War Notes: December 3, 2009

Will keep it brief, since it is late.
.......................................................
Only a day after a bizarre report that the U.S State Department would support a high-ranking civilian to essentially co-manage the country with President Karzai, U.S Ambassador to the U.N Susan Rice denied that the U.S would back such a proposal. The plan had seemed to be pushed by Richard Holebroke, and it did not go well at the U.N, who saw it as undercutting the role of their man on the ground, Kai Eide.
...........................................................
Perhaps to make amends for all the progressive people's hearts President Obama shattered with his troublesomely hawkish speech last night, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs clarified that July, 2011 was not some vague goal for withdrawal, but in fact, that it was "etched in stone." Defense Secretary Gates testified before the Senate that the date was "a statement of strong intent." Those comments would suggest that the withdrawal date is as much to give Karzai and his crew an ultimatum as anything else, though I maintain my skepticism that Obama wouldn't push back the withdrawal date in a heartbeat if the military and Republicans howled at withdrawal. Incidentally, aren't promises usually "set" in stone, and not "etched" in them?
.......................................
The Columbia Journalism Review asks why media outlets have done such a poor job asking Afghans what exactly they think of the massive escalation. Actually, they kind of just point out the poor job the media has done. I don't think people really need to ask anymore.
......................................
Though I am sure there have been many good responses to last night's speech around the blogosphere, and even a decent Tom Friedman piece that now sits on the upper right hand corner of the screen, my favorite was this piece from DailyKos, in which a diarist ably disassembled many of the "straw man" arguments supporters of the escalation have been making. To clarify, he is responding to frequent arguments made on DailyKos itself- that is, progressives and Obama supporters who support or are ambivalent about the escalation, not to Republicans, who should not have their arguments taken seriously on most issues.