In case you missed it in the legendary Friday news dump, the Pentagon says that the Taliban have "coalesced into a resilient insurgency"
>
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that this wasn't breaking news on Friday, something that some precocious young Pentagon trend-spotter just happened to notice, and said, "By golly, I wonder if Secretary Gates knows about this." Actually, since the news came in the form of a report that was sneaked out on Friday, this startling conclusion was presumably known, well, at least days earlier.
In fact, according to the AP's Lolita C. Baldor:
The report was released Friday along with a separate plan for the development of Afghan security forces. They are the first two comprehensive Pentagon reports to evaluate progress in Afghanistan.
Vast problems -- corruption, the illegal poppy trade, human rights abuses and slow progress in reconstruction -- were detailed, as well as the struggle to train and equip the Afghan Army and police.
The report described a dual terror threat in Afghanistan that includes the Taliban in the south, and "a more complex, adaptive insurgency" in the east. That fragmented insurgency is made up of groups ranging from al-Qaida and Afghan warlords such as Gulbuddin Hekmatyar's radical Hezb-i-Islami group to Pakistani militants such as Jaish-e-Mohammed.
Insurgents will continue to challenge the government in southern and eastern Afghanistan, and the may also move to increase their power in the north and west, the report predicted.
The assessment was bluntly pessimistic as it described efforts to train the Army and police.
Now possibly the report could have been released earlier in the week, when it would have been likely to receive more normal media attention. Perhaps that was the plan, and the Pentagon supply office simply ran tragically short of those shiny report folders -- or maybe even, gasp, staples! Wouldn't you think they go through a lot of staples in an average week at the Pentagon? Let's say you forget to reorder one week. Boy, are you going to have a lot of loose papers!
In a panic you call over to Foggy Bottom to see if the State Department guy's got any staples he can spare, and it turns out she is a Colin Powell gal, still nursing grievances over the boss's serial humiliations at the hands of former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. No help there! So you mobilize a massive national-security crisis effort, and finally, in the wee hours of Friday morning, you lay hands on enough staples to release the report -- just in time to catch all those press guys 'n' gals heading out for the weekend.The Friday news dump is a cherished D.C. institution -- in fact, it's probably known and beloved of governments all over the world. But in the Bush regime it's become something of an art form -- no, an entire genre.
One of the many things I cherished about Rachel Maddow's old morning show on Air America Radio was the regular Monday feature in which they sifted through the weekend dump to see what the regime was legally compelled to release and least wanted brought to public attention. There was always something.
Now, I'm hoping Rachel still does this on her evening show (which airs at an impossible time for me). Frankly, though, this is a feature you'd think would be emulated by, well, every news outlet in the country. Gradually readers and viewers could be trained to look forward to weekly treasures from the dump. It could become a highlight of the weekly news calendar. Why, it's possible to imagine Friday becoming the worst day of the week for these awkward disclosures.
That is, of course, if our news media were actually interested in reporting the news.
Meanwhile, perhaps the Pentagon will have some thoughts on how to deal with the mess in Afghanistan. Check back on Friday.
#
Labels: Afghanistan, Friday news dump, Taliban
posted by KenInNY @ 4:05 PM
3 comments
|
Reddit
3 Comments:
This is totally OT. I'm posting it here because I figured Howie Klein might be interested, and would more likely see it over here. Below is a comment I made here, regarding the local media campaign being run in response to Steny Hoyer's sleazy leadership in the sell-out by House Dem leadership on FISA:
______________
Raising the awareness of the ubiquitous low information voter is always a good thing, but is likely doomed to failure without considerable forethought, research, and planning. I've been a little disappointed in these folks who should know all this by now.
My specific problems:
1. Understand the district where you are trying to exert influence.
I don't even claim expertise in regard to my own MD-04 district, let alone MD-05, but I do know that MD-05 is not homogeneous, particularly along its north-south "axis". Rev. Yearwood's message may resonate better in sizable portions of the northern reaches of the district, but I suspect not so much in most of its southern enclaves. That's not to say the latter cannot be reached, but the message and (I'm sorry to say) messenger both need to be adjusted accordingly - something along the lines of 'doesn't the government get into your business enough as it is? Why does Congressman Hoyer want to make things even worse, when it really won't even help the anti-terrorism effort?' ...Something like that, with more of a libertarianish, keep-the-gubmint-outta-my-personal-life vibe.
2. Understand the relationship between the district and its representative.
I've seen otherwise well informed commenters on other progressive blogs muse that, well, Steny, look what happened to Al Wynn next door; you're next. Although I don't see this level of ignorance expressed by mainstream bloggers, I am concerned that this attitude may have some influence on campaigns like this. Before Donna Edwards so frightened him by her near upset in the 2006 Democratic primary, Wynn was becoming increasingly arrogant and aloof, and folks here picked up on that. From what I've read, and in a few chats with coworkers who live in his district, I don't see Hoyer exhibiting any such politically self-destructive behavior. In fact, one coworker, a retired federal employee who serves with a group concerned with preserving benefits of retired feds, says Hoyer is quite frank, open, courteous, and down-to-earth in his meetings with that group. I have heard no evidence of Hoyer behaving differently with other people in his district. Such an attitude goes quite far in keeping the loyalty of voters, even if they don't like all the decisions their guy/gal makes.
Having said all that, it's still a good idea to expend some resources in MD-05 to make voters aware of this, in the hopes that at least a few questions will be posed to Hoyer by "friendlies" in his district. I have brought it up with my retired-fed colleagues, and will continue to do so. Such efforts may make Steny think twice before trying to slip something so odious under the radar in the future. So the folks behind this campaign should try to understand the various vibes in the district, and vary the game plan accordingly with different options in robocalls, newspaper ads, roadside billboards, etc.
__________________
When I say I'm no expert on MD-05, I ain't kidding, but if there is any good place for me to submit my $0.02 worth on something like this taking place in my back yard (so to speak), please let me know.
Despite my criticism - and apologies if it is unduly harsh; that was not the intent - I like this effort. Just needs some fine tuning, IMHO. In fact, maybe the libertarian partners in this endeavor could be of use here, as long as they avoid the temptation of wild thoughtless "fed-trashing"; there are lots of DC commuters in southwest MD-05 who are federal employees or contractors. Also some federal installations in south MD-05, including a major Naval air facility on Patuxent River.
Here's an additional comment, related to the one above. Someone just put up a very useful (IMHO) post over at Free State Politics on political demographics in MD (PVI and all that) - here is the link. I'm no expert, but anyone trying to have in effect in MD politics, especially on an old pro like Steny Hoyer, should take a look.
Sorry again for the OT - I hate doing that in a post that deserves attention and commentary solely on its own merits. My only (weak) justification is that the kind of crap Steny & Co. have been pulling has helped to get us into such messes, e.g., diversion of resources and attention (including Congressional oversight) from the Afghanistan campaign, with the resulting unsurprising and disastrous consequences.
You raise lots of interesting points, Murlandguy, and since we don't have any kind of bulletin board where you could post them, I suppose this is as good a place to post them as any.
Howie is traveling at the moment, but I'll make sure he sees your notes.
Best,
Ken
Post a Comment
<< Home