Good Policy?

I was looking for the show "Lie to Me" since I heard FOX was not running the President's Press Conference. In the end FOX had thrown in with the other national television stations and carried the conference, sharing the loss of millions in advertising dollars for the networks.

(our local FOX station went with the conference while the national broadcast was "Lie to Me")

I was initially dumbfounded by the President's remarks on Pakistan, a nuclear power. Spoken with a tone that does not come through in the transcript. Maybe I was being a bit too hard. Here is what he said:

I am gravely concerned about the situation in Pakistan, not because I think that they're immediately going to be overrun and the Taliban would take over in Pakistan. I'm more concerned that the civilian government there right now is very fragile and don't seem to have the capacity to deliver basic services: schools, health care, rule of law, a judicial system that works for the majority of the people.

And so as a consequence, it is very difficult for them to gain the support and the loyalty of their people. So we need to help Pakistan help Pakistanis. And I think that there's a recognition increasingly on the part of both the civilian government there and the army that that is their biggest weakness."

This is a good outline of the battle parameters. But was it wise to criticize the Pakistani government in a way that compliments the strategy of the Taliban, or any other radical Muslim group? Could President Obama have been more complimentary of the Pakistani government's efforts or image before its own people as he was speaking on the '100 Day' world stage? If you understand how these radical organizations operate maybe you would agree with me that this was a shot in the arm for the Taliban cause.

I went to a lecture of an urban geographer on Beirut some months ago. I found it fascinating how President Obama's statements shadowed what she explained as the operations of Hezbollah in Beirut, or Lebanon in general. In fact fighting corruption, providing social services, education and even running public works are all part of the program whether it is Hezbollah, Hamas, Fatah or the Taliban. All terrorist groups bent on the destruction of the western world, most notably the United States.

I was listening to the BBC World Report on the radio the other day and, though it is not in their print, they linked the recent 'woman's legislation' in Afghanistan with President Obama's policy. That is that under Bush democratic practices and freedoms were emphasized while under Obama the consolidation of power to keep al-qaeda and the Taliban suppressed take priority. So supposed torture that saves lives degrades us all but suppressing woman's rights is good policy? But I've wandered away from the topic.

the civilian government there right now is very fragile and don't seem to have the capacity to deliver basic services: schools, health care, rule of law, a judicial system that works for the majority of the people."

"don't seem to have the capacity,..." So who does? Not the way I would put it.