Good military strategy or policy as it were, ain’t much good if it can't buttress and maintain political support.

But hey, cheer up, things could get worse, or better depending on how you look at it: our remaining coalition partners might decide to speed-up their withdrawal now that the news is out, beating us to the airport. . .thereby causing Obama no other choice but to speed it up further. . .as out in 2013?

"A final scene has Hamchunk with Wayne on the beach at sunset, with the kid asking Wayne “what will happen to me now?” Wayne gives the kid Petersen’s Green Beret, saying, “You let me worry about that, Green Beret. You’re what this thing’s all about.” The two walk off together along the beach, hand-in-hand."
http://www.pophistorydig.com/?tag=john-wayne-green-berets

You will go back to your feudal village where you will memorize passages from the Koran, grow poppies, treasure your AK-47, and beat your wife. I cannot change centuries of tradition and ignorance, but I can promise you one thing little Afghan. If you ever harbor and give safe haven to terrorists again, I will bomb the shit out of you and could care less about collateral damage.

RVN SF Vet...little Afghan says, "Hey, could care less about collateral damage wasn't in the COIN Manual! Maybe it was on the little coins that the American generals gave me."

Sniff, Sniff, I almost hurled at that scene, but voided the phlegm from my pie hole instead. It seems the Duke might have shot that scene from His Charlie Papa (on the beachfront in the Oscar Charlie). The Sun Also rises o'er the South China Sea, yet sets under the Annamite Cordillera. Sheesh...Could they not afford to shoot on the beach in N.C. (Kitty Hawk)? Would the quality of the Dukester's tee many Martoonies have suffered as a consequence?

Funny! I live behind the Orange Curtain, not too far from El Toro and Camp Talega...the Duke lives on here...SNA is named after him.

Quang:

I know, I've lived in RSM since 87. I'm also aware of Wayne's popularity, and support for HUAC's actions, post war. He was not remembered fondly by WWII veterans, especially in light of his movies and posturing, which contrasted negatively with their service. Moreover many Hollywood actors joined the services and experienced active combat, as did many of the post war GI's who became famous film personalities. He had a few run in's with veterans who decried his non-participation. He was given a deferral rating of 3-A for family dependency (Wayne was 34 and had 4 children at the time), and this was later changed in 1944 to 2-A deferral based on national interest. Many volunteers were over 34 and had children, so that was not a show stopper. The studio did not want to lose him, since he was a a walking gold mine.

He indeed inspired many a youth to join the services in order to "get Some!", but I, at the time, thought even then that he was over the top; though I did like, and was motivated by war flicks. Gee, those intolerant WWII vets; imagine that they had the unmitigated gall to cast aspersions on the patriotic icon of the time. I suppose they wanted him to walk it like he talked it...How primitive! Perhaps a little war story would be instructive.

Coming back from an operation Northwest of Hue, we were assigned to be the palace Guards for the Phu Bai Base. At night, a wooden whitewashed screen would be erected in an open area, so movies could be watched. The audience consisted of Battalion members, as well of the usual assortment Remfish pogues. The projectionist began a screening of the TV series "Combat." After a few seconds, the animals became agitated an began yelling, advising the projectionist to reconsider his choice, and hurling a time-on-target fusillade of rocks at the screen. The projectionist then played an episode of Gunsmoke, or Dragnet (totally acceptable fare). Another time, a similar demonstration occurred, which allowed for the showing of What's New Pussycat; now that's a real flick for grunts.

The Dukester represented, and was probably a touchstone for the Neocon apparatchiks, who presently infect the governmental organs of the US. They exhort others (less connected), to do what they would never consider doing themselves, nor their deplorable ilk, are conned and influenced to do, in the name of defending the US. Hey, if you believe you're defending the US of A, go for it; it's a free country.This is just my opinion, of course, and a minority one at that, seeing that the exceptionalism cocoon requires one to be not too discriminating with the facts.

Oh, BTW, Quang, did you fly out of Lonesome Dove?

the last para. should have read (new sentence) These less connected are conned...etc.

My bad, My bad, my Maximus Bad!

You're talking about the wrong John Wayne!! Guess we're not in Iowa anymore Michelle.

have some cool photos...btw, one of my my late father's callsigns was "Rio Bravo," given the time he spent in Texas in the late 1950s while learning to fly with the USAF and his propensity for fistfights...

By in large the prevalent judgments of current intelligences estimates are pretty much consistent with assessments of global terrorist threats by our allies and independent terrorism experts, who generally all agree that our increased involvement abroad is actually fueling Islamic radicalism.

More than likely our focus on better horizontal information sharing and training among domestic state, federal, and international law enforcement agencies has shrunk the security envelope that the 9/11 terrorists once had to operate in, is the primary contributer to your judgment that fighting them over there has kept them from attacking us here on U.S. soil, i.e. yesterday's arrest in Seattle.

at some point, Hunter, we need to break the cycle. Maintaining a constant state of war and hyper vigilance is not healthy from an economic or political standpoint.

OBL was a villain, a murderer, and an opportunist as we saw with his championing the Palestinians, but not a liar. As Michael Scheuer and others have stressed time and again, read what he had to say. OBL's primary grievance and original recruiting tool, before we began the war, was our presence in the region and our support of local dictators, which latter was ongoing policy until recently. OBL and his Islamist friends were assisted mightily by US interventions during the 1980s and 1990s. Our victories weren't taken as evidence of the superiority of American liberalism, so much as sign that God can use any tool to further his ends. Our belief that helping these people would bring them to our side is as flawed a notion as thinking our gadgets would turn them all into liberal democrats. They'll take the help, the cash, and the gadgets and do their own thing. Of course, there will always be a minority of urban technocrats and westernized young people. But we shouldn't take their existence as evidence of any larger social realities.

Now, having, decided that we are friends with whatever democracy or junta has taken the place of the Mubaraks of the world, we continue our support and intervention in the region. I have little doubt that new regimes will prove equally oppressive and resented, and we, as their backers, will share in the hate. The reason being the ME, like other places, suffers under its own social contradictions that will only be resolved by force.

I understand the primary argument for ongoing intervention is oil and stability. But the oil trade would continue no matter who is running the show. The ME is not self sufficient, they need to sell their oil. In any event, let the Western Europeans, Chinese and Japanese worry about ME oil.

Jane Harmon, whatever one feels about her, did make a good point. We have no coherent narrative or strategy. I'd say we do have a narrative, an incoherent, contradictory narrative, informing our strategy, which reflects the messy nature of American politics and self-image. We need a new narrative/strategy, our old one ain't working.