Remarkably unconvincing spin on Afghanistan

Kyle Spector from Third Way, a think-tank outfit that mostly works to enhance the Democratic Party's Republican-lite tendencies, dispenses prize blather about the U.S. public's growing recognition that President Obama's Afghanistan adventure is a fruitless sink of lives and treasure. Sure there's a way to explain that the polls don't say what they say, you see ...

... Americans are following the stream of negative news out of Afghanistan, which will tighten the already-slim margins of support the president still receives on his Afghanistan policy. Clearly and consistently reminding the public of the reasons for the U.S. mission in Afghanistan and the gains being made in taking the fight to al-Qaeda and the Taliban could go a long way in maintaining support for the president's strategy. Equally important will be communicating results and letting the public know that there is an endgame in Afghanistan that most could support: bringing U.S. troops home responsibly after neutralizing the terrorist threat.

Now how is the administration supposed to remind us of "reasons for the mission" when there is no coherent "mission" and communicate "gains" and "results" when there aren't any?

CIA Director Leon Panetta recently estimated the number of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan to be "60 to 100, maybe less."

Robert Haass, Newsweek

For this we have a war costly $100 billion annually plus a bloated "National Security" spook apparatus costing another $75 billion mostly to pay private contractors? How is the U.S. military supposed to find and kill 60-100 terrorists in a country it can't control that is home to 30 million fiercely nationalistic Afghans?

No amount of spin is going to get Obama off the hook for his misguided escalation of this war. Cut your losses, Mr. President.