Part of what makes Donnelly's chronology so painful is the way he weaves statements by pundits in with events involving actual administration officials to make it look like the government is simply reacting to the media. Nice hatchet job, there. Since Donnelly thinks that Bill Kristol is a quality strategic analyst, I have to wonder about his judgment on most of this.

This process has certainly been ugly, but then so is the situation. I'd much rather have an administration actually thinking about the options and ramifications of each than one that gets stampeded into sending more troops by the "we can always revoke their orders" types like Kristol or the "pull out now" types like Will.

Six years of drift and indifference without much attention and now those of the chattering class all expect instant answers. The instant answer is that this is a goddamn mess and not amenable to a quick, glib fix.

In the meantime, we do have troops on the ground and in the air, arguably decent military leadership, and - for the first time since this senseless business began - national leadership that actually takes it all seriously, not just seeking what might sound good for Afghanistan but also what is good for America.

Patience, Grasshopper - even this guy's mistakes are improvement over the last clown's best efforts.

I'm not a huge fan of the whole "this is the new Vietnam" argument, but there is one area that this analogy is true: governance and accountability. South Vietnam was never going to prevail because it was a fiction, a vanity exercise, rather than a real, viable state. Its leaders, be it Diem, Theiu, or Ky, never had legitimacy in the eyes of the populace. When confronted with a remote and corrupt regime that appeared to be the puppets of foreign forces and a violent nationalist movement that happened to be sitting in their villages, the people naturally chose to aid or at least accept the NLF.

Obama is in an impossible position right now because of Karzai's criminal approach to the election. He needs a legitimate Pashtun leader to give the largest ethnic group in Afghanistan a real alternative to the Taliban. He is right to wait to see if there is going to be a government that can battle with the Taliban for the loyalty of the population. Even a deal, with Dr. Abdullah taking the Marshal Ky role, lacks legitimacy. Without a legitimate Afghan government that we can point to and support, the entire war becomes a bloody holding action where all we can say is that the Taliban is worse than the admittedly bad alternative (kind of like, well, Vietnam). Hardly a stirring call to action, either for the people of Afghanistan or the international community, not to mention the growing ranks of Gold Star mothers in this country.

So I think these delays are inevitable, and brought on by the weakness and misconduct of Karzai and his goons, not by anything that is actually in Obama's control. Although it is extremely unlikely, it will be interesting to see what the administration does if Abdullah wins. A Tajik, even a legitimately elected Tajik, is probably worse than a corrupt Pashtun when it comes to battling the Taliban. Still, if Abdullah is legitimately elected, I don't see how you turn your back on him, even if his election will probably permanently (insofar as anything is permanent in Afghanistant) alienate the Pashtuns from the central government and make the war unwinnable.

And yes, I am aware that Karzai has problems that go far beyond the election (see, e.g., opium and war lords), but if he wins the run-off in a relatively clean fashion, that will naturally eclipse his other weaknesses, at least for a time.

No Marshal Ky, Thank You Very Much
by Hwkeye on Tue, 10/20/2009 - 2:56pm

I am a fictional character. Saigon never existed. The Republic of Vietnam was a figment of the imagination...

I am a fictional character. Saigon never existed. The Republic of Vietnam was a figment of the imagination...

Ahh, the Orange County bitter-enders weigh in. Miami without the rum and cigars. Yes, indeed, the Republic of Vietnam was a true egalitarian paradise, not a dictatorship-cum-kleptocracy. All were united in joyful support of Bao Dai, no wait, Ngo Diem, no wait, Big Minh, no wait, Nguyen Khan, no wait, Big Minh, no wait, Nguyen Khan, no wait, Big Minh, no wait, Phan Khac Suu, no wait, General Theiu, no wait, Tran Huong, no wait, Big Minh (again! must have been very popular with the grassroots, right?).

Yes, indeed, the Republic of Vietnam was a stable, popularly supported regime with a rich, varied political life that was an effective counterbalance to the nationalism of the North that had been validated in the struggles against the French. The fact that it had only been created under the Geneva Accords which were then repudiated by its self-chosen leader, Diem? Irrelevant. And it only failed because Gerald Ford didn't bomb in 1975. Heck, if Jerry had only had a set, Big Minh would probably be on his fourteenth term of office and not pushing up daisies in California. Sell it to Mark Moyar, 'cause I'm not buying.

As you were incapable of grasping the point in my earlier post "Congressman", I feel constrained to add that much of the foregoing was sarcasm.

The Obama is a slow-poke narrative is all over the place. But can you cite some counter-arguments to show you've considered them?

Indefinite detention in Bagram for those caught all over the world? No progress on closing Guantanamo Bay? Using the State Secrets privilege to shut down entire civil lawsuits for fear of embarrassing the government? Threatening the British government by with-holding intelligence information if they don't suppress info that we tortured? And on, and on, and on. This is what you question your support over?

Ask Tom Ricks. We are gracious hosts. Kennedy, Kennedy, Cabot Lodge, LBJ, Westmoreland, Calley, LeMay, Nixon, Abrams, etc...oh wait, what's your point? Bob Sorley bought it. Moyar too. Me, I was just a kid who saw American servicemen in Saigon well past the signing of the bilateral Paris Peace Accords...and long after McCain and company went home. I left a week before Saigon fell (thanks USAF C130) and missed the teary Miss Saigon ending...and Big Minh welcoming his brother who was with the NVA...

is not about Obama's deliberation process, that's (a). And (b), there is substantial continuity on a high-burden-of-ptoof approach to more troops from essentially May through to today. The stray comments are Mullen's 'properly resourced' in July and, of course, the McChrystal moment. To all if which Obama (and Gates) have reacted with steadfastness in not committing to additional troops beyond the March surge.

You should drop this.

Tom - and I'd be grateful if you would take the time to respond - why is there such a hurry? I didn't notice you complaining when the Bush administration let the situation drift (and worse) for six years. But Barack has to decide whether to escalate in your timetable? What's the rush? Please explain.

The administration has already said (Emanuel I think) that it is assessing whether or not they have a partner in the Afghan government. If JFK, LBJ, RMN, and even GRF had spent a little more time doing the same re. the SVN government and the ARVN we might have lost a few less than 58,000.

So - you;ve been kibbitzing for weeks, but you haven't bothered to explain - what's the rush?

This is about as clear a statement as I have heard from the commander-in-chief - on anything. I don't hear any parsing of phrases here. This is stern and strong:

“This is not a war of choice. This is a war of necessity. Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which al Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans. So this is not only a war worth fighting. This is a–this is fundamental to the defense of our people.”

You have been right about Afghanistan since the early days of the campaign, Mr. President. The war was undersourced by a neocon cabal that only had eyes for a war that we did not really need. This has always been the 'war of necessity.'

Quit waffling and triangulating. We know what we need to do and what has a reasonable chance of success. We also know what will happen if we fail. Quit worrying about your poll numbers or the left wing of your party. Does this threaten you domestic agenda. Yup, it does. Let's get on with it.

Hey, you wanted the damned job...