Now, as President Obama leads yet another debate on whether to deploy tens of thousands of additional troops there, the secretary of state and the secretary of defense will once again constitute a critical voting bloc, the likely leaders of an argument for a middle ground between a huge influx of soldiers and a narrow focus aimed at killing terrorists from Al Qaeda, according to several administration officials.
Gates, that crucial swing vote. Don’t know if he’s actually swung; the Times appears to have built this story in spite of having just that bit of somewhat-speculative news. But presuming the piece has it right, it’s noteworthy that Gates, the defense secretary behind the surge, would shave down the McChrystal request. If Gates can’t get behind it, the case can’t be airtight.



1 Comment
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
RSS/XML Feed
‘Case can’t be airtight.’
Spencer : do you actually read any news coming out of AfPak that isn’t sourced in central comedy releases of the Pentagon News Room in D.C. ?
The place is coming apart at the seams, the U.S.A. has got the Pak Army shelling their own Taleban – who have just sacked their H.Q. – and the Pak Secret Service keep chummy with the Talebs for any number of reasons. Meantime back in Afghanistan, the natives would as soon as shoot Yanks as look at them because they are a hated … wait for it … Foreign Occupier.
But hey. India just bought 2 reactors. No Non Proliferation Treaty nonsense involved.
You want to explain ‘Middle East Policy’ to the rest of us poor twits listening to the constant carping about Iran – which has signed the NPT and has inspections!