Eaton fires broadside at Cheney

[Ken White]

Except it's a very, very far stretch to compare a tactical situation to a decision about strategy.

Principles are principles and time is time. The parameters are different but the compressed time tactically is simple relaxed or more time strategically

Again, please tell me how many troops are going to die because the President is taking a few weeks to actually analyze and decide what the proper course ahead should be, as opposed to deciding according to when you think he should?

Hobson's choice? Unanswerable question as you know.

Moot point in any event. The Prez will take his time and make a decision -- it is highly unlikely to change much on the ground no matter what that decision is. It is an almost certain fact that if we remain in Afghanistan, there will be more casualties. The prime determinant of the number of those will most likely be time followed by enemy activity and own actions as contributors. The enemy activity cannot be predicted with any reliability and it is, regrettably, probably going to drive the latter consideration. Bill Moore said it well:

"I think we need to give it a break. War is hell, war is complex, and it has always been that way, and the nations (and world's) best minds should debate the issue fully. A tactical commander must make tactical decisions quickly, but strategic leaders generally do not, and they definitely don't for an insurgency in Afghanistan."

This discussion of time / strategy is more politically than operationally pertinent.

ADDED: That statement by me in on way contravenes that just above by John T. Fishel. We're both correct as a change in strategy will be a political decision.