Out and About

This whole business about the leader of the Pakistani Taliban running loose and making public appearances in Pakistan under the terms of a very lenient accommodation Pervez Musharraf reached with him kind of seems like a problem. I'm not sure statements like "there can be no deal with the United States" should necessarily be taken at face value, but it's clearly cause for concern.

Now I don't think withdrawing a couple of brigades from Iraq and throwing them into Pakistan is necessarily the correct way to express that concern, but given that the Afghanistan-Pakistan area is where our biggest problem seems to be, it would be nice for that region -- rather than Iraq -- to be the main focus of not only our material resources but perhaps most importantly of the time and attention of folks at CENTCOM, the NSC, the White House and so forth. Instead, this whole area is getting treated like an afterthought.

Comments

But McCain wants us involved in Iraq forever and wants us to invade Iran.

That's what he offers and the sooner people wake up to that fact the better.

The reality is this: thanks to the Bush/McCain policies, bin Laden is still out there. They have let him get away. That's something McCain needs to answer for in the general election as he tries to tout his national security credentials: that his policies have let bin Laden escape and will continue to do so.

Posted by cm | June 2, 2008 10:02 AM

Obama should visit Afghanistan every time McCain visits Iraq, then tag McCain for being distracted from the real WoT.

Posted by Consumatopia | June 2, 2008 10:04 AM

We don't need to pull any brigades from Iraq. Just ask for Republican volunteers and you'll have thousands, millions of ready, easy-to-train troops.

Posted by El Cid | June 2, 2008 10:11 AM

A couple of brigades? So THAT'S what Obama means when he says we should invade Pakistan. Awesome.

Posted by Al | June 2, 2008 10:32 AM

I like that Matt thinks that invading Pakistan isn't "necessarily" the correct way to address concerns about Pakistan. Matt's definitely leaving room to agree for whatever Obama calls for.

Matt, you claim foreign policy expertise and you have pretty much unlimited time and attention. What do you think the US should do in Pakistan? Do you know that "time and attention" aren't actual policies?

Posted by Thomas | June 2, 2008 11:45 AM

This point about the critical theatre cannot be stressed enough. The fighting in Iraq is a sideshow for the WOT. Yet, it's where we have most of our resources.

I like Consumatopia's idea, it would be a good stunt to constrast McCain's stunt visits.

Posted by American Citizen | June 2, 2008 4:49 PM

I'm not so sure.

If the time and attention we are spending in Iraq is the cause of many of the problems there, as I've seen Matt argue persuasively on this blog, it seems unlikely that more time and attention spent in other areas of the Middle East will produce better results than we've seen in Iraq. We should just get the hell out.

Posted by yave begnet | June 2, 2008 5:52 PM

"What do you think the US should do in Pakistan?"

Matt doesn't answer questions like that.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | June 3, 2008 5:59 AM