Visual source: Newseum
Roger Cohen:
Something immense is happening as the world transitions to a hyperconnected state where, for many, the distinction between the real and virtual worlds has ceased to exist. All the trailing paraphernalia of states and borders and government-to-government palavers, not to mention privacy laws, look so 20th century.
Harold Meyerson:
A heretical idea has entered the national discourse: Maybe some other nations handle their economies better than we do. Some nations, after all, are growing like gangbusters. Some nations have retained manufacturing—even high-wage manufacturing—in the face of low-wage competition. And in some nations, ordinary people actually share in the proceeds from globalization that in this nation flow only to the rich. …
Leslie Gelb, former president of the Council on Foreign Relations, also attributes Germany's overwhelmingly positive trade balance and comparatively low unemployment rate (7 percent) to that tripartite system [a broad agreement among business, labor and government]. David Leonhardt, The New York Times economics columnist, wrote recently that Germany owed its edge in global competitiveness to a range of policies that could not be more different than ours: limiting homeownership, improving education (including vocational and technical education) and keeping unions strong -- which is why "middle-class pay," he noted, "has risen at roughly the same rate as top incomes."
R. Emmet Tyrell says, amid nasty cracks about Jimmy Carter and Bll Clinton, that Obama will lose his reelection campaign whoever the Republican nominee turns out to be.
Dick Durbin:
From parking meters to airports, public assets around the country are now seen as "cash cows" that can be sold or leased by cash-strapped state and local governments for a one-time payment.
Having billions of dollars immediately available to plug budget holes without raising taxes is very appealing. And to the delight of Wall Street investors, state and local governments often fail to ask the important questions or consider the long-term impact. …
Whether you agree or disagree with privatization, two things are obvious. First, taxpayers need to be asking more and better questions before handing over control of critical public assets like a highway, an airport or a parking meter concession. And second, Uncle Sam is being played for a sucker.
Robert Dreyfuss:
[A senior White House said before in a background briefing before Obama's speech]: “We haven’t seen a terrorist threat emanate from Afghanistan for at least seven or eight years. The threat has come from Pakistan.” Even there, said the official, the leadership of Al Qaeda has been decimated and virtually “taken…off the battlefield.” So what’s their rationale for staying? According to one official, the reason to remain is that the Taliban and Al Qaeda are “interrelated,” and America’s goal is to prevent a Taliban seizure of power in Afghanistan so that Al Qaeda cannot re-establish a “safe haven” in Afghanistan once again. Our goal, he said, is to “make Afghanistan resistant to [the Taliban’s] return.” If that’s the strategy, it’s ludicrous.
The Taliban and Al Qaeda are separate and distinct, and in any case, Al Qaeda is crippled. Besides, as the killing of Osama bin Laden proved, US forces can zap Al Qaeda using commandos and drones, if need be, so there’s really no worry about an Al Qaeda base in Afghanistan.
Orzala Ashraf Nemat
Three years on, the evidence from implementing the military surge shows how the reality differs from the president's narrative that the surge was a success.
The way progress is measured in Afghanistan is very problematic. Look beyond the cliched statements about how many girls are going to school or women are now engaged in the public sphere – good news to an uninformed audience – and you can see a drop off in the number of school and university students, particularly outside the capital, and suspension of significant development projects in all parts of the country.
The escalation in the war not only caused casualties on both sides, but it also resulted in the further militarisation of communities, either through the government's initiative of arming local militias or via criminal gangs and anti-government forces. This is undoubtedly affecting provision of very basic services such as health, education, agricultural and various socioeconomic development programs.
Doyle MacManus:
…U.S. officials are talking increasingly of a long-term commitment of military trainers, advisors and others that would remain for many years. The commander of the U.S. training mission in Afghanistan, Lt. Gen. William B. Caldwell, said this month that his mission of building the Afghan army and national police would take "until about 2016, 2017."
Michael Gerson, the former Bush speechwriter, kicks Barack Obama around:
What other American president has employed a public argument so transparently political—the need to “rebuild our infrastructure” and “find new and clean sources of energy”—to explain his choices as commander in chief? What other president has deployed the words “fidelity” and “unwavering belief”—citing examples of military tenacity and courage—to announce a policy of premature retreat? What other president has more dramatically claimed “a position of strength” while more effectively conveying an impression of weakness?
There is a boldness to this rhetorical approach, which might better be called shamelessness.
Eugene Robinson:
Some heard a declaration of victory, others an admission of defeat. The many contradictions in President Obama’s speech about Afghanistan Wednesday night were perhaps intended to obscure the bottom line: Tens of thousands of American troops will remain for at least three more years, some of them will be maimed or killed, and Obama offered no good reason why.
The only debate within the administration, it appears, was whether to bring home the troops far too slowly or not at all. Obama decided on the too-slowly option
Michelle Malkin says the "bleeding heart" lionization of undocumented immigrant José Antonio Vargas is "insane":
The Vargas deceit is not an object lesson about America's failure to show compassion. It's another stark reminder of America's dangerous failure to learn from 9/11.