Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The 36 Hours That Shook Washington-by FRANK RICH

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-10 08:51 AM
Original message
The 36 Hours That Shook Washington-by FRANK RICH
The 36 Hours That Shook Washington

by FRANK RICH
Published: June 25, 2010


THE moment he pulled the trigger, there was near-universal agreement that President Obama had done the inevitable thing, the right thing and, best of all, the bold thing. But before we get carried away with relief and elation, let’s not forget what we saw in the tense 36 hours that fell between late Monday night, when word spread of Rolling Stone’s blockbuster article, and high noon Wednesday, when Obama MacArthured his general. That frenzied interlude revealed much about the state of Washington, the Afghanistan war and the Obama presidency — little of it cheering and none of it resolved by the ingenious replacement of Gen. Stanley McChrystal with Gen. David Petraeus, the only militarily and politically bullet-proof alternative.

What we saw was this: 1) Much of the Beltway establishment was blindsided by Michael Hastings’s scoop, an impressive feat of journalism by a Washington outsider who seemed to know more about what was going on in Washington than most insiders did; 2) Obama’s failure to fire McChrystal months ago for both his arrogance and incompetence was a grievous mistake that illuminates a wider management shortfall at the White House; 3) The present strategy has produced no progress in this nearly nine-year-old war, even as the monthly coalition body count has just reached a new high.

If we and the president don’t absorb these revelations and learn from them, the salutary effects of the drama’s denouement, however triumphant for Obama in the short run, will be for naught.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/27/opinion/27rich.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Major Hogwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-10 08:56 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well, Obama gave him a 2nd chance, there's nothing wrong with that, Frank.
The policy was set by Obama, not by McChrystal or any other General.
So, it can be carried out by any other General.
And that, sir, is the lesson of the day.

It's pretty damn easy to criticize Obama today after having 20/20 hindsight, isn't it?
Do your damn homework before criticizing Obama, Mr Rich.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeorgeGist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-10 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
2. Obama's boldness is suspect ...
given that Afghanistan is not a threat to US, and Nature is kicking ass in the Gulf of Mexico.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-10 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
3. Much more worth reading there.
You have to wonder whether McChrystal’s defenders in Washington even read Hastings’s article past its inflammatory opening anecdotes. If so, they would have discovered that the day before the Marja offensive, the general’s good pal Hamid Karzai kept him waiting for hours so he could finish a nap before signing off on the biggest military operation of the year. Poor McChrystal was reduced to begging another official to wake the sleeping president so he could get on with the show.

The war, supported by a steadily declining minority of Americans, has no chance of regaining public favor unless President Obama can explain why American blood and treasure should be at the mercy of this napping Afghan president. Karzai stole an election, can’t provide a government in or out of a box, and has in recent months threatened to defect to the Taliban and accused American forces of staging rocket attacks on his national peace conference. Until last week, Obama’s only real ally in making his case was public apathy. Next to unemployment and the oil spill, Karzai and Afghanistan were but ticks on our body politic, even as the casualty toll passed 1,000. As a senior McChrystal adviser presciently told Hastings, “If Americans pulled back and started paying attention to this war, it would become even less popular.”

To appreciate how shielded Americans have been from Afghanistan, revisit Rahm Emanuel’s appearance last Sunday morning on “This Week,” just before the McChrystal firestorm erupted. Trying to put a positive spin on the war, the president’s chief of staff said that the Afghans were at long last meeting their army and police quotas. Technically that’s true; the numbers are up. But in that same day’s Washington Post, a correspondent in Kandahar reported that the Afghan forces there are poorly equipped, corrupt, directionless and infiltrated by Taliban sympathizers and spies. Kandahar (pop. 1 million) is supposed to be the site of the next major American offensive.

The gaping discrepancy between Emanuel’s upbeat assessment and the reality on the ground went unremarked because absolutely no one was paying attention. Everyone is now. That, at least, gives us reason to hope that the president’s first bold move to extricate America from the graveyard of empires won’t be his last.


I'd like his next step to be even bolder: to announce our withdrawal, and to begin withdrawing.

But that's just me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-10 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
4. What a phrase:replacement of Gen. Stanley McChrystal with Gen. David Petraeus, the only militarily
Edited on Sun Jun-27-10 09:36 AM by midnight
and politically bullet-proof alternative.

That frenzied interlude revealed much about the state of Washington, the Afghanistan war and the Obama presidency — little of it cheering and none of it resolved by the ingenious replacement of Gen. Stanley McChrystal with Gen. David Petraeus, the only militarily and politically bullet-proof alternative.

I'm not savvy enough to understand how this is bullet proof, but I suppose in time, something might reveal itself. It is such an odd happenstance that this man collapsed last week, and now is running things-crazy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-10 09:47 AM
Response to Original message
5. Another thread from yesterday about this:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-10 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
6. K & R !!!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-10 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
7. But..but...he appointed General SuperHawk to save the day!
The Light at the End of the Tunnel is relit...again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unblock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-27-10 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
8. while i often fancy myself and armchair political expert, i'm often baffled
by such things as characterizing the obvious and "inevitable" thing as "bold".

i'll take it; i like that the press, the republicans, and even creeps like lieberman use the term and give kudos to obama.

but from a strictly objective, analytical point of view, doing the obvious and inevitable thing is hardly "bold".



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 01:33 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC