Spencer Ackerman points out that Victoria Nuland, author of an op-ed on Afghanistan in The Washington Post, is actually . . . a Kagan by marriage! Specifically, she's Bob Kagan's wife.
« The Difference? | Main | The McCain Factor »
The Surge of Kagans
02 Feb 2008 02:15 pm
Comments (13)
Didn't know that. Worth noting too that from 2003-5 Nuland was in OVP, she was Principal Deputy NSA, Libby's main deputy after Eric Edelman left. So she is presumably a Cheneyite.
Jesus fucking Christ, that family breeds, fucks and marries like Mormon rabbits. What the hell is up with them? When Reverend Moon performs mass weddings at the Washington Times offices, do you have to marry a Kagan? I'm half expecting Wolfowitz, Bush and Bolton to all be the abandoned bastard Kagan children who were then adopted and never told of their real lineage.
Our Kagans will blot out the sun!
So much the better--we shall write a progressive blog in the shade.
Usul, we have Kagansign the likes of which even God has never seen.
Yet somehow the Kagans are able to proliferate solely to the degree that they can advocate and cheerlead for Teh SURGE(tm)!!!, yet not enough to actually fight the surge themselves.
Must be some new ecological niche, sort of like cuckoo birds pushing our young men and women out of the country and into Iraq so that they can then pursue an r-selection strategy combined with K-selection types of rewards!
Ummm, is it too much to ask that you address an issue like this substantively? As a Canadian who supports our continued presence in Afghanistan, I am painfully aware how quickly public support has fallen for staying. If the USA doesn't pony up some troops, it will be politically untenable for other NATO countries to stick around. That's just a fact. And NATO is popular in Afghanistan and doing a lot of good against the bad guys, so this should really be a priority.
More of this kind of post, and iwe'll have to conclude you've jumped the snark.
"And NATO is popular in Afghanistan and doing a lot of good against the bad guys, so this should really be a priority."
Does the word "bullshit" have any meaning for you?
http://stopwarblog.blogspot.com/2007/12/poll-nato-support-plummets-in-south.html
"Poll: NATO support plummets in south, negotiations wanted
The Associated Press reports on a new poll commissioned by ABC, the BBC and a German TV network:
The poll has found that in southwestern Afghanistan, support for NATO-led forces has plummeted to 45 per cent this year, from 83 per cent a year ago.
According to the survey, the civilian casualties blamed on the international forces is a prime complaint. ...
The survey found that 42 per cent of Afghans rate U.S. efforts in Afghan positively, down from 68 per cent in 2005 and 57 per cent last year.
Just over half of Afghans still have confidence in the ability of U.S. and NATO forces to provide security, down from two-thirds a year ago...
“Attitudes are far more negative in high-conflict areas, particularly the southwest provinces of Helmand and Kandahar, but also in western Herat and other areas that have seen Taliban attacks. Views are far more positive in the more peaceful north,” the report said.
In the southwest, the birthplace of the Taliban movement and an area of intense combat, two-thirds of Afghans rated U.S. efforts negatively. Twenty-three per cent of respondents there said local people support the Taliban — three times more than last year and compared to only eight per cent nationally.
Last year, 81 per cent of residents in the southwest said the Taliban had “no significant support at all.” Now, only 52 per cent say so.
Despite the increasingly negative view of U.S. activities in their country, 71 per cent of Afghans still support the American presence, and 76 per cent view the Taliban's overthrow as a good thing.
More than a third say the Taliban are the prime cause of violence in the country, followed by 22 per cent who blame al-Qaeda and foreign fighters. Nineteen per cent cite international forces or the U.S. government as the primary cause.
Other results of the poll have prompted consternation:
Despite the Taliban's very negative reputation -- and partly linked to perceptions of its strength -- 60 percent of Afghans say the Karzai government should negotiate a settlement in which Taliban leaders would be allowed to hold political office in exchange for laying down their arms. Support for a settlement is 16 points higher among those who think the Taliban has grown stronger rather than weaker; and it peaks, at 88 percent, in its home base, Kandahar. ...
In another troubling result, favorable opinions of Osama bin Laden have increased in the Southwest from 1 percent last year to 15 percent now. ...
There's been a decline in the number of Afghans who say U.S. forces should remain in their country either until security is restored, or permanently -- now 49 percent, down from 60 percent last year. Just 14 percent desire immediate withdrawal; most of the rest divide between a one- or two-year time frame.
While they remain, these forces clearly face danger -- not just from Taliban and other fighters, but from a substantial segment of the population. Seventeen percent of Afghans say attacks on U.S. forces can be justified. That rises to 26 percent in Southwest overall, peaking at 40 percent in Helmand, and about as high, 38 percent in Nangarhar, in the East. And it's 28 percent among Pashtuns, vs. 10 percent among all other Afghans. (link)
Note that some 88% of Kandaharis want to see a negotiated solution to the conflict. Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier, on the other hand, has said "Canada does not negotiate with terrorists". It seems that the majoritarian aspirations of Kandaharis have met the same fate as those of Palestinians. In 2006, Harper's government was the first to reject the results of the election in Palestine which returned a Hamas government."
In terms of the effectiveness of NATO against the Taliban, the Taliban are moving into more areas, coming close to Kabul, and control considerable sections of the country.
The Afghan war is lost. It may take another couple of years to make that obvious, but it is clearly lost to anyone who has a clue about insurgency.
The Karzai government will be forced to admit the Taliban into some level of power at some point, but whether the Taliban will accede to that or simply demand its overthrow is not clear.
Not to mention that none of this was necessary to deal with bin Laden and Al Qaeda and nothing that happens in Afghanistan from here on out is going to have any effect on Al Qaeda per se which is now entrenched in Pakistan - a country into which the US simply cannot introduce large numbers of troops and which cannot itself deal with Al Qaeda or its local Taliban and jihadist groups.
"A combat squad of Kagans", I think, deserves to be the collective term.
Ah, so that's why the article promoted the idea that NATO should be some kind of Imperial force. I especially liked the word "emerging" in the title. Sounds like "it's happening, and there's nothing you can do about it, folks!" Of course, I hope that won't happen.
Can't the WashPost ever declare the affiliations of these people. Once it was the daughter of Dick Cheney, now the wife of Robert Kagan.
Joking aside (and previous comments were amusing), JESUS CHRIST, how can this many 'Kagans' be given op-ed space.
The more I learn about DC, the more I distrust anyone who lives/works there.
Company Town. Indeed. Scary.
Holy crap, two neoconservative policy wonks are married to each other? Next you'll be telling me that Matt and Spencer are roommates!
"two neoconservative policy wonks are married to each other"
I'm sorry to be anal, but you misspelled "at least six neoconservative policy wonks are related to each other."
Hope that helps!
Comments closed February 16, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
Our Kagans will blot out the sun!
Posted by otto | February 2, 2008 2:45 PM