter of heroin was wrong.  But trying to make the Afghani government more open, and trying to replace the heroin trade with, y'know, actual edible crops, was not the wrong thing to do.  

What was wrong?

Invading Iraq was just stupid.  Afghanistan had everything to do with supporting al-Quada.  Iraq had nothing to do with it.

Anybody who had been paying the slightest bit of attention since 1995 knew that.

Unfortunately, we got stuck with The Shrub, who wasn't paying attention to much more than clearing brush and baseball scores.

One function of the income gap is that the people at the top of the heap have a hard time even seeing those at the bottom. They practically need a telescope.--Molly Ivins

[ Parent ]
Youffraita, you're not wrong with so much that you say! (4.00 / 3)
However, we didn't go to Afghanistan for any humanitarian reasons on behalf of the women, nor really to even get bin Laden.

We were all very angry and devastated by 9/11 -- Bush's response was "we're gonna' smoke him out."  But, in fact, he was just misleading all of us -- and we have been continually mislead from that day forward.  9/11, itself, is riddled with many question marks!

Say "YES" to Generation We  Go there, read the Petition and sign, if you agree!   Say "YES" to GENERAL STRIKE

[ Parent ]
Mostly agree w/you (4.00 / 2)
but the whole point of Afghanistan was SUPPOSED to be Taliban equals al-Quaeda.  (And that wasn't a complete lie).  

Then somebody told GWB or Cheney that Afghanistan didn't have any oil, so they illegally invaded Iraq.

Um.  Hello.  Please, if you're going to illegally invade a country:

(a) DON'T do it; and

(b) understand the culture, and THE FUCKING DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUNNI AND SHIA, you morans

Just my little primer for the GOP hatemongers among us.

One function of the income gap is that the people at the top of the heap have a hard time even seeing those at the bottom. They practically need a telescope.--Molly Ivins

[ Parent ]
War is bad (4.00 / 7)
for children and other living things.

He who is not busy being born is busy dying.  Bob Dylan
[ Parent ]
I like the sense of Klare's thinking! (4.00 / 3)
We were all sold a bill of goods, both in terms of Afghanistan and Iraq!  The real reasons for going to Afghanistan and Iraq are here!!!

From Afghanistan to Iraq: Connecting the Dots with Oil
By Richard W. Behan, AlterNet. Posted February 5, 2007.

An in-depth look at the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the events leading up to them, and the players who made them possible.

In the Caspian Basin and beneath the deserts of Iraq, as many as 783 billion barrels of oil are waiting to be pumped. Anyone controlling that much oil stands a good chance of breaking OPEC's stranglehold overnight, and any nation seeking to dominate the world would have to go after it.

The long-held suspicions about George Bush's wars are well-placed. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were not prompted by the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington. They were not waged to spread democracy in the Middle East or enhance security at home. They were conceived and planned in secret long before September 11, 2001 and they were undertaken to control petroleum resources.

The "global war on terror" began as a fraud and a smokescreen and remains so today, a product of the Bush Administration's deliberate and successful distortion of public perception. The fragmented accounts in the mainstream media reflect this warping of reality, but another more accurate version of recent history is available in contemporary books and the vast information pool of the Internet. When told start to finish, the story becomes clear, the dots easier to connect.

Both appalling and masterful, the lies that led us into war and keep us there today show the people of the Bush Administration to be devious, dangerous and far from stupid.

The following is an in-depth look at the oil wars, the events leading up to them, and the players who made them possible. . . . . (emphasis mine)

Very much worth reading because your understandings will become so much clearer.  Also, IMO, kinda' helps to understand why the effort to really get bin Laden has been pretty much of a feigned effort -- a farce!

And, now, with Georgia having invaded and slaughtered 2,000 plus S. Ossetians in one day, and our backing of Georgia, you can understand our connection there, as well!

Say "YES" to Generation We  Go there, read the Petition and sign, if you agree!   Say "YES" to GENERAL STRIKE

[ Parent ]
Um, tahoe, I prob'ly missed something (4.00 / 2)
but while I agree Iraq was about oil...there isn't any in Afghanistan.

Or, if there is, I don't know about it.

Maybe the country could be used as a pipeline.

But any rational person wouldn't put a pipeline through a country as unstable as Afghanistan.

You'd grow poppies there...and sell the opium and heroin to finance your pipeline through other (more stable) countries.

If you were sane.

Think there's any relation between our government's policies and the fact that poppy production in Afghanistan is up to record levels, according to the NYT?

One function of the income gap is that the people at the top of the heap have a hard time even seeing those at the bottom. They practically need a telescope.--Molly Ivins

[ Parent ]
Hi, Youffraita! (0.00 / 0)
Sorry not sooner!

From the same article linked above (and there are other articles, as well), please note:

. . . .Afghanistan

The strategic location of Afghanistan can scarcely be overstated. The Caspian Basin contains up to $16 trillion worth of oil and gas resources, and the most direct pipeline route to the richest markets is through Afghanistan.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, the first western oil company to take action in the Basin was the Bridas Corporation of Argentina. It acquired production leases and exploration contracts in the region, and by November of 1996 had signed an agreement with General Dostum of the Northern Alliance and with the Taliban to build a pipeline across Afghanistan.

Not to be outdone, the American company Unocal (aided by an Arabian company, Delta Oil) fought Bridas at every turn. Unocal wanted exclusive control of the trans-Afghan pipeline and hired a number of consultants in its conflict with Bridas: Henry Kissinger, Richard Armitage (now Deputy Secretary of State in the Bush Administration), Zalmay Khalilzad (a signer of the PNAC letter to President Clinton) and Hamid Karzai.

Unocal wooed Taliban leaders at its headquarters in Texas, and hosted them in meetings with federal officials in Washington, D.C. . . . .

Take a look at how the pipelines are right now and the location of the Caspian Sea.  
China lays down gauntlet in energy war

O.K., now for some more maps.  Here's a map of Afghanistan:

A map of the general area, but in each of these maps, bear in the mind the locations and make a mental note of them:


(click to enlarge)

And, here is a map of southwest Asia  -- you can note the location of Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, etc.


(click to enlarge)

O.K., Youfraitta, it's not exactly rocket science to see what has and is going on here, our "wooing" of the President of Georgia, included.  Remember that oil people are oil people and THAT doesn't change from generation to generation.  

Bush said, when opting to go to Iraq, (but still in Afghanistan),  "I'm tired of swattin' flies -- there's no targets here!"  What do you think he meant?  

Apropos and interestingly enough, while driving and listening to NPR today, it seems the Administration is now attempting to "buddy up" to Kazakhstan.  

So, Youffraita, not because I say so, but you can see that right down the line the plan has been the plan to "weasel" our way into any country where we might garner a true "IN" and "steal" their OIL!



Say "YES" to Generation We  Go there, read the Petition and sign, if you agree!   Say "YES" to GENERAL STRIKE

[ Parent ]
Well, I thought I had this subject licked, but there are a couple (0.00 / 0)
of errors, which were not readily discernible.  Sometimes, links just don't "take" and you wind up with the previous link, which is what happened here.  So, one more time once!

The second link was a "repeat" and should have been this:

width="400"px
(click to enlarge)

and the map of Southwest Asia, which should have enlarged, but didn't, so here it is again:

width="438"px
(click to enlarge)

I hope it all works this time around.  

Say "YES" to Generation We  Go there, read the Petition and sign, if you agree!   Say "YES" to GENERAL STRIKE

[ Parent ]
Pony for the bang-on accurate description . . . (4.00 / 2)
. . . of MBA students.
[ Parent ]
heh...did you have some (4.00 / 2)
MBA candidates living next door, too?

Honestly, how anyone could ever claim that chimpy's having an MBA means anything more than he can bullshit a professor, I could never understand.

One function of the income gap is that the people at the top of the heap have a hard time even seeing those at the bottom. They practically need a telescope.--Molly Ivins

[ Parent ]
Thank you for this essay, Magnifico! (4.00 / 4)
Palin is like a "programmed Barbie doll" to me.  Note, too, that she never really answers a question!

Say "YES" to Generation We  Go there, read the Petition and sign, if you agree!   Say "YES" to GENERAL STRIKE
A song for McCain (4.00 / 1)
after last night's debate.



Almost everything you do will seem insignificant, but it is important that you do it. Mahatma Gandhi

Obama's strategy, sadly ... (4.00 / 4)
...is not that much better than what we've already seen. Many thousands more troops and no exit strategy.

I'd personally like to see more attention devoted to the kind of special-forces techniques that sends in small groups with a strong local-language element that builds trust among the people to root out the guys who are blowing up girls' schools and otherwise making the average person's life miserable. That is the way to capture the remnants of the original al Qaeda and capture (or kill) Osama bin Laden.

Then, in my view, we are done with Afghanistan and Pakistan military. We are left with rebuilding (or building anew) the infrastructure we promised we would but have not delivered on.

Will this help change everything? No. But the U.S. can't directly improve life in a lot of places where life for the average person, especially women, is a mess. That has to be done by NGOs. The U.S. can't invade Egypt just because 90% of the women there undergo genital mutilation; the U.S. can't invade Turkmenistan because of the horrors there. What the U.S. can do is behave more as a role model for others' behavior. Too bad that the job has been botched for so long by a bipartisan team of botchers.

The Talking Point Puppet | 26 comments
Reform Immigration -
March for America
Sunday, March 21
 

March on Washington
Saturday, March 20
 

 

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

Contact Us

Seek




Advanced Search

Contribute to Docudharma
 

 
     

 

DharmaDocs
- Mission Statement
- FAQ
- HTML Help
- Dharmapedia
- Series
www.flickr.com

Action
- I paid a visit to my Congressman's District Office!
by: tahoebasha3
- When "Rock and Roll" Only Meant One Thing
by: keirdubois
- So, got any plans for this weekend?
by: rossl
- Where have you gone, Albert Einstein?
by: rossl

Powered by: SoapBlox