<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Afghanistan</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2009/12/11/afghanistan/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2009/12/11/afghanistan/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=afghanistan</link>
	<description>n. the principle of good order&#60;br /&#62;&#60;br /&#62; "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 02:25:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Larison</title>
		<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2009/12/11/afghanistan/comment-page-1/#comment-34541</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel Larison</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:12:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amconmag.com/larison/?p=10388#comment-34541</guid>
		<description>You were reading correctly.  I had a column earlier this year in which I hinted at support for McChrystal&#039;s proposals, and I have tried to be pretty consistent during my time as a blogger in arguing for additional forces in Afghanistan to correct for the over-reliance on air power.  The latter has contributed to so many of the incidents with civilian casualties over the last several years.  These incidents have been very damaging to popular support for the government, they have created serious tensions between the Karzai government and our people, and they have alienated the population.  

I have been critical of the use of drone strikes in Pakistan for the same reasons.  Speaking of Pakistan, I am skeptical that the Pakistani army&#039;s creation of a refugee problem in western Pakistan is going to undermine their enemies, and the Pakistani military and civilian leadership has been unanimous, at least publicly, in condemning the drone strikes as counterproductive and unacceptable violations of their sovereignty.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You were reading correctly.  I had a column earlier this year in which I hinted at support for McChrystal&#8217;s proposals, and I have tried to be pretty consistent during my time as a blogger in arguing for additional forces in Afghanistan to correct for the over-reliance on air power.  The latter has contributed to so many of the incidents with civilian casualties over the last several years.  These incidents have been very damaging to popular support for the government, they have created serious tensions between the Karzai government and our people, and they have alienated the population.  </p>
<p>I have been critical of the use of drone strikes in Pakistan for the same reasons.  Speaking of Pakistan, I am skeptical that the Pakistani army&#8217;s creation of a refugee problem in western Pakistan is going to undermine their enemies, and the Pakistani military and civilian leadership has been unanimous, at least publicly, in condemning the drone strikes as counterproductive and unacceptable violations of their sovereignty.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: S.L. Toddard</title>
		<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2009/12/11/afghanistan/comment-page-1/#comment-34540</link>
		<dc:creator>S.L. Toddard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2009 14:18:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amconmag.com/larison/?p=10388#comment-34540</guid>
		<description>Mr. Larison, is your support for the Obama surge, and for a continued American presence in Afghanistan, new?  Recently I&#039;ve read you leaning in that direction, and wasn&#039;t sure whether I was reading you correctly, but now it seems I have been.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr. Larison, is your support for the Obama surge, and for a continued American presence in Afghanistan, new?  Recently I&#8217;ve read you leaning in that direction, and wasn&#8217;t sure whether I was reading you correctly, but now it seems I have been.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jetan</title>
		<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2009/12/11/afghanistan/comment-page-1/#comment-34534</link>
		<dc:creator>jetan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 21:03:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amconmag.com/larison/?p=10388#comment-34534</guid>
		<description>Good article. but I am not sure that our presence in the region is serving to stabilize  Pakistan. I wish you had expanded that argument a bit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good article. but I am not sure that our presence in the region is serving to stabilize  Pakistan. I wish you had expanded that argument a bit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

