Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (126264)	12/4/2009 12:51:29 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542197

Yes, that's the part that I find hard to swallow. In a rational world we could weigh the potential benefits of his decision in terms of probable achievable goals and probable costs. In my view the achievable goals are to find ways to effectively reach into terrorist strongholds and get Bin Ladin or as many of the decision making leadership of Al Queda as we can, weaken the most radical resistance to moderate Afghan national rule, maintain whatever level of commitment credibility we have left in the world and lay the groundwork for an after-occupation era where we can maintain operatives and a base of operations to gather intelligence on terrorist activities and, if necessary and practical, mount operations against them. Whether the odds of achieving those ends would justify the likely casualty, economic and lost opportunity costs of continuing our efforts there for another few years should be the issue we debate. Instead we're given a generous sprinkling of pie in the sky goals because anything less would leave him vulnerable to charges from the "our team's number 1" cheer leaders that he's too weak and that he's standing in the way of our wise military's potential victory. In my view, if he's actually planning to get out and this latest "surge" is a gambit to attempt the practical goals that I see as achievable, and if I'm right in believing that a withdrawal at this time would critically limit the possibility of achieving important domestic breakthroughs on health care, climate protection, judicial appointments, restructuring of the power of lobbyists, etc, and would tear the country apart, then I can accept accept the cost of the Afghan surge with a heavy heart. But I'm only reading between the lines on this and, as you know, that's a dangerous practice since we all tend to project our own views to fill the gaps. Ed