Behind Afghan War Debate, a Battle of Two Books Rages

[Jennicut]

WASHINGTON -- The struggle to set the future course of the Afghan war is becoming a battle of two books -- both suddenly popular among White House and Pentagon brain trusts.

The two draw decidedly different lessons from the Vietnam War. The first book describes a White House in 1965 being marched into an escalating war by a military viewing the conflict too narrowly to see the perils ahead. President Barack Obama recently finished the book, according to administration officials, and Vice President Joe Biden is reading it now.

The second describes a different administration, in 1972, when a U.S. military that has finally figured out how to counter the insurgency is rejected by political leaders who bow to popular opinion and end the fight.

It has been recommended in multiple lists put out by military officers, including a former U.S. commander in Afghanistan, who passed it out to his subordinates.

The two books -- "Lessons in Disaster," on Mr. Obama's nightstand, and "A Better War" on the shelves of military gurus -- have become a framework for the debate over what will be one of the most important decisions of Mr. Obama's presidency.

For opponents of a major troop increase, led by Mr. Biden and Mr. Emanuel, "Lessons in Disaster" -- which traces the hawkish war stance and eventual disavowal of them by Vietnam-era national-security adviser McGeorge Bundy -- encapsulates their concerns about accepting military advice unchallenged.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125487333320069331.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLTopStories

Like to see Obama really thinking this through. And military advice does not ever need to be taken with no challenges, no questions asked.
Laughing at all the neocons and the entire military commanders liking the book that says Vietnam could have been won. They lied to themselves over and over again.

[theoldman]

1. The war in Vietnam was not an insurgency.

It was a war between the North and South.

[karynnj]

3. It was more than a war between to countries, it was closer to a civil war

Many Vietnamese never accepted the concept of it being 2 countries. The US was fighting in South Vietnam against both an insurgency (the Viet Cong), which consisted of people living in South Vietnam, who were against their government and against North Vietnam.

[jeanpalmer]

2. You can't trust the military

To be no better off or worse off in Afghanistan than we were 8 years ago, the military had to have made many bad judgments and mistakes. They were the ones in charge, and and yet they never admit error. They just keep digging a deeper hole for us. Where are all the Afghan soldiers they were supposed to have trained? And why can't they defend their country? No explanations from the military.

[sofa king]

4. Bigger news flash: US Has President Who Reads Books