Theater of the Absurd
Oliver North | May 07, 2012
My old American Heritage Dictionary defines the word "theater," inter alia, as "a large geographic area in which military operations are coordinated." Throughout World War II, official dispatches and press reports described military action and events in the European, Pacific and China-Burma-India "theatres of war." We now have a new definition, courtesy of our present commander in chief: a place to remind everyone that Osama bin Laden is still dead.

On the anniversary of bin Laden's demise at the hands of U.S. special operators, the Barack Obama re-election campaign made a "surprise" middle-of-the-night visit to Kabul, Afghanistan. According to White House talking points, the purpose of the trip was twofold: "thank the troops" and sign a "historic" strategic partnership agreement with Afghan's erratic president, Hamid Karzai. It was brilliant political theater in a theatre of war.

Since the end of World War II, few military operations have received as much self-congratulatory acclaim by a commander in chief as the operation to kill the head of al-Qaeda. Mention of Osama bin Laden's death is a constant in every Obama campaign appearance and fundraiser. Bin Laden's being dead is a staple in Democrat Party direct mail and Internet solicitations and mentioned more often than Obama's Nobel Peace Prize. The topic even creeps into speeches about green energy, health care, the economy and White House meetings with foreign dignitaries.

Republicans complain about the O-Team's hyping bin Laden's death. They cite Vice President Joe Biden's chest-thumping comment that "Osama bin Laden is dead, and General Motors is alive" as proof that Obama is "overplaying his hand" or "taking too much credit," even "dancing in the end zone." But wait. Every politician running for re-election touts his or her "accomplishments," deserved or not. And face it; killing bin Laden is one of the few real accomplishments of this administration. Anyone who didn't see this "we killed bin Laden celebration" coming knows less about American politics than my Boykin spaniel.

Angst over the O-Team's use of bin Laden's death in the president's re-election campaign is a distraction. Critics -- including Mitt Romney's advisors -- should focus on issues that really are important to protecting the American people. Some recent examples:

There are Republicans running around Washington trying to calculate how much this week's campaign junket to Kabul cost the American taxpayers. But this isn't just another GSA swindle. Those who want us to hire a new commander in chief need to explain what's in -- and not in -- the so-called Enduring Strategic Partnership Agreement Obama and Karzai signed in the few minutes they spent together on Tuesday morning. The document has glowing words about "shared determination" and "mutual commitments" but is silent on our financial burden. It contains nothing about how many American military personnel will remain in Afghanistan after our "combat forces" are withdrawn in 2014 and fails to describe their mission or capabilities. Unlike a status of forces agreement, it provides no legal protections for U.S. troops. In short, it's fluff. The Romney team needs to tell us how they would do better.

The substance of what actually transpired in Kabul wasn't the only missed opportunity for the GOP to hone in on the Obama administration's destitute national security record. On Monday, John Brennan, assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism, told a Washington audience that "targeted strikes" from remotely piloted aircraft (the media incorrectly refer to them as drones) are the most "effective," "legal," "proportional," "ethical" and even "humane" way of protecting us from terrorists. Instead of a quick GOP response, it took Jose Rodriguez, former director of the CIA's National Clandestine Service and author of the new book "Hard Measures," to ask how death by Hellfire missile is more "humane" than capturing and questioning terror kingpins. Rodriguez points out that Obama's "take no prisoners" policy means no captured terrorists, no interrogations and no human intelligence (HUMINT).

Mr. Obama doesn't talk about our abysmal lack of human intelligence in this long war. He called waterboarding and sleep deprivation for captured terrorists "torture" and banned these enhanced interrogation techniques.

Our appalling HUMINT deficit was evident shortly after Air Force One took off from Bagram Air Field early Tuesday morning, when suicide bombers struck "Green Village," a secure compound outside Kabul. Press accounts incorrectly ascribed the attack -- which killed seven and wounded dozens, including schoolchildren -- to the Taliban. But a credible source says that the assault was conducted by the Haqqani network and that NATO officials were alerted more than six hours before the strike about the arrival of the suicide team in Kabul. The intel provided included information on how to precisely locate the terrorists. When asked why the attack wasn't prevented, I was told: "It was HUMINT. Nobody pays attention to HUMINT."

Strategists in the "Romney for President" campaign need to identify problems such as these and explain how they will fix them -- fast. Bin Laden is still dead. But the war being waged against us isn't. If Republicans fail to focus on doing better, the O-Team will turn the "theatre of war" in Afghanistan into a "theater of the absurd."

I think the Romney campaign has exactly "zero" interest in talking about or participating in anything close to foriegn policy.

Fish on...

Todd

Barry's dancin' in the end zone.
Wink, watcha gonna do ?

Whatcha gonna' do?...........whatcha' gonna' do. Whatcha gonna do?.........whatcha? gonna' do.

Someone is sticking their fingers into foreign policy......

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE59E0Q920091015

Who would do such things?

Just skip to the end, and when you see that both the Heritage Foundation and the NRA oppose the treaty, then the treaty is likely a no brainer...to support.

Fish on...

Todd

"Like this, Ted ?"



"With all these quail around, watch out for Cheney."

I'm more weirded out by Illy's SalmoG obsession. 2 posts with his name in the title recently?

A hippie weirded out, unlikely. Probably just being one of those
"No Brainers' of Odds.

So...transparency, or not? Or only when it makes the President look bad?

Weak effort.

Fish on...

Todd

Too bad there wasn't a movie camera there when everyone told Rumsfeld that the terrorists were Saudis and came out of Afghanistan, and he said "there are better targets in Iraq"...and there we went.

Fish on...

Todd

I didn't excuse anything...I asked you a direct question.

Fish on...

Todd

Big-O scrotum scrubber

Snork!

So you want transparency...except when you don't.

Just like oil supply controls gas supply/price...except when it doesn't.

Either way, it's Obama's fault.

I think I've got a handle on it now...thanks.

Fish on...

Todd

Please...please...you aren't harping about releasing "classified information"...which this isn't...for political reasons.

Please.

Ever heard of Dick Cheney? Ever heard of him committing actual treason by giving up the name of a covert CIA agent to discredit her husband who had proof that he and the rest of the Bush Administration are liars?

You have zero credibility to argue about the release of anything.

Fish on...

Todd

You mean you support Cheney outing a covert agent in order to get back at her husband for proving he and his cronies lied to get us into Iraq?

That takes right wing ballwashing to the extreme... but it's not like you're alone here on that call.

Fish on...

Todd

You've got to be kidding...the only bull$hit in that case was that Cheney committed actual treason, unlike the use of the word that TeaBaggers and other assorted idiots.

Fish on...

Todd

I think it's a proud and seminal moment for all Americans...unless, of course, you supported the guy who "didn't really give much thought" to the guy who masterminded mass murder in the World Trade Center...everyone should be able to see it.

I suggest you not watch, so as to preserve the sanctity of that moment.

I'll be watching, just as I watched when Dumbya declared "Mission Accomplished", stuffed a roll of quarters in his johnson, and embarrassed all of America...only I won't be embarrassed for us this time.

Fish on...

Todd

Well, unfortunately for you and the rest of the haters...you're right, it is.

Suck it!



Fish on...

Todd

"Either way, it's Obama's fault." sez Odd. But I gotta admit it's a
change from the Lib mantra "its all Bush's fault."

I think what you'll see is a bunch of high level advisors going back and forth with the evidence as to OBL's wherabouts, the likelihood of getting him, and the chances of collateral damage.

You'll see people arguing about it, and presenting both sides, as advisors are supposed to do.

You'll see the President have to be the one to make the final decision, and you'll see him make that final decision.

Then you'll see the results...the perpertrator of the worse terrorist attack on American citizens killed by Navy Seals.

I can see why you would rather just hate on Obama rather than see anything objectively at all, but this is a pretty good story if you're an American...it's even a good story for those who while whine all the day and night about it.

Fish on...

Todd

Todd do you really believe some of that chit you peddle or are you
just playing debate class games? Drink the tea or stir the chicken guts
with a stick, whats the difference?

I hope that the SEALS were waiting for the go ahead...and I hope that there were advisors advising against it...it's called "debating" the possibilities, something your guy sucked balls at.

It's called an "informed and conscientious decision"...you'd be eating it up right now if he sent the team into the wrong place and two of them got popped...as it happens, however, he made the correct decision, on timing, place, and manner.

Sorry.

Fish on...

Todd

just more spiken the ball. it'll just be a glorified puff-piece plastered on the big screen for all the scrotum scrubbers (classic) to founder over. and, at the rish of allowing bedwetting sympathizers/hollywood pussies access to classifed information just to pump-up the SCROTUS.
maybe that's POTUS.

To be clear...I don't think you'd be happy to see dead Americans, but if there were any, you'd be gleefully blaming it on Obama and wondering why the movie hasn't come out yet.

Don't bother denying it.

Fish on...

Todd

In other words, it took 19 hours to talk Barry into it. :>)

Stop being such a whiny b!tch...you can tell it's a good campaign ploy because the right wing douchebags are tripping all over their own dicks to get in line to cry about it.

Romney's got schit, and Obama's got this...among other things...it will be an election issue, get used to it...start explaining how Romney was for it before he was against it before he was for it...

Fish on...

Todd

Hey Hank,

This just poured out of your mangina.

Just another one of the governments tautologies, Vets will never be
treated as they deserve and the BIA is one of the most corrupt
agencies beyond the Beltway. The DEA is in a dead heat with them.