Meanwhile O Dithers in Afghanistan; Flounders on Iran

AFGHANISTAN: Michael Yon

The War in Afghanistan Is Winnable [Michael Yon]

I respect the work of Dexter Filkins, who wrote this weekend’s New York Times Magazine story “Stanley McChrystal’s Long War.” Filkins is a seasoned war correspondent whose characterizations of Iraq ring true. Much of his latest piece resonates with my ongoing experiences in Afghanistan. Despite the great length of the article, the few points that did not resonate were more trivialities for discussion than disagreements. Filkins did a fine job.

To be clear, I have developed a strong belief that the war is winnable, though on current trends we will lose. Filkins seemed to present a similar argument. In my view, we need more troops and effort in Afghanistan — now — and our commitment must be intergenerational.

Keep reading this post . . .


'Gates Blindsided by Rahm' [Rich Lowry]

From Bill Kristol:

Yesterday, in light of Rahm Emanuel’s comments on delaying the decision on troops for Afghanistan, I asked: “Are Sunday talk show declarations by Emanuel and political advisor David Axelrod an appropriate way to announce the considered judgment of the president at this stage of a long Cabinet-level review process? Or is Emanuel end-running the process? Do Secretaries Gates and Clinton agree with Emanuel? Were they consulted before Rahm popped off?”

I’ve now been told by an authoritative source close to Defense Secretary Robert Gates that he had no advance warning that Emanuel would be saying any such thing.


IRAN:

Bolton: Obama’s ‘Virtual Reality’ [Robert Costa]

Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton tells NRO that President Obama is living in a “virtual reality” if he believes that the talks this week in Vienna over Iran’s nuclear program will yield any significant results. The meetings, hosted by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), are aimed at convincing Iran to ship low-enriched uranium to Russia and France for more processing, in order to prevent Iran from enriching uranium on its own. “Obama’s intent for direct interaction is just read as weakness by Tehran,” says Bolton.

“President Obama doesn’t understand the nature of the regime he’s facing,” says Bolton. “He doesn’t understand the determination of the Iranians to get nuclear weapons, and he doesn’t understand the risk that a nuclear Iran poses to the region. On all three critical points, he fails.”

“The president, so intent on rejecting the eight years of Bush, is ignoring important history,” says Bolton. “On Iran, Bush policy is indistinguishable from Obama policy. They are both based on the idea of negotiations and threatening sanctions, all of which have failed for years. That strategy will not work now, either.”

Keep reading this post . . .


Romney Speaks Out on Iran [NRO Staff]

From the Washington Post:

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) condemned the Obama Administration's approach toward Iran, a republic he described as "unalloyed evil" and controlled by "ruthless and fanatical" leaders in a speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee today in San Diego.

"Stop thinking that a charm offensive will talk the Iranians out of their pursuit of nuclear weapons," said Romney. "It will not." Later in the address, he punctuated that sentiment by noting: "Once an outstretched hand is met with a clenched fist, it becomes a symbol of weakness and impotence."

Romney's speech comes on the same day that negotiators from the United States, France and Russia meet with Iranian officials in Vienna to discuss the country's controversial nuclear program.

More here.