The elephant in the hearing room Posted by Patrick Barry

McChrystal's response to Chairman Skelton's question about U.S. goals are highly revealing about the disproportionate space taken up by Afghanistan in the Washington debate.  McChrystal defines U.S. strategic objectives in terms of thwarting Al-Qaeda, and enabling the Afghan government to better take charge of its own affairs, something pursuant to the main goal.  But that says absolutely nothing about Pakistan, where U.S. interests are arguably much greater.  Now that's not exactly McChrystal's (or Eikenberry's) fault, since their commands don't extend into Pakistan.  But you have to wonder whether the fuss over their testimony is giving Congress and the American people a proper appreciation for how U.S. interests should be balanced on either side of the Durand line.  Why, for instance, isn't there complimentary testimony from Pakistan Ambassador Anne Patterson and CENTCOM Commander General Petraeus?

Comments

[ginkgo biloba]

Hi,
The complete pacification and elimination of acts of terrorism - bombings, shootings, kidnappings, and so on - arising from the various interpretations of the Koran would require the CONTINUING identification and elimination of any and all human beings who interpret the Koran's words as a call to war against those who do not reach the exact same interpretation.