Latest Column

“It seems obvious that Obama is going to have to be less coy with the public about what is really going to happen in July 2011, even if that risks alienating his party’s vestigial antiwar base. ”
.
He has already lost his antiwar base, as if there is anything wrong with being opposed to war, so there is no need for you to join Lanny Davis in calling for a “Sister Soulja” moment, as if this administration has done anything yet that would be considered left wing by a rational person.

I have said this before: “recalcitrant neighbours” have a different view of their interests in the region as distinct from those of the US, and to a lesser extent, Europe.

Add to that the fact that the financial equilibrium is slowly tilting eastwards – China and India.

So: no matter our politics here at home how long can we afford this war by selling US bonds?

“He became an afterthought because of the brilliant, and in some ways diabolically clever, decision that Barack Obama made in naming his successor: General David Petraeus, the dominant U.S. military figure of our time.”

.
An afterthought? That is presuming McChrystal remains in the military under close scrutiny doesn’t it Mr Klein? What if McChrystal decides to actually retire? What if he sheds the clothing of a military man, and becomes a vocal public citizen? How brilliant will Obama be at confining him to saying nothing when this happens?
.
I do hope McChrystal decides to retire. I hope he comes on Fox News to tell his side of the story. I do believe the brilliance of Obama will be exposed. That indeed COIN is not working in Afghanistan at all, and trying to take lessons learned from Iraq will not work in Afghanistan.
.
The perception out in middle America is that Obama lost control of his military. He had to squash the wagging tongues within his military, and he basically fired McChrystal as the end result.
.
General “Betrayus” (remember that MoveOnOrgy ad Joe Klein?), who the left vilified, has all the cards now in his pockets to play the baffoon Obama like an oboe. I for one believe Obama and the rest on the liberal left will rue the day Obama made yet another bumbling mistake in snap judgements getting rid of his man McChrystal, and putting Gen Petraeus solely in charge.

Wow! “Idiocy”! “Brilliance”! “Wildly incompetent!” This column has all the drama of a made-for-TV-movie.

Obama’s appointment of Petraeus is hardly brilliant. Petraeus is perceived as being the best, most well known, most respected and well-liked general in the country.

It’s just like playing chess when you freak and bring out your queen.

That happens all the time but I’ve never heard anyone refer to it as brilliant. Not saying it was a bad decision but, eh, “brilliant?”

Excellent article, I learned a lot. I’ve got a question for you, Joe and maybe this is because I don’t understand military culture at all but… why does the military want to remain committed to Afghanistan for years to come? It seems pretty clear in your article that the generals don’t want to withdraw. But you don’t say why? What do they want to accomplish?

I’ve never thought that members of the military actually liked to be in combat. I thought it was more that it’s something they’re explicitly willing to do. I would think after 10 years that the military would be reluctant to commit more time and blood.

What’s the motivation?

I always admire your covering of the actual military aspects of a problem but absolutely cringe when you discuss the cultural aspects,
.
Don’t you understand that by pushing this ‘East-Coast vs Appalachia dreck you are actually participating in and exacerbating the problem. The main difference in worldviews that I percieve is the idea that the Military is a tool to be used to do a specific job vs the notion that the Military is noble in and of itself. The fetishising of the Military is what leads to ridiculous situations like our outspending the entire rest of the world on deadly hardware and manpower and still cringing in fear at the notion that we might hold a terrorism trial in New York City.
.
The issue in play now, as you know, is the extra effort that is required to protect the civillian population in Afghanistan. There’s no doubt that when our troops come under fire, there is nothing they would rather do than call in major firepower on the source of the problem. Unfortunately the situation can be compared to trying to take out all the libertarians who happen to occupy a particular city block. The ‘enemy’ is only a small subset of the population.
.
The frustration this causes is precisely WHY the accountability of the Military to the civilian leadership is essential. If they had their own way, we’d be manufacturing enemies at 10 times the rate we’re killing them.

“It is frequently asserted that Gen. Petraeus “succeeded” in Iraq via a troop escalation or “surge” of 30,000 extra US troops that he dedicated to counter-insurgency purposes in al-Anbar and Baghdad Provinces.

But it would be a huge mistake to see Iraq either as a success story or as stable. It is the scene of an ongoing civil war between Sunnis and Shiites that is killing roughly 300 civilians a month. It can’t form a government months after the March 7 elections, even though the outcomes are known, having a permanently hung parliament, wherein the four major parties find it difficult to agree on a prime minister. The political vacuum has proved an opening for Sunni Arab insurgents, who have mounted effective bombing campaigns and more recently are targeting the banks. And now the caretaker government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is being shaken by a wave of violent mass protests even in Shiite cities that voted for him, against his government’s failure to provide key services, especially electricity in the midst of a sweltering summer heat wave. On Saturday, a big protest rally denouncing the lack of electricity turned violent, and police shot dead two protesters. In some parts of Iraq temperatures reach 120 degrees Fahrenheit, and few places have electricity more than 6 or 7 hours a day. The minister of electricity has been forced to resign. On Thursday, the headline in al-Zaman, the Times of Baghdad, read “Electricity Uprisings Break out in Hilla and Diyala under the Banner of Ousting al-Maliki.” If the caretaker government falls in the face of this popular pressure before parliament can agree on a new prime minister, there would be a dreadful security vacuum and a constitutional crisis.”

Lessons of Petraeus’ Iraq for Petraeus’ Afghanistan

The military is noble because they are over their getting shot at. Takes a little courage, no? And most members of the military have no interest in slaughtering civilians–talk about unwarranted cynicism. What’s wrong with you? On the other hand, no, most soldiers don’t seem to love having a hand tied behind their back when they are fighting and their own lives are in danger. It’s so weird, they also want to get home to see their loved ones. Crazy world!

Mr. Klein, this article was particularly frustrating because you let nonsense conventional wisdom cloud some good analysis.
.
Petreaus is not a good choice. His record is abysmal.
.
The “surge” failed. Paying Iraqi factions not to kill each other is a temporary fix, at best. There’s been no reconciliation between Iraqi sects, the government can’t legislate, the Kurd oil dispute is unsettled, the recent elections are dubious, the “decrease” in violence was due to number manipulation (link) and violence is actually increasing (link to follow). The surge’s only “success” is as a PR move- it entered into CW despite evidence to the contrary- you’re helping.
.
Petraeus wrote the COIN policy, which, as you showed in the past, is dependent on a strong, legitimate, effective central government that can provide basic services throughout the country- something that will not happen in Afghanistan. And Petraeus wants to amplify his misplaced policy there… good grief. We’re not countering insurgents, we’re defending our bases from attack from indigenous Afghanis.
.
And you still have not explained why the Taliban, an unsophisticated lot with no Army or Navy, a group with no history of terrorism, who’s most lethal weapon is fertilizer bombs, is a threat to you and me here in the States- especially a threat that is worth several trillion dollars.
.
This is the preamble to the Iraq invasion all over again. You are being duped. These charlatans are executing the neoconservative plan (a network of military bases from N Africa to S Asia to secure natural resources) and you are letting it happen, again. You want to help us? Use your position to call for new generals that can lead us out of this mess.

* link to increasing violence in Iraq
- http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/11/world/middleeast/11iraq.html?hp

Whoever said the anti-War / anti-Military nuts on the left were all underground? WRONG!!

Newfree, are Libertarians nuts on the left? They’re true fiscal conservatives, the original Tea Partyers, and they want us to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan (and close the bases there, slash the mil budget, stop military aid to foreign countries, close Gitmo, stop rendition and prosecute war crimes).
.
Stop this left vs. right BS. It is about what is best for this country.

But then you’d think there wouldn’t be opposition to the 2011 deadline for withdrawal…

I think the military opposition for that deadline reflects their belief that victory won’t be achieved by then.

Hey Joe, you said Obama was joined by Biden and Hagel, it was actually Hagel and Jack Reed of Rhode Island.

This is in reference to the Baghdad trip in 08.

As long as Hamid “Nguyen Van Thieu” Karzai is in charge of the Kabul government, I don’t see how there can be any improvement to the situation there.

Not to dismiss the article wholly, but it did strike me as overstating in part. As Derek and pintortwo point out, it is taken as a given that Iraq is a shining success even as it burns and hurts daily. Petraeus is a fine general, but his primary merit to Obama is simply that he is the most well known general. The army possesses masses of generals as fully capable as McChrystal and Petraeus put together. The public just doesn’t know them. West Point is a factory of highly capable officers, and most members of any class of 20 or more years ago are probably capable of leading the effort, which is a lost cause anyway.
.
The matter of the Democratic party being out of touch with the military is another area I find overblown. How many Democratic leaders served in the military versus Republican leaders? I have no idea but would guess that the larger balance would lie with Democrats. After Korea and Viet Nam I remember claims that Democrats started wars and Republicans ended them. In any event, we are the most military obsessed country in the world since Nazi Germany. It’s not a good thing.

Who served in the military?

http://www.awolbush.com/whoserved.html

“if they had their way…”
.
not a fair characterization considering COIN was Petraus’s thing. you made the jump from the soldier’s instinct under fire, to the impossibility of the military as a whole showing strategic restraint.

I was surprised at the implication that being anti-war, whatever that means, is the same thing as being anti-soldier, or that big city liberals have never served.

With the predictable absence of any evidence, Joe Klein asserts: “[Obama] won quiet praise from the people in uniform by retaining Bush’s popular Defense Secretary Robert Gates ….”

Again, for the thousandth (hundred thousandth?) time, Klein invokes alleged, unnamed, unidentified, so-called “people in uniform” in “support” of his unsubstantiated, wishful thinking assertions.

Also, what evidence does Klein have that Gates is “popular” among anyone other than leftists, particularly the members of the Washington press corps? Answer: None.

Robert Gates is not popular amongst leftists, I can tell you that.
.
Similarly, the Washington press corps is not leftist at all, it’s a bastion of establishment centrism.

Again, for the thousandth (hundred thousandth?) time, textee invokes alleged, unnamed, unidentified, so-called “people in uniform” in “support” of his unsubstantiated, wishful thinking assertions.
.
==quote fixed==

Stuart. We’re talking about textee who only yesterday referred to Kathleen Parker as a leftist.
.
I’m still mulling the theory that he’s a spambot. Definitely borderline failure on the Turing Test.

Paul Dirks:

I did not refer to Kathleen Parker as a leftist. I did, though, say that she was not a “conservative” as she was described by Kate Pickert. Kathleen Parker is a moron and uber darling of the Washington press corps. There won’t be much disagreement between Parker and Eliot Spitzer. Their show might make for the worst television in history.

Perhaps all of the generals have risen (or descended as the case may be) to their level of competency. If so, that bodes well for the future in Afghanistan.

This column is total revisionist history. It’s more pathetic than normal. Joe states that Petraeus and Obama developed a prickly relationship when the General made a powerpoint presentation to the candidate. How about before then when the rookie senator blitzed the general on the surge attacking him for 8 minutes, never asking a question and then voting against him? Ya think that might have started them off on the wrong foot?

Joe also tries to suggest Hillary Clinton has something to do with the surge and supported the theory. Clinton also tried to humiliate Petraeus in those same hearings. Hillary aggressively opposed the surge. Joe himself was contempteous of the surge as well.

The fact is both Obama and Hillary were nutured with a healthy level of contempt with all things military while in college and early in their political careers. They don’t like Generals and the Generals don’t care for them. They will do their duty. McChrystal’s error was in saying what they all think.

You have to remember the famous Kerry gaffe after he lost the election and addressing college students said, “You better study up or you’ll end up in Iraq”. This is classic liberal thought. Those who serve do so because they have fewer options. We get a lower quality individual than the general population because those with ‘better’ options, take them. This is not true but still passes as conventional wisdom in the liberal world. The folks over in Iraq had a fun time with ‘Jon Carry’ but didn’t miss his ignorance.

Petraeus won a huge and decisive victory against great odds and revived the Ameirican military in doing so. He’s also revised counter-insurgency strategy the world over leading to decisive victories over insurgencies in places like Colombia and of course in Gaza. The difference between the Israeli IDF in Southern Lebanon and Gaza was spectacular due largely to adapting the tactics and some of the tools developed by Petraeus. Moreover the USA continues to advance and refine these tools. Obama himself advanced the concept of drone wolfpacks in Pakistan to devastating effect. These attack modes are incredibly lethal yet the American soldier remains safe. It seems very likely the next time the IDF needs to go into Gaza or Southern lebanon it will be with vastly fewer soldiers yet vastly more lethal firepower.

I’m not sure who is doing programming at CNN but how do they keep their jobs? The show will be a disaster.

Joe,
-
Thank you for finally acknowledging that Karzai being in charge of Afghanistan makes doing actual counterinsurgency work impossible by definition.
-
The next step is admitting that since we can’t use a COIN strategy to stabilize the country, and we won’t force Karzai out, that we should just bail to a couple of well defended mega-bases and conduct counter-terrorism ops against Al-Queda in Pakistan and obliterate any camps they attempt to set up in Afghanistan.

“We get a lower quality individual than the general population because those with ‘better’ options, take them.”
-
Fortunately, in the case of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, the “lower quality individuals” had “better options” (sometimes called “other priorities”) and the military did not get saddled with their incompetence until Afghanistan and Iraq, after they had lied and cheated their way into top civilian positions.

Now now! Be Nice. GWB DID serve. Dick Cheney was simply too horney getting passes for being a young father. Hey, looked how that worked out. We might not have Liz and her brillaint commentary!

This Bush / TANG thing has to still be an open sore. Think about how poorly it worked out ofr your side.

It was always perpsoerous having liberals who never served anything accuse GWB of missing a weekend of guard service in Alabama 30-yrs prior. Dan Rather fell for the most incompetent’y prepared fraud ever and got himself and a dozen others fired while removing the topic as an issue. CBS lost almost 20% in the ratings it never recovered and is barely ahead of Oreilly in total viewers.

At the same time it focused attention on Kerry and the preposterous exaggerations of his own record. The SBVs were outstanding where CBS and the libs were childishly stupid.

Their show might make for the worst television in history.
.
I can certainly agree with that.

Dirks:
.
I really wish I had gotten an answer to that question “if she’s not a conservative, then what is she?”

textee,

You have to consider some of the rumors for who might be the Secretary of Defense such as Hillary or Hagel. There’s no end to the number of clowns he might have appointed. That’s not to say Joe isn’t full of crap. Gates has been a staunch supporter of Petraeus and the shift to counter-insurgency ‘investing’. There are/were a lot of old school general against it, Gates fired the top Air Force general and secretary of the air force for dragging their feet in supporting the drone program. Most of the men in harms way looking for the protection of a drone flying overhead watching their backs were in support of Gates.

LOL
.
We get a lower quality individual than the general population because those with ‘better’ options, take them.
.
The military-hating fallacy there is that people without “better” options to take are lower quality individuals.
.
You presume to know a great deal about liberals, but you apparently know nothing about us –not even the most basic fact that John Kerry is no liberal at all.
.
Keep putting your rank ignorance and rightist fantasizing on display, it makes for instructive entertainment.

Ok, a few things wrong with those statements\
.
1) Where is your read that McChrystal is actually against COIN? Everything I’m reading is that McChrystal, like large sections of the Pentagon, think COIN still has a chance so long as they can get Karzai in line (hence the shots at the diplomat) and they can use the necessary force for the necessary length of time effectively (hence the murmurings of needing more troops and more time)
.
2) McChrystal offered his resignation before he got to Washington. I doubt he’s ready to call out Obama and feels he earned this dismissal.

Where have you been? Since 1968 liberals have been anti-war and anti-soldier. Why do you think they’re not allowed on the Harvard campus to recruit? Why do you think Kagan wanted to ban them?

That doesn’t mean every liberal is anti-military but virtually every liberal looks down their noses at those who serve.

One of the more comical reactions to Kerrys cheap shot about failing students having to serve in Iraq is that he was just repeating what every liberal knows to be true. The average person who enlists does so because they have fewer options. Makes sense. Why go in the Marine or Navy when you can go to college? These are the people who can’t get into college. When the backlash started a number of MSM columnists supported Kerry including EJ Dionne.

Except of course it’s bullsh*t. Aptitude and other tests show the average soldier is brighter than the comparative population. There are also reams of stats proving another liberal ‘factoid’ that veterans, especially vietnam vets, don’t fare as well post service. That’s more nonsense.

This liberal snideness is of course a stereotype so there are exceptions but it’s become a stereotype for a reason.

liberals are hardly complicted and Kerry is absolutely a liberal.

My opinions and comments are based on what I feel is best for the country. I have a great deal of respect for our soldiers- so much so, that I am deeply offended that neoconservatives in the previous administration lied to them and had them sacrifice on false pretenses- it is profoundly disrespectful and sinister. I feel obligated, out of respect for our soldiers, to tell anyone that will listen that we need to bring these men and women home now.
.
There are just wars- I feel we needed to invade Afghanistan to eradicate al Qaeda camps, Bush deserves credit for accomplishing this. And there are unjust wars- Iraq was no threat, and building bases in Afghanistan, after AQ was made impotent, is unnecessary- as you well know, as the deciders well-know. Bush deserves blame for letting ideologues in his administration hijack US Foreign Policy. Obama deserves blame for attempting to “finish the job”.
.
You, rdw56, if you are indeed Michael Rubin, are a dishonest hack that believes it is OK for elites to lie to common folk- including soldiers- because you know what’s best for the rest of us. All of your comments have an ulterior motive: to advance the project for a new American century.

“That doesn’t mean every liberal is anti-military but virtually every liberal looks down their noses at those who serve.”.

What is your best piece of empirical evidence to support your thesis?
.
Given that there are so many liberals who have served would you describe them as self loathing liberals?

liberals are hardly complicted and Kerry is absolutely a liberal.
.
Boy, the well of ignorance never runs dry with you, does it?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60419-2004Jul18_2.html
.
One of Kerry’s more effective defenses against the charge that he is a reflexive liberal may be the support of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council , or DLC. Formed in 1985 out of concern that the party had drifted too far left, the group has rarely hesitated to criticize Democrats who it believes cleave to an outdated special-interest brand of liberalism. The DLC, which criticized former Vermont governor Howard Dean’s candidacy in last winter’s primaries, has been enthusiastic all year about Edwards and Kerry.
.
Al From, the group’s founder, said the Republican accusations of liberalism “pretend that the reform movement of the 1990s” in the Democratic Party under President Bill Clinton never happened . From maintains that, by backing anti-crime measures and welfare reform over the objections of many urban liberals and by backing free-trade measures over the objections of labor unions, “Kerry was here and was an important part of the redefinition of the party.”

Is there anything that’s just too plainly false or stupid for you not to proclaim with fatuous faux-authority?

Hillary is smart? What a stupid thing to say. If she is so smart what great powers of analysis told her the Iraq war would go well and make her support for it look good?

“There are different kinds of truths for different kinds of people. There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for students; truths that are appropriate for educated adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy. It doesn’t work.”
-Irving Kristol, “godfather” of American neoconservativism.
.
Kristol is, no doubt, someone that rdw56/Rubin admires and emulates.

By the way rdw56, has your paranoia about liberals reached the point where you are lining the windows with tin foil yet? As one human being to another, and beyond ideology, it’s amazing how much of the human personality is affected by chemical ratios. You and your fellow liberal haters can get better, more chemically balanced, and lead a fuller, happier life. Help is available.

but virtually every liberal looks down their noses at those who serve
.
That’s a caricature you’re speaking of, a cartoon villain.
.
You have no idea what you’re talking about. You exist in a fantasy world.
.
Liberals respect the service of those who volunteer to protect our nation and the rest of us, just like we respect teachers and fire-fighters and train conductors and every other profession that contributes to the greatness of our country.
.
We’re the people who find value in public service, remember?
.
We’re the folks who think that the healthy competition of the marketplace should be tempered by an equally healthy assumption of civic responsibilities, don’t you recall?
.
You are really degrading your ideological side with this deliberate stupidity.

“to advance the project for a new American century.”

I have no idea what you are talking about but all power is derived from economic prowess. We are powerful militarily because we are powerful economically. Armies cost money. American exceptionalism isn’t about military power. American military dominance is the result of American exceptionalism.

Kerry is absolutely a liberal. ONe doesn’t have to be in the pocket of domestic unions to oppose trade deals. NAFTA was designed to advantage Mexicans, Canadians and Americans and any self-respecting liberal would have supported it. The problem in the USA was union ownership of politicians.

if you followed the surge at all you would know that it was successful almost immediately well before the 30,000 additional troops arrived. The primary component responsibile for the success of the surge was the change in the tactics of the 130,000 troops already there, not the additional troops.

“to advance the project for a new American century.”
I have no idea what you are talking about…
.
Yes you do: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century
——
.
You believe that America is destined to dominate the world- it is the natural order. Of course, to dominate economically you need control of natural resources. Therefore, we must dominate these critical regions- from the Horn of Africa, through the Middle East, into Central Asia. A network of bases in this arc will allow us to be the lone provider of security to these most bountiful and untapped areas, clearing the path for industrial investment and exploitation. When the world’s biggest corporations are dependent on US military might, the countries they hail from will pay homage to their benefactor in the form of USD for Oil in perpetuity (otherwise no security, no profit). Thus insuring that the dollar’s value will remain bound to the price of the world’s most valuable resource.
.
Our objective in the Middle East is to enhance our economic prowess– a necessary step toward fulfilling our destiny as sole superpower promised by American Exceptionalism- yes?

Kerry is absolutely a liberal.
.
You just have no expertise on this subject at all. You literally have no idea what you are saying.
.
John Kerry is a member of a caucus of powerful Democrats dedicated primarily to eliminating liberal influence in the Democratic Party, what they call “modernizing” for a “21st century party”.

The Democratic Leadership Council is a non-profit 501(c)(4) corporation[1] that, upon its formation, argued the United States Democratic Party should shift away from the leftward turn it took in the late 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. The DLC hails President Bill Clinton as proof of the viability of third way politicians and as a DLC success story.
.
The DLC’s affiliated think tank is the Progressive Policy Institute. Democrats who adhere to the DLC’s philosophy often call themselves New Democrats. Note that this term is also used by other groups, who have similar views on where the party should go in the future like NDN[2] and Third Way[3].
.
The DLC’s current chairman is former Representative Harold Ford of Tennessee, and its vice chair is Senator Thomas R. Carper of Delaware. Its CEO is Bruce Reed.
.
Senator John Kerry won the Democratic primary and chose primary contender Senator John Edwards as his running mate. Both Senators are members of the Senate New Democrat Coalition, and the DLC anticipated that they would win the general election. In a March 3, 2004 dispatch, they suggested voters would appreciate Kerry’s centrist viewpoints, imagining voters to say “If this is a waffle, bring on the syrup.” [24]

Despite whatever story you carry around in your head about who and what Democrats and liberals are, really, honestly, John Kerry is not a liberal, and was never our choice to be a Presidential candidate.
.
John Kerry didn’t bother to lie to liberals about who he was or what wing of the party he represented…unlike Barack Obama.

Did you serve your country, high speed?

Thank you, RDW for commenting.
.
.
–

OT: I’m raising a pint of Boddingtons for our boys of USA Soccer! Such a spectacular win against Algeria.
And out of solidarity to our rivals of England, who also made it out of the group. I’m watching some Brazil , Ivory Coast match I recorded a while back (haven’t watched before; been too involved on some stupid blog…)
.
…or two…

…fyi: my 18.5 was a response to 14.1. Hit the wrong reply…

2 interesting posting by military perssonel. One is on his way to Afghanistan and 1 is currently serving there.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/06/the-madness-of-king-david-petraeus.html

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/06/fearing-the-ego.html
Both give us, I believe, a true picture of what the regular military is experiencing and their perspective which I would assume is worth more than the pundits.

personnel

http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2010/06/23/by-their-fruits/

“Of course, to dominate economically you need control of natural resources. ”

We have an abundance of natural resources but even so your basic proposition is flat out wrong. Japan has few natural resources and a top economy. Israel has even fewer and a strong economy. Russia and Iran have natural resources coming out their ears and are comparatively weak. Iran sits on an ocean of oil and has to import gasoline.

The strength of the USA and the West in general is capitalism and freedom. Look over the post-WWI era and who prospered and who did not. Where did all of the great scientific breakthoughs come and the new products? China with it’s 1B people? India?, Russia? The Islamic world?

The USA will continue to prosper and lead because we are capitalist and free. Obama has tried to make us less capitalist and less free but he’s not been successful.

“When the world’s biggest corporations are dependent on US military might”

What are you talking about? How are Intel and Exxon dependent on US military might? Are you suggesting China would not pay Intel for their products without the threat of military intervention? You’re kidding right? Obviously if China didn’t pay Intel they wouldn’t get any chips. As it is they stiff Microsoft which liberals don’t seem to mind.

Exxon is also very good at protecting itself. Large companies do business where there is a rule of law and an economy to buy the product. Chances are if there isn’t a rule of law there isn’t much for an economy and a reason to be there.

There are clowns such as Hugo Chavez who would resort to thuggery but Exxon already departed Venezuela as have other multi-nationals which is why oil production is down over 20% and they have domestic shortages. But even there the US military was not involved.

What so you mean ‘toward fullfilling”? Hasn’t the liberal bitch since 1989 been we ARE the worlds sole superpower?

That’s what’s so cool. We are only in a competition with ourselves.

Do you twits have any idea how small natural resources are as a percent of the US economy? Oil is less than 4% of GDP. We export coal and are the leading producer of natural gas in the world. This focus on natural resources as the basis for economic growth is nonsense.

You missed the point, and failed to answer my question.
.
It is not necessary that we dominate the resources ourselves, it is that we dominate the regions where they are abundant and unclaimed thereby linking our currency to the most valuable resource.
.
Is not Our objective in the Middle East is to enhance our economic prowess– a necessary step toward fulfilling our destiny as sole superpower promised by American Exceptionalism,?

You seem to go out of your way to miss the point of my comments– I think you know exactly what I’m saying.
.
No one is significantly tapping into these specific resources because the regions themselves are unsafe. Should the US military make it safe for capitalists, the companies that could invest and exploit what is there will be dependent on our military might for return on investment.
.
You may be many things, but I suspect “dumb” is not one of them. Don’t act that way, don’t treat me that way.

No one complains about American success- we love it, I love my country. Many feel, however, we jeopardize it with military extravagance and cheapen it when we don’t live up to our principals.

Reading Klein’s post I found it impossible to detect even so much as a trace of the main idea that Greenwald had blogged about. So much for civil discourse.