Would one enterprising stenographer please ask O’Hanlon which six month periods were NOT crucial? And if they are too lazy or stupid to ask, give me a microphone and O’Hanlon, and I’ll ask.
Reader Interactions
27Comments
Comments are closed.
Come for the politics, stay for the snark.
There are no moderate republicans – only extremists and cowards.
I am pretty sure these ‘journalists’ were not always such a bootlicking sycophants.
You cannot love your country only when you win.
American history and black history cannot be separated.
They traffic in fear. it is their only currency. if we are fearful, they are winning.
This blog will pay for itself.
Reality always lies in wait for … Democrats.
I have other things to bitch about but those will have to wait.
Hey hey, RFK, how many kids did you kill today?
I would try pessimism, but it probably wouldn’t work.
A tremendous foreign policy asset… to all of our adversaries.
Rupert, come get your orange boy, you petrified old dinosaur turd.
The truth is, these are not very bright guys, and things got out of hand.
Take hopelessness and turn it into resilience.
Stamping your little feets and demanding that they see how important you are? Not working anymore.
All hail the time of the bunny!
Disagreements are healthy; personal attacks are not.
The only way through is to slog through the muck one step at at time.
Republicans in disarray!
Fucking consultants! (of the political variety)
“Everybody’s entitled to be an idiot.”
Quote tweet friends, screenshot enemies.
She burned that motherfucker down, and I am so here for it. Thank you, Caroline Kennedy.
It’s a good piece. click on over. but then come back!!
You are here: Home / Politics / War on Terror / War on Terror aka GSAVE® / Not All Friedman Units Are Equal
El Cid
It’s sort of a Zen / Hallmark cards way of looking at both wars and life — you know, live every six months as if it were the most important six months of your life!
Soprano2
He was just on “The Diane Rehm” show. Too bad someone didn’t call in to ask this.
cleek
who the fuck is Michael O’Hanlon that anyone should pay attention to anything he says ?
frikkin NPR this AM, while talking about the McChrystal nonsense felt it necessary to include a similar quote from O’Hanlon, without giving us any sense of why we should care. out of the blue, the reporter mentioned that “Michael O’Hanlon, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, says it would be a mistake to drop McChrystal because this is a critical time in the occupation”. (paraphrase) and then they moved on to the next topic.
i’m like, “is this guy the fucking Pope Of War or something? why should i or anyone care?”
Sly
Serious People know that Friedman Units only appreciate in value. Like real estate, gold, and Washington Post subscriptions.
El Cid
@cleek: He had written an Op-Ed in the WSJ, was then cited by every other major news organization, hence, NPR follows along. Normally, though, you can just flip through the New York Times to see what and who will be featured on NPR a few hours later.
Walker
If O’Hanlon says to keep McChrystal, then he clearly needs to be fired.
Bob
He doesn’t respect the chain of command. Fire his ass.
cleek
@El Cid:
OK, but still, why should anyone pay attention to him ?
Butch
At what point are you wrong so many times that you finally start to lose credibility? With Hanlon and Kristol and Friedman and a whole bunch of others it just never seems to happen. At least I wish Hanlon would learn to use a comb.
Roger Moore
@Butch:
Your mistake is in thinking that right and wrong are defined by objective facts rather than political talking points. As long as you stick with the narrative, you can’t possibly be wrong. It’s only when you say something that’s factually incorrect and unpopular that you’ll get in trouble.
Joseph Nobles
Just like there’s always another Al Qaeda #3 to kill, there’s always a crucial six-month period to get around. Someone needs to do an intervention on the warmongers.
Rey
The President and McChrystal’s meeting ended after :30 mins. Stick a fork in him, he’s done….
El Cid
@cleek: “Should” is a different ‘nother question. If there were a “should” meritocratic evaluation of whom should and shouldn’t be listened to, it would be like a rapture of thousands of pundits and ‘experts’ vanishing off our screens and pages and airwaves.
Thankfully for them, none of our billion dollar media feel that a “should” standard — of to whom we should listen — will ever need to be applied.
handy
Saw some other toadie on the TeeVee this morning pushing a similar line about how McChrystal’s so crucial to winning the war and his soldiers are gaining confidence in his strategeries. I guess that’ll be the new talking point–Obama can’t let him go because doing so puts victory in jeopardy.
Poopyman
@cleek: Oh yes, indeedy. I was going to post this too. This was on the 3 minute “news” at the top of the hour, too, not as part of some “he said, he said” segment during Morning Edition. Other POVs? Not a chance.
Poopyman
@Walker: @handy:
Bear in mind that keeping McC is the Republican meme only because liberals are calling for his firing. One only needs to imagine what would be said if he’d said those things about Bush & Cheney.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Rey: NYT says McC left the White House before a meeting on Afghanistan strategy. That’s somewhat telling, if true.
Booger
“Most crucial period” = “Friedman Unit” = “Free Beer Tomorrow.”
Rip the McChrystal bandaid off right now, all at once. Whatever pain it causes will be miniscule compared to a long, slow, lingering process that ends up in the same place several F.U.s from now.
Also, don’t forget that Friedman Units are like nuclear power–too cheap to meter.
ppcli
@cleek:
I went to graduate school with Mike O’Hanlan, and I wanted to step up to the plate in his defence. Mike was always really generous with the beer in his fridge. Good quality beer, too. Of course, nowadays when I pay attention to him I don’t get a free cold beer. But you never know. He might start passing ’em out again.
slag
I honestly didn’t care about this issue before, but now, I really want Obama to fire this guy. I’m so tired of the constant insinuations that military generals run this country. Adios junta!
Quiddity
The “most crucial” six months is whenever Sir Michael says it is. And according to O’Hanlon, it’s not even here yet. We are “entering” it, which means it will probably take some time before the clock starts ticking. That means the six months won’t be over until, what, 2012?
Jerry 101
The next six months (FU) are always crucial because, if they were not, then the adventures would have no reason to continue. IOW, if the next 6 months aren’t crucial, then why are we there now?
In the FU worldview, we don’t get to leave, because the next 6 months are always, ALWAYS crucial. Maybe we can reduce our presence to merely 50,000 soldiers, but we can never leave. Because the next six months are crucial to…whatever.
We could have 6 months go by in Iraq without a single insurgent attack, without a single IED, without a single MURDER for any reason, and have massive economic growth and recovery and a perfect, pro-USA democracy in place with a 90% approval rating, and still, the next six months would be crucial. Can’t risk letting ’em slide backwards. Or can’t risk Iran invading (betcha that one’s coming in the not too distant future as a reason to retain a permanent presence in Iraq, after all, we still occupy parts of Germany and Japan – just in case the Russians or Koreans or Chinese attack).
So, FU. FU. FU….FU ad infinitum. We’re never leaving.
TuiMel
I would pay cash money to see that. I can almost taste the popcorn now.
Kenneth Fair
Give me a microphone and O’Hanlon, and I’ll whack him upside the head with the microphone.
Phoenix Woman
@cleek:
You, too? I nearly barfed up a lung when I heard NPR playing back O’Hanlon’s bullshit.
Hey, but maybe he’ll be down with Obama’s personnel change now that his BFF Petraeus is in charge. Wahoo!
Sean
If they give you O’Hanlon and all you do is ask a fucking question…
tkogrumpy
And here I thought I’d never hear that expression again.