They can spin it however they like, but Karzai needs to bribe these people to maintain security. Is the warlord going to work for someone else, someone willing to pay him? That's what I want to know.
The news story instantiates a particular peeve of mine. It is full of the writer's (or editor's) opinions, but doesn't actually contain any names or facts about the rejected (or accepted) ministers.
Emotion, not content.
And none of the other stories I've seen in the English language press has more than two names -- Wardak (retained at Defense) and Ismail Khan (rejected -- he's the warlord they're concerned about, and he's very unlikely to join the Taliban. Instead, he's dead certain to return to his power base in Herat and continue running the area from there to the Iranian border, regardless of which popinjay gets named de jure governor.
Having this particular warlord bottled up in a ministry actually reduced warlordism, but you can't expect AP editors to figure that out, given their limited travel and generally narrow and shallow English-major educations.
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Encourage Althouse by making a donation:
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
8 comments:
And this makes him corrupt and so unlike the US of A in the eyes of the Demos and Lefties how?
WV "nonsi" The opposite of Yes in the Spanish Newspeak dictionary.
Oh, no! These people want a government much like ours (US).
They can spin it however they like, but Karzai needs to bribe these people to maintain security. Is the warlord going to work for someone else, someone willing to pay him? That's what I want to know.
Karzai can't make promises about the future anymore. His administration is over, he's a lame duck. Not something we need in Afghanistan right now.
His administration is over, he's a lame duck.
Wow, Jason, it really is just like the USA.
Not something we need in Afghanistan right now.
Yep just like Obama.
Couldn't he just make them all czars?
The news story instantiates a particular peeve of mine. It is full of the writer's (or editor's) opinions, but doesn't actually contain any names or facts about the rejected (or accepted) ministers.
Emotion, not content.
And none of the other stories I've seen in the English language press has more than two names -- Wardak (retained at Defense) and Ismail Khan (rejected -- he's the warlord they're concerned about, and he's very unlikely to join the Taliban. Instead, he's dead certain to return to his power base in Herat and continue running the area from there to the Iranian border, regardless of which popinjay gets named de jure governor.
Having this particular warlord bottled up in a ministry actually reduced warlordism, but you can't expect AP editors to figure that out, given their limited travel and generally narrow and shallow English-major educations.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.