Why Vice Presidents matter in this election

[alw 0]

On Thursday night Senator Biden said, “With regard to the role of vice president, I had a long talk, as I'm sure the governor did with her principal, in my case with Barack. Let me tell you what Barack asked me to do. I have a history of getting things done in the United States Senate. John McCain would acknowledge that. My record shows that on controversial issues. I would be the point person for the legislative initiatives in the United States Congress for our administration. I would also, when asked if I wanted a portfolio, my response was, no. But Barack Obama indicated to me he wanted me with him to help him govern. So every major decision he'll be making, I'll be sitting in the room to give my best advice. He's president, not me, I'll give my best advice.”

Biden’s missteps were fairly well detailed in the New York Post this weekend.

Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was picked because he was thought to bring decades of experience that could help counter GOP attacks on Obama's lack of experience in foreign policy. These missteps raise serious questions about the Obama ticket and its ability to carry out a cohesive and productive foreign policy. We must also wonder how this pick speaks to Obama’s ability to choose the right team for fiscal policy.

Opponents will undoubtedly point to mistakes in facts which were made by Governor Palin. Of course there were mistakes on her part, but look beyond both. In Biden you have, as he has indicated, a presidential mentor with 36 years of legislative experience who still cannot get the facts straight in his area of expertise. In Palin you have a Governor that recognizes her status as the second on the ticket who is a quick study, getting more of the facts right in a few weeks than her opponent has in his long career.

---------------------------------------------
Every day is a bonus - every night is an adventure.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

In Palin you have a Governor that recognizes her status as the second on the ticket . . .

. . . who smiles and winks while telling us what she'll do if McCain dies.

Quote

Biden’s missteps were fairly well detailed in the New York Post this weekend.

Yes, Biden did make some mistakes, but I'll take my news from a less biased source, thanks.

[downwardspiral 0]

Kudos to Palin for actually knowing and understanding what the commanding general in Afghanistan said while the 35 year senator did not....or was that just an blatent lie on Biden's part because he knows people will take his word for it before Palin's?

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Biden’s missteps were fairly well detailed in the New York Post this weekend.

Perhaps a less-biased source than a NY Post *editorial* -- do give the NY Post credit for fully acknowledging the piece as an editorial -- would be something like factcheck.org on the VP debate. Nevermind, that the NY Post editorial needs some serious fact checking ... but it's an editorial so partisan rhetoric is fine - opinion-editorials (Op-Eds) are supposed to put forth an opinion persuasively.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Kudos to Palin for actually knowing and understanding what the commanding general in Afghanistan said while the 35 year senator did not....or was that just an blatent lie on Biden's part because he knows people will take his word for it before Palin's?

Really? Are you sure that McClennan GEN McKiernan's comments were not more in line with Sen Biden's?

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[alw 0]

Quote

Yes, Biden did make some mistakes, but I'll take my news from a less biased source, thanks.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/president/debates/transcripts/vice-presidential-debate.html

Here's the transcript

---------------------------------------------
Every day is a bonus - every night is an adventure.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Here's the transcript

Thanks, but I saw the debate and have since read the transcript.

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

Quote

Kudos to Palin for actually knowing and understanding what the commanding general in Afghanistan said while the 35 year senator did not....or was that just an blatent lie on Biden's part because he knows people will take his word for it before Palin's?

Really? Are you sure that McClennan GEN McKiernan's comments were not more in line with Sen Biden's?

VR/Marg

Yup. Biden said the General said a surge won't work in Afghanistan. The General never said that.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[Andy9o8 0]

If you're cool with Palin, as President, having the nuclear codes and facing down Putin, and China, and North Korea and Iran, and keeping Pakistan & India, and Israel and the Arabs states, from blowing each other up...then more power to you.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Yup. Biden said the General said a surge won't work in Afghanistan. The General never said that.

From the link that Marg posted, this is the quote that Biden was apparently referring to:

Quote

Washington Post: "The word I don't use for Afghanistan is 'surge,' " McKiernan stressed, saying that what is required is a "sustained commitment" to a counterinsurgency effort that could last many years and would ultimately require a political, not military, solution.

So, no, the General didn't exactly say that, but I wouldn't say that what Biden said was a blatant lie.

And I wouldn't give too many kudos to Palin, since she didn't even get the General's name right.

[billvon 2,435]

> Biden said the General said a surge won't work in Afghanistan. The
> General never said that.

McKiernan: “What I don’t think is needed – the word I don’t use in Afghanistan is the word surge. . . . Afghanistan is not Iraq.” He said it was “a far more complex environment than I ever found in Iraq" and that a “sustained commitment” would be required instead."

Looks like he agrees with Biden.

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

Quote

Yup. Biden said the General said a surge won't work in Afghanistan. The General never said that.

From the link that Marg posted, this is the quote that Biden was apparently referring to:

Quote

Washington Post: "The word I don't use for Afghanistan is 'surge,' " McKiernan stressed, saying that what is required is a "sustained commitment" to a counterinsurgency effort that could last many years and would ultimately require a political, not military, solution.

So, no, the General didn't exactly say that, but I wouldn't say that what Biden said was a blatant lie.

And I wouldn't give too many kudos to Palin, since she didn't even get the General's name right.

I beg to differ about the blatant lie part. Biden looked into the camera and said the General said a surge would not work which is entirely untrue. Then, for emphasis, he repeated his claim.

What the General did say was an Iraq style surge will not end the conflict. War is so much more complicated than just boots on the ground and a surge, or whatever McKiernan chooses to call it, is only a part of an overall strategy to win this conflict.

In my opinion there will be a surge in afghanistan and the only thing that will determine whether we call it a surge or not is who wins the white House.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Kudos to Palin for actually knowing and understanding what the commanding general in Afghanistan said while the 35 year senator did not....or was that just an blatent lie on Biden's part because he knows people will take his word for it before Palin's?

Really? Are you sure that McClennan GEN McKiernan's comments were not more in line with Sen Biden's?

Yup. Biden said the General said a surge won't work in Afghanistan. The General never said that.

What Sen Biden said:

“The fact is that our commanding general in Afghanistan said today that a surge -- the surge principles used in Iraq will not -- well, let me say this again now -- our commanding general in Afghanistan said the surge principle in Iraq will not work in Afghanistan, not Joe Biden, our commanding general in Afghanistan.

“He said we need more troops. We need government-building. We need to spend more money on the infrastructure in Afghanistan.”

[Thanks to [alw] for the transcript.]

--- -- --- -- ---

What GEN McClennan McKiernan said:

(1) Concisely, as reported in Washington Post “Commander in Afghanistan Wants More Troops” & noted by [Shotgun] & [billvon]

“The new top U.S. commander in Afghanistan said yesterday that more American troops are urgently required to combat a worsening insurgency, but he stated emphatically that no Iraq-style ‘surge’ of forces will end the conflict there.

“‘Afghanistan is not Iraq,’ said Gen. David D. McKiernan, who led ground forces during the 2003 Iraq invasion and took over four months ago as head of the NATO-led coalition in Afghanistan.

“‘The word I don’t use for Afghanistan is “surge,”’ McKiernan stressed, saying that what is required is a ‘sustained commitment’ to a counterinsurgency effort that could last many years and would ultimately require a political, not military, solution.”

(2) More extensively, the General’s own words from the Defenselink.mil transcript of GEN McKiernan’s Pentagon briefing [it’s a primary data-addict thing

“What I have found after four months in Afghanistan is that the environment there is even more complex than I would have thought prior to my arrival. It’s complex in terms of geography; It’s complex in terms of demographics, of resources, or more specifically the lack of resources, to include what I normally like to refer to as the lack of human capital, the lack of -- the availability of people that can provide governance in Afghanistan, and that's probably a fact of education in many years to come.

“What I find in Afghanistan, however, is a degree of complexity in the tribal system which is much greater than what I found in Iraq years ago. [Over 400 major Pashtun tribal networks in Afghanistan, more in Pakistan – nerdgirl]

“But the question and the need to engage the tribes, to engage tribal authorities and use those values at a local level to enhance security, governance, needs of the people to be able to express grievances with the government of Afghanistan, I think, is an important concept and one that we have to continue to work in support of the government of Afghanistan.

“What I have said -- as a military officer, I’ve said that the -- ultimately the solution in Afghanistan is going to be a political solution, not a military solution. We’re not going to run out of bad guys there that want to do bad things in Afghanistan.

“So the idea that the government of Afghanistan will take on the idea of reconciliation, I think, is appropriate, and we’ll be there to provide support within our mandate. It won't be a military-led operation.” [i.e., *not* a military surge like in Iraq - nerdgirl]

“Q Gates last week expressed some skepticism about whether more U.S. troops were really the answer in Afghanistan. He said that the answer may be -- in his mind was building up the Afghani army rather than having more U.S. troops. Is there a gap in thinking between you and the secretary?

“GEN. MCKIERNAN: No, I don't think there's a gap at all. I think we're totally in agreement that ultimately what we want to do -- winning this campaign -- is about building Afghan capacity and capability. So recently there's been a -- an international support to increase the size of the Afghan army. We need to increase the size of the Afghan police. We need to continue to reform the Afghan police. But until such time as we get to a capable Afghan security organization that can provide security for the people, there's going to be a reliance on international forces. [i.e., no surge]

“GEN. MCKIERNAN: I think first of all, I find it sometimes not very helpful to try to compare Iraq and Afghanistan. I think they're two very different environments. But as I said earlier, I believe that in looking at what is winning the campaign in Afghanistan, a couple things are important.

“First of all, it's important that winning is seen in Afghan terms. It's about extending a viable level of governance in Afghanistan which is -- meets the needs of the people and provides for certain level of security and economic promise for the future.

“I also believe that part of that solution in Afghanistan must be seen as a regional problem set. I've consistently said that it's very difficult for me to imagine the right outcome in Afghanistan without the right outcome in the militant sanctuaries on the Pakistani side of the border.

“So I think it's a regional problem set that will require regional solutions. And I think that stability in that region is of a vital national interest to this country.” [Again, no ‘surge’ - nerdgirl]

What about an Afghan version of the Sons of Iraq?:

“Q And are you considering or looking into a program that would be similar to the Sons of Iraq, where you would actually start paying some of the tribes, that the U.S. money would go to some of the tribes to get --

“GEN. MCKIERNAN: No, the difference in Afghanistan is that needs to be an Afghan-led effort to engage the tribes. And there is a program called the Afghan Social Outreach Program which President Karzai is -- tasked one of his ministers to lead. But one of the real differences, again, between Afghanistan and Iraq was, if you recall, Afghanistan was in the midst of a civil war when we intervened. And that potential is still there, so this needs to be an Afghan-led effort on how to engage the tribes and what the incentives are and how to use the traditional tribal authorities to help with community security and community assistance.”

What kind of other things is GEN McKiernan thinking about w/r/t Afghanistan (that aren't a "surge")?

“Q Minister Wardak, when he visited here a couple of weeks ago, spoke about a combined task force of Afghani/Pakistan/American forces along the border as being a potential solution for dealing with the cross-border insurgency issue. How practical is that, and is that a good idea?

“GEN. MCKIERNAN: I think it's a great idea. He surprised me a little bit because he mentioned that that was from the last Tripartite, which I was at. We didn't discuss that. (Laughter.) But I think it's a good idea. I think, in the future, I would certainly support the idea of combined patrolling along the -- along that border. And that border, you know, is not a border as we would know it in the United States. It's a very open, porous border. But the idea of a combined security effort there with Pakistani military or Frontier Corpsmen, Afghan border police, with ISAF coordinated along the border, I think, is a very powerful idea. And certainly I would like to pursue that in the future through the Tripartite process.”

Who has been briefed directly by GEN McKiernan since his move from US Army Europe to Afghanistan?:

“Q. Have you briefed the two presidential candidates or any of their aides about the situation in Afghanistan?

“GEN. MCKIERNAN: I have -- Senator Obama came with a congressional delegation through Afghanistan -- I want to say about a month ago or a month and a half ago -- and yes, we did have the opportunity to brief him. [Tony Blinken, Sen Biden’s Chief of Staff on the SFRC was also that trip. So it’s reasonable that Sen Obama and Sen Biden may have additional information.- nerdgirl]

“Q Senator McCain or his aides -- have you briefed them?

“GEN. MCKIERNAN: Not in the short time that I've been there.” [~5 months, that's reasonable. I'm not 'knocking' Sen McCain or Gov Palin on that just noting that Sen Obama & Sen Biden's staffer have been - nerdgirl]

Also available via DoDvClips.mil.

- --- ----- --- -

The “Surge” does not equal counterinsurgency theory or counterinsurgency operations. It’s not evident that differentiation is clear to Gov. Palin. At the same time, I’d be willing to bet it’s not clear to a vast majority of Americans. And one may argue how important or not that is for a VP; I’m agnostic leaning to not very important. It’s most definitely not a deciding factor for me. Erroneously insisting that it does and that it is, however, is not positive indicator, imo.

Now GEN Petraeus as CENTCOM may decide he wants a ‘surge’ in Afghanistan … or the SecDef may decide that. And I am confident that GEN McKiernan will execute the operational orders given to him.

At the same time please don’t confuse my knowledge of what GEN McKiernan said (aka ‘the primary data’) with unilateral agreement.

I do heartily agree w/GEN McKiernan that Afghanistan is an order of magnitude if not more complex than Iraq. And I heartily agree the counterinsurgency theory applies. I disagree with emphasis on relying on & executing such through the current Afghan government. Structurally, it needs to be a lot more robust to execute the kind of operations McKiernan speaks. But that’s a-historic: Afghanistan has never had a strong central government.

My thinking is more akin to this ideas expressed in this Foreign Policy article: “What Petraeus Understands”

“The Mesopotamian lessons that will be most useful in the South Asian conflict derive from Petraeus‘s famous counterinsurgency manual, which emphasizes a “population-centric” approach. In Iraq, his command placed top priority on securing the population, meeting its needs, and shoring up the legitimacy of the government versus the insurgency. Engineers built walls and soldiers erected checkpoints to protect the population and keep out car bombers.

“Much has been made of the coalition’s recent successes against al Qaeda in Iraq. But only in a very focused way did Petraeus take an ‘enemy-centric’ approach to the terrorist organization. Killing the bad guys worked because the killing was more discriminate and the hardcore elements were separated from the rest of the insurgency and the population support base. Thanks to new human intelligence gained from the population and former insurgents, these operations were more precisely aimed at small numbers of ‘irreconcilables.’ Biometric devices helped create a computerized, shareable registry of possible insurgents, which led to more accurate targeting. Other technical means then allowed rapid targeting of entire cells, but it was human intelligence that ensured the targets were the right ones. Then, U.S. and Iraqi troops held the areas after counterterrorist operations, unlike in the past.

“Toward the mass of the Sunni insurgency, Petraeus adopted a new strategy. ‘We can’t kill our way to victory,’ he was fond of saying. He sought instead to convert those who were fighting—bringing the ‘reconcilable’ insurgents in from the cold. [i.e., paying the Sons of Iraq - nerdgirl]

“The obvious parallel in his new role is to the Pashtun nation that straddles the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan. Pashtuns form the support base for the Taliban insurgency, which in turn gives sanctuary and support to the much smaller al Qaeda network. The United States and NATO need an approach that wins over the Pashtuns, looks for Taliban converts, and uses the resulting intelligence in a very focused counterterrorist campaign against al Qaeda. Unfortunately, this is contrary to the dominant thinking in the policy debate. Many in Washington are pressuring the administration and Pakistan to ‘get tough’ in the tribal areas when in fact they need to ‘get smart.’

“Given what he has achieved in Iraq, Petraeus brings unique credibility to the ‘get smart’ crowd. And unlike many U.S. generals who see war in narrow military terms, Petraeus lives and breathes the [St. Carl] Clausewitzian maxim that ‘war is the conduct of politics by other means.’ He understands better than anyone that each time an errant bomb kills innocent Afghan or Pakistani villagers, the coalition loses support in those countries and at home.”

Afghanistan may be the only thing that makes Iraq seem ‘easy’ by comparison.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[rushmc 18]

Quote

If you're cool with Palin, as President, having the nuclear codes and facing down Putin, and China, and North Korea and Iran, and keeping Pakistan & India, and Israel and the Arabs states, from blowing each other up...then more power to you.

Thanks
I am

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

If you're cool with Palin, as President, having the nuclear codes and facing down Putin, and China, and North Korea and Iran, and keeping Pakistan & India, and Israel and the Arabs states, from blowing each other up...then more power to you.

Vs. Obama, hell yeah. First of all, anyone with half a brain knows that decision is made before it ever gets to the President.

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

I beg to differ about the blatant lie part.

OK, so we disagree. I think both of them got their facts less than straight on a few things, but so far I haven't noticed anything that I would consider a "blatant lie" from either Biden or Palin at the debate.

[alw 0]

Quote

If you're cool with Palin, as President, having the nuclear codes and facing down Putin, and China, and North Korea and Iran, and keeping Pakistan & India, and Israel and the Arabs states, from blowing each other up...then more power to you.

What I not "cool with" is Barack Obama as President, having the nuclear codes and facing down Putin, and China, and North Korea and Iran, and keeping Pakistan & India, and Israel and the Arabs states, from blowing each other up.

What I'm not "cool with" is electing Barack Obama to punish Bush or the Congress or people that don't recycle.

What I'm not "cool with" is handing one party a blank check when the guy writing the check is somewhere to the left of George McGovern and believes that, like Kennedy, some really smart guys in a cabinet room in the White House know more than people that have been putting their lives on the line since he stopped eating food out of jars.

What I'm not "cool with" is a coalition of a President from the Chicago machine, a speaker that manipulated a key vote to cause it to fail and with it lost $1T in one day, and a Majority leader that devastated the insurance industry by speaking without thinking.

Sorry folks, I'm just not cool with Barack Obama. I won't change anyone's mind and I won't suffer too much if Barack Obama gets elected. I just get upset cause I've seen this happen before and I know how much longer it will take for things to improve and how much longer it will take with a Democrat controlled Congress and White House. Anybody remember Carter?

---------------------------------------------
Every day is a bonus - every night is an adventure.

[downwardspiral 0]

I watched the debate as well as General McKiernan's press conference so let me ask you this. What is a "surge" to you?

A surge to me would be more boots on the ground, temporary or permanent, in order to accomplish specific objectives. McKiernan wants 4 more brigade combat teams (14,000-20,000 additional troops) in order to establish better secruity in Afghanistan. The Iraq surge consisted of 30,000 additional troops to help quell sectarian violence throughout Iraq. The majority being in Baghdad.

Perhaps my terminology is wrong but it's looking like McKiernan wants a surge and why would he want something won't work?

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Anybody remember Carter?

Anyone remember the (far more recent) record surplus under Clinton? The one that was pissed away by Bush sending thousands of our siblings and children to their deaths to assuage his Oedipal conflict?

We're reviled around the world, and now we're about to start building Hoovervilles at home, thanks to the butt-fucking the current team has given this country for the past 8 years. How anyone can "be cool" with giving these guys a 3rd bite at the apple, and still sleep at night, is just incomprehensible.

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

is just incomprehensible

and what is just incomprehensible to me is that anyone could believe that only one party did all of the damage that got us here.

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

is just incomprehensible

and what is just incomprehensible to me is that anyone could believe that only one party did all of the damage that got us here.

Thank you for insulting our intelligence by using the old argument technique of painting the opponent's position with hyperbole.

Nobody said "all". People understood the meaning.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Vs. Obama, hell yeah. First of all, anyone with half a brain knows that decision is made before it ever gets to the President.

Great.. more of the same.. by the same people who took us to Iraq.. and have destroyed our ecopnomy all for personal greed.. glad to know you have been good with the way the country has been going....enriching the Friends of the Administration for BILLIONS and BILLIONS and BILLIONS.

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

Nobody said "all". People understood the meaning.

and what is just incomprehensible to me is that anyone could believe that only one party did all of the damage that got us here.

Okay, I took out the "all", notice it does not change the result.

And why are you insulted by what is "incomprehensible to me"? And if you are, deal with it, it is called freedom of speech!!!

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

Great.. more of the same.. by the same people who took us to Iraq.. and have destroyed our ecopnomy all for personal greed.. glad to know you have been good with the way the country has been going....enriching the Friends of the Administration for BILLIONS and BILLIONS and BILLIONS.

Are you really in that much denial to think that the problems our county has is one sided?

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[Amazon 7]

The congress has been run into the ground by rePUBICan shenanigans since 1994....The presidency has an approval rating the LOWEST it has ever been....The Presidents buddies have SACKED the American Treasury for trillions....... and you want more of the same from thje same people.. give me a fucking break.....I think you have no CLUE what denial is