Kaput in Kabul

So what exactly was General Stanley McChrystal thinking when he ridiculed the Obama administration in an interview with Rolling Stone magazine? This couldn't be good for the war effort in Afghanistan, and the irony of McChrystal and Obama on war policy makes these comments all the more ironic. But Obama made it McChrystal clear to the general that he wouldn't tolerate disparaging remarks from any military officer, no matter how high the rank, so reaffirming the President's position as Commander-in-Chief. McChrystal's comments weren't good enough to get him on the cover of the Rolling Stone - like, he's not Lady Gaga, or even Dr. Hook :-D - but the story was good enough to get him canned from his position as commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan.

General David Petraeus, now in charge of the U.S. Central Command, is accepting a demotion to replace McChrystal and assume command of NATO forces in Afghanistan to make Obama's surge work. How's that for patriotism? Too bad he won't succeed. Afghanistan is clearly a mess, with a government of no real authority, and the Taliban are too dug in and and in control of many parts of the country. Besides, the Taliban's chief benefactor, al-Qaeda, has fled to Pakistan and poses more of a threat from there. Most Americans - I, for one, included - don't see any reason to prop up a corrupt, dysfunctional government in Afghanistan, and there are obviously more effective ways of combating terrorism, as our dealings with the Times Square terrorist proved. Petraeus's surge strategies may have worked to a degree in Iraq, which is a more developed and a relatively more stable country than Afghanistan, but not in this case.

Come to think of it, Iraq is still a mess, despite less fighting and a second parliamentary election. Also, a lot of bribery was used to get Iraqis to work together. You'd think the media would pay attention to that, but they're too busy covering more important stuff, like Lady Gaga.

Heck, they'd even prefer to cover Dr. Hook and the Medicine Show.