44's non-strategy

I think it's no secret that I am underwhelmed by the president whom GrEaT sAtAn"s gIrLfRiEnD refers to as "44." So much so, that I have been reluctant to diss his new National Security Strategy, for fear my comments would come across as just more snarky stuff from the right wing. But now I have cover! Leslie Gelb, late of the New York Times and the Carter administration, assesses the non-strategy on The Daily Beast. I particularly liked this complaint, which gets to the heart of the matter: "To shape a true strategy, the president must establish and explain priorities. In the Obama document, everything seems to be a top priority...."

Yes! What the president has given us is a State of the Union laundry list. Either Mr. Obama doesn't know what a strategy is, or (even more terrifying) his advisers don't. This feeds rather neatly into a discussion I have been following over on the Kings of War blog, to wit: why is it that the United States is so bad at strategy? (Great at winning battles, lousy at winning wars. It's almost as if we go from aspiration direct to tactics, so we keep ending up in a situation where the thought balloon over the president's head reads: "Uh-oh! What do I do now?") Mr. Gelb's analysis is worth reading, and the KOW discussion is worth skimming. Blue skies! -- Dan Ford