The scandal that broke last week over U.S. Marines urinating on dead Afghanis is not simply a case of a few "bad apples," or "bad management" up the chain of command.
Okay, New York Times, time for a little geography lesson, with a few bits of history thrown in.
Though military generals claim, as they always do, that progress is being made, it's hard to see that on the ground.
I like many others watched the presidential address last night knowing what was going to happen and so hoping I was wrong.
President Obama's decision to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan has generated skepticism and dismay among his supporters. And rightly so.
There is substantial symbolism in this week's visit of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to the United States.
Before buying into an escalataion strategy, the Obama administration should spend some time examining the August 12 battle of Dananeh.
One of the Obama administration's most important actions has been its decision to thoroughly review U.S. objectives, goals and strategy in Afghanistan.
In 1992 Afghan President Najibullah issued a warning. Unfortunately, it was rejected.
Last week President Obama signed a military spending bill that begins to turn our nation in a new, better direction. But there is a long way to go.