Charlie Rose

aj617  06/27/2011 11:07 PM Report

Let us open our well-worn secret copy of 'A Fractured History of the Empire' and by the light of an

antique oil lamp see if we cannot get a glimpse of an unusual overview of the current situation:

The apparent disarray of American policy in Afghanistan is revealed by our text on page 1111 to be an example of a red herring - a cover story for the inconvenient truth of what has really been the approach of empires to problems in the hinterlands since time immemorial. At the extremity of the reach of the empire there is a balance of power with the barbarian, who correctly believes that a bit of god-given-luck could provide him with both victory and booty. The empire, though it may possess the power to do so, cannot simply kill all the natives because its own system would self-destruct (snap quiz: how? why ?) for succumbing to the temptation of the extermination strategy.

The real policy of America, which not even president Obama, being the present bearer of the torch of Britannia,

or as the cynics might say, the present leader of the

American dog being wagged by the British tail, despite their declarations of fealty and humble attachment,

can gainsay or confute, is to transform the barbarian by a long and inconclusive war into a being more like ourselves -the product of a violent modern crucible. Winning this war for us means changing our adversaries into our own reflection, and in the end it might mean, at the appropriate time, declaring our apparent defeat in the war on the ground, just as the British did so many years ago in America, paving the way for our eventual incorporation into their idea.

robdverity  06/25/2011 03:17 PM Report

Protracted withdrawal is strategic nonsense. The troop morale has to plunge into the toilet. They're now putting their lives on line for two more years? They imperil say 60 +/- more years of life for two more yrs - so we can reach a yet-to-be-defined victory.

It takes callous s.o.b.s . . .

Get out all-the-way! NOW! (Or suit up your damn self.)

SharkswithfrikingLazers  06/23/2011 06:44 PM Report

Richard Haass nailed it. The other arguments were weak.

Too bad we lost this argument a decade ago--all our blood and China's treasure (though we have to pay it back). Hopefully, we can win the argument now.

Charlie, haven't we heard that the Northern Alliance took back Afghanistan with the help of the CIA? So . . . this might be our Afghanistan policy because it appears to work.

robdverity  06/23/2011 05:20 PM Report

O says we're a country of laws and simultaneously denies The War Powers Act requiring Congressional approval re the Libyan action.

We're a strange country indeed. We've spent 6,000 lives (Iraq + Af-Pak), and $3.0 trillion (PBS Need to Know) to avenge 3,000 lives in 9/11 (twice the price in lives). Boy we really showed them, eh?

We're a nation of jingoistic MI complex driven high-schoolers that will cut off its nose to spite its face. But boy don't push us around cause we're big bad and EXCEPTIONAL. We'll spend trillions right into bankruptcy to prove it. Osama has to be laughing up his sleeve in his watery grave. He's still winning even in death. His goal has been reached: our bankruptcy chasing his shadow.

Obama is Osama's dupe. (And W's).

REMant  06/23/2011 11:26 AM Report

I thought this one of his best written speeches, tho as usual Obama tried to conciliate so many concerns it gives the impression of indecision. Despite the leaked figures cited by Charlie at the beginning, he actually announced plans to bring 10,000 by the end of this year and the remainder of the 33,000 "surge" by "next summer," further withdrawals to be discussed at Yalta (oops, no, Chicago!) next May.

He said the goal is to leave Afghanistan no longer a place of sanctuary for al Qaeda, not to remake the country. This more than implies that there will be a change of strategy, but it is not clear from reports whether this is because it is felt that coin hasn't worked, or that it has. Leaving 2x the number there in 2008 I feel certain takes cognizance of Gates' point that the Taliban will not likely negotiate as long as the prospect of waiting us out remains, tho the president said they would have only to renounce al Qaeda's, not their own principles and many will question if this is a distinction with a difference.

While the president made a gesture to those like Sen McCain who've argued we must have peace with honor, he also tried to appease those who've said the money would be better spent here at home. Public opinion tho has turned against the war, and many have concluded that the Karzai govt is both hopeless and thankless. Whether the Afghan army is ready, as alleged, or not, or, it seems, even indigenous, this war seems, in some places at least, to be turning into a carbon copy of 2005 Iraq.

The president went beyond Afghanistan, however, in an attempt to defend his course in Libya similarly as limited necessary allied involvement, pointing to "America's singular role," in world affairs, which, of course was meant to satisfy many foreign govts and activists who've argued just that. Nevertheless, he did not offer anyone military support, only "the power of our example." He averred America was a place of freedom and rule of law, which sought the same for all ppls, which is great, were it only true. None of these forays has been the informed choice of the American ppl, nor the Arab uprisings the choice of many of them. Rather they have been instigated and/or pursued by actions kept as far out of public view and control as possible and I don't expect that to change anytime soon.