DanG

I never said there was a "criminal" investigation. There clearly was an investigation, since you've spend 17 pages of posts trying to convince us it was no good. What, in your mind, makes a "criminal" investigtion different? - Dan G

I oppose another investigation into 9-11 for the same reason I oppose another investigation into the JFK assassination, the moon landings, and Area 51. It is a waste of time and money, and it is highly unlikely that the results would differ from the results of the first investigation. - Dan G

So they planted fake FDR data, but failed to mark a couple door readings OPEN? And, apparently, also failed to make the recordings match the flight path of the plane. Either these people are criminal masterminds, or they are totally incompetent. Which is it? - Dan G

You do realize that your link is 14 months old, no? - Dan G

Well said. I agree with every word of your post. - Dan G

Reminds me of the joke about winning an argument over the internet and winning a medal at the Special Olympics. It may not be PC, but goddam it's true. - Dan G

OK, thanks. I see you're just arguing for argument's sake. Have a nice day. - Dan G

I met Eikenberry in 2003 when he was a two star. He brought a Deputy Ambassador to the PRT I was stationed at. They wanted to go on a walking tour of the Gardez bazaar. Frankly, we were aghast, as that was just not done. It was seen as way too dangerous. They also wanted to do it with minimal force protection and in civilian clothes. I ended up taking them down there and walking around for about an hour. The Ambassador managed to wander off with his own two-man security detail, creating quite a bit of corcern. I thought for sure there was a slaughter emminent. There wasn't, and after that we started to conduct more operations downtown, eventually learnng a lot more about the city and how it ran. It turned out to be a good thing, but I was pretty butt-clenched at the time. Eikenberry is nothing if not his own man. He had the reputation as a loose cannon and free thinker even back then, but he was also passionate about the plan to rebuild Afghanistan. I think that his opinion on the subject is probably well thought out and may even be correct. I, for one, am glad that Obama is taking the time to hear all the different views from the subject matter experts. Regarding his perspective versus McChrystal's, I agree that he probably has a broader view of the situation. I haven't had a chance to read too much on what he's said, but it seems like his primary concern is that without the potential for a stable and effective central government, no matter what we do it will all eventually fall apart. I certainly share his concerns, but I still think we need to try. Can we do it with the current troop levels? Probably, but it will take longer and may not be domestically tenable. Unfortunately, a lot of the "success" in Iraq seems to be due to our willingness to deal with people we otherwise find unsavory. We've been doing that in Afghanistan, too, but I think it's going to get worse. The people who are able to exert effective control in the countryside also happen to be drug dealers, warlords, and arms trafficers. We've dealth with some of them for a long time at arms length, but if we want to see an reduction in violence, we may have to really cozy up. That's not a long term strategy for success, but in an ideal world we could use it to take the pressure off long enough to get effective governance systems in place. I doubt that the American people have the patience for that. I also wonder how much of Eikenberry's comment was directed to Obama, and how much to Karzai. The comment could easily be read as, "Shape up or we're leaving, Hamid." Thanks for asking interesting questions. What are your thoughts on Eikenberry? - Dan G

If you were there in 2003 (as I was) you know that the troop levels are much, much higher now than they have ever been. I never said I was against a troop increase. I'm against people saying that Obama is killing the troops by taking extra time to decide on a change in strategy. - Dan G

Do you have more info on this? I don't remember hearing about it, and a search turned up nothing other than the incident last July. - Dan G

I'll admit to a bit of snarkyness in that post. All of my other posts have been substantive. This happens to be a topic that is near and dear to my heart, and it pisses me off when people use it as a tool to get a couple of partisan digs in. - Dan G

The success of the surge had little or nothing to do with increased troop levels. The surge was a change in strategy, not just pushing more little green men into the box. Obama faces a similar change in stragety in Afghanistan, but it is a much more complex situation. I believe Marg posted a graph earlier that showed how troop levels in Afghanistan have increased dramatically under Obama. Deaths have also gone up. Without a strategic refocusing, adding more troops will result in the same. You are also assuming I am against an increase in troops in Afghanistan. You are wrong. I am for an increase so long as the troops are properly employed. As I've posted elsewhere on this forum, just kicking in more doors is not going to win this war. It's going to be more difficult than that. - Dan G

Why do you feel the need to always make it so personal? Do you have nothing constructive to add? - Dan G

I guess the same person who made rushmc the arbiter. No, but causation can produce correlation. - Dan G

I never said, or implied, that no one else can have a valid opinion. Project much? The correspondence between troop levels and number of fatalities is not an opinion. If there are more people around to die, more of them will die. It is simple math. - Dan G

Are you just dense, or are you not reading what I write? That's not why we invaded Iraq. And no, I don't think we should be the world's police force. Yes it is. So bullshit right back at you. And why did you feel the need to add [SIC] after the word Pro-Choicers? I mean, technically you are correct to note this it was my usage, but when usage is correct (unlike Bull Shit) it is not necessary to note it with a (sic) Could you be more precise with you pronouns, please? I am not trying to run the country, the Republican Party is, and they need to learn a little flexibility. Allow me to reiterate, I am not trying to win any elections. You need some work on your reading comprehension, and writing clarity. - Dan G

Ironically, ChangoLanzao is exactly right. I expect more combat injuries and fatalities if even more soldiers are sent downrange. There will also be more enemy casualties, but that's not what you seem concerned about. Don't try to pretend to be knowledgable regarding things you have no clue about. It makes you look dumb. - Dan G

Nice sarcasm. So, how would it hurt them? - Dan G

I disagree that all government run programs don't work, but I also disagree with the Republican notion that the market is the solution to all problems. A well-run, very limited, government option that covered chonic conditions, emergency care, and preventative care would go a long way towards fixing our system. I disagree that any government option is, a priori, a bad thing. And they shouldn't be. If you want my backing on labor reform, remove preferential legal treatment for unions from the books. Thanks, I do understand the situation. The government should not tell people how they may or may not decide to unionize. The government should also not give them special treatment if they do decide to unionize. I propose that the government pass a law saying, "All votes on slots for Ron's 8-way team shall be done by secret ballot." Are you okay with that? How can you be against a secret ballot? Good. I think we should enter into wars when they are the right thing to do. Iraq was not, Afghanistan was (and is). Whatever. We all know plank 10 is just a clever way of saying, "Pro-choicers not welcome." Having principles is great. There is a difference in having principles and being able to act on those principles. To be able to act of them, you need to win elections. My principles have changed over the years on some issues. It's called learning, growing, and reconsidering my thoughts. Of course, to a modern Republican, that is "flip-flopping" and shall not be tolerated. - Dan G

MAJ Hasan was not a civilian. Given how you feel the Legion of Merit has become less appreciated, I'm suprized you seem to want the same thing to happen to the Purple Heart. If this goes through, soon it will be awarded to any servicemember injured while on duty, regardless of circumstance. Furthermore, awarding the Purple Heart to these victims gives MAJ Hasan more credit than he is due. He was not an enemy combatant, he was a raging asshole who committed a dispicable act. Don't glorify his crazed murderous rampage as jihad. - Dan G

Nobody's dying waiting for reinforcements. This isn't the Battle of the Bulge for God's sake. That kind of hyperbole is an insult to the troops, and only serves to weaken morale. People going on like that should be ashamed. - Dan G

But why did they oppose it? Was it because of the noise? Was it ugly? I don't understand the opposition. - Dan G

So what is the reasoning behind wanting to ban the minirets? - Dan G

1. Nope, but that doesn't mean I always agree with the Republican way of getting there. 2. I think a government option might be workble, but that's a long way from government running healthcare. Other reforms are needed that are not included in the current bills. 3. Yep. 4. I don't really care how unions organize therselves, and I don't see why the government should be involved. I'm not pro-union by any stretch, but people have the right of assembly, and how they want to assemble should be up to them. Goverment has no place regulating it. 5. It should be considered. 6. You didn't ask, but I support victory in Afghanistan, and withdrawal from Iraq (do I get 0.5 points) 7. No, but we shouldn't nuke them to prevent it. 8. You didn't ask about 8 either, but the Defense of Marriage Act is a terriblee law and should be replealed. Let the gays get married if they want, what do I care? 9. No, no, and yes. (and we all know the third thing is the only one important to real Republicans) 10. I support that right. Since I don't pass the test, does that mean that the Republicans don't want my vote? I used to vote straight party line Republican right up until GWB and Karl Rove took over the party. Now I find myself voting Democratic. There is no room for moderates in the Republican party, and this proposal will further marginalize them. If they want to have electoral success, they need to move back toward the center and drop the evangelical Christian focus. - Dan G

How, exactly, is delaying his decision failing to help the troops already in Afghanistan? Do you think he's cut off supplies in the meantime? This line of thinking being pushed by the Republicans makes no sense to me. - Dan G