Ron Paul yanks Richard Holbrooke's chain...

[KGW]

I am not a complete fan of Mr. Paul, but I must say he certainly asks the right questions at times:



Holbrooke looks and sounds like someone directly out of the NeoCon cabal. Perhaps it is because he is? Lying fook!

[cjppjc]

Re: Ron Paul yanks Richard Holbrooke's chain...

No one is more consistant than Ron Paul. He bashed Bush and the Congress for the war in Iraq. Now he is again asking where the authority to do these things in Pakistan and Afganistan come from. This conversation about authority never comes up unless Dr. Paul is speaking.

[*T*]

Re: Ron Paul yanks Richard Holbrooke's chain...

I am not a complete fan of Mr. Paul, but I must say he certainly asks the right questions at times:



Holbrooke looks and sounds like someone directly out of the NeoCon cabal. Perhaps it is because he is? Lying fook!

What Paul hasn't realised is that subscribers to a certain outlook WANT a failed state (Pakistan), they WANT a widening engagement, they WANT a permanent war footing, they WANT massive deficit spending, that the side effects are DELIBERATE and PLANNED.

[BiscayneSunrise]

Re: Ron Paul yanks Richard Holbrooke's chain...

Holbrooke looks and sounds like someone directly out of the NeoCon cabal. Perhaps it is because he is? Lying fook!

Paul wanders off point too much and loses credibility. He should have just zeroed in on the authority question and not let up. Not to mention the HUNDREDS of civilian casualties now being inflicted on Afghan and Pakistani civilians by indiscriminate US airstrikes. Not a good way to win hearts and minds.

The reason why Holbrooke sounds like a a member of the neocon cabal is that a certain school of thought says that US Presidents must respond to geo- political realities. Regardless of party affiliations, personal desires, demands from party members or citizens, presidents, by and large, follow similar foreign policy paths.

We had 40+ years of communist containment from presidents of both parties because it was the only reasonable policy for decades. Now, believe it or not, Obama is mostly following the foreign policy of George Bush.

During the campaign Obama wanted to distance himself from the Iraq war. However, he did insist that Afghanistan was central to the war on terror (Ooops sorry, we don't use that expression anymore)

Whether he really meant it or was just trying to sound tough, I don't know.

While General Petraeus is arguing for more negotiations with Taliban (questionable in my mind) President Obama is ordering more airstrikes. Again, not the best way to win hearts and minds.

Just as we stumbled into Vietnam, we may end up stumbling around Afghanistan for years because there is no alternative.

Tragic.