What say you?
... but Arabic is actually spoken in Afghanistan.
That's without considering its use as an educated lingua franca in the Middle East.
I'm also looking for the bit in your diary where Obama is corrected on it and argues about it.
I've been looking real careful and I just can't find it.
Let's be fair--5000 native speakers does not make it a very well-spoken language, and a good many of those who speak Arabic as an educated lingua franca also speak English as the same.
On the other hand, there are legions of foreign fighters present in Afghanistan today, many of whom do speak Arabic and only Arabic. Arabic translators would certainly be useful there.
... even in Afghanistan given that it's only very (post invasion) recently that Afghans would have motive and opportunity to learn English.
I wish the diariest linked to these 2 items:
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/05/14/ obamas-embarrassing-gaffes-continue/
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/ 2008/05/obama-gaffes-on.html
The presence of foreign fighters in Afghanistan was the reason Obama campaign provided in their pushback (see link to ABCNEWS above). Let me quote directly from the article:
... ABC News' David Wright responds: As for the point about Arabic translators needed for Afghanistan, the Obama campaign points to the well-documented presence of foreign fighters there, many of whom do speak Arabic. However, these folks are mostly shooting at NATO troops, not talking to them. No doubt there are a handful of Arabic speakers employed at Bagram and Kandahar and other detention centers to interrogate foreign fighters captured on the battlefield. But I have not seen any reports that there is a shortage of such personnel, or that the need for such translators in Iraq has hamstrung the interrogators in Afghanistan. Foreign fighters captured in BOTH Iraq and Afghanistan have also been sent to detention centers such as the one in Guantanamo. Is there a shortage of Arabic translators there or at other U.S. detention facilities overseas? That would be an interesting news story. Again, I haven't seen any proof of it. To reiterate: Obama's main point may well be fair: that Iraq has made Afghanistan tougher to win by stretching our resources too thin. But are these really the best examples for him to cite of why this may be the case?
As for the point about Arabic translators needed for Afghanistan, the Obama campaign points to the well-documented presence of foreign fighters there, many of whom do speak Arabic. However, these folks are mostly shooting at NATO troops, not talking to them.
No doubt there are a handful of Arabic speakers employed at Bagram and Kandahar and other detention centers to interrogate foreign fighters captured on the battlefield. But I have not seen any reports that there is a shortage of such personnel, or that the need for such translators in Iraq has hamstrung the interrogators in Afghanistan.
Foreign fighters captured in BOTH Iraq and Afghanistan have also been sent to detention centers such as the one in Guantanamo. Is there a shortage of Arabic translators there or at other U.S. detention facilities overseas? That would be an interesting news story. Again, I haven't seen any proof of it.
To reiterate: Obama's main point may well be fair: that Iraq has made Afghanistan tougher to win by stretching our resources too thin. But are these really the best examples for him to cite of why this may be the case?
The original story of gaffe on Arabic translators appeared in ABCNews site:
... ABC News' David Wright responds: ...As for the point about Arabic translators needed for Afghanistan, the Obama campaign points to the well-documented presence of foreign fighters there, many of whom do speak Arabic. However, these folks are mostly shooting at NATO troops, not talking to them. No doubt there are a handful of Arabic speakers employed at Bagram and Kandahar and other detention centers to interrogate foreign fighters captured on the battlefield. But I have not seen any reports that there is a shortage of such personnel, or that the need for such translators in Iraq has hamstrung the interrogators in Afghanistan. Foreign fighters captured in BOTH Iraq and Afghanistan have also been sent to detention centers such as the one in Guantanamo. Is there a shortage of Arabic translators there or at other U.S. detention facilities overseas? That would be an interesting news story. Again, I haven't seen any proof of it.
...As for the point about Arabic translators needed for Afghanistan, the Obama campaign points to the well-documented presence of foreign fighters there, many of whom do speak Arabic. However, these folks are mostly shooting at NATO troops, not talking to them.
(bold mine)
That was not the only gaffe. The other involved the agricultural specialists that Obama claimed were needed in Afghanistan, and instead used in Iraq. See the link to ABCnews. It's good.
The link at NoQuarter which discusses the article is here:
... then what?
Indeed. You don't always have the luxury of taking them to Guantánamo before speaking to them. Sometimes time is of the essence.
sorry for the double post.
because 5000 folks in Afghanistan speak a dialect of mixed Arabic it makes Arabic lingua franca of Afghanistan? 5000 out of 31 million population? Oh, you said educated lingua franca..Afghanistan is little bit different than a Arab dominated country if I may say..BTW the official language of Afghanistan is Dari and Pashto...
... learn to read.
There are native speakers although they're kind of irrelevant in comparison to Arabics use as a lingua franca. It's used as a lingua franca in the entire region (not just Afghanistan). It's the one language that people from various Muslim backgrounds from Morocco to all the way over to Singapore and Malaysia are likely to share.
There being native Afghani Arabic speakers doesn't make it a lingua franca, that it's the shared language used between various non-Afghans and also Afghans is what makes it one.
http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/Asia- and-Oceania/Afghanistan-EDUCATION.html
Adult illiteracy for the year 2002 for males was 49%; females, 79%. This is the highest illiteracy rate in Asia. Education is free at all levels. Primary education lasts for six years and is theoretically compulsory for 6 years, but only 53% of boys and 5% of girls were enrolled in elementary school in 2002. Boys and girls are schooled separately. A teacher has on average 58 pupils in an elementary school classroom, but only 28 students in a secondary school classroom. Only 32% of the males and 11% of females graduating from elementary school continue into secondary education. Vocational training is provided in secondary schools and senior high schools, and six percent of students are enrolled in the vocational system. Secondary education lasts for another six years. Children are taught in their mother tongue, Dari (Persian) or Pashtu (Pashto), during the first three grades; the second official language is introduced in the fourth grade. Children are also taught Arabic so that they may be able to read the Koran (Qur'an). The school year extends from early March to November in the cold areas and from September to June in the warmer regions. The school-aged population in Afghanistan is 6,650,000.
It's taught in schools there.
It's also the official language of the religious leadership:
http://www.pressreference.com/A-Be/Afgha nistan.html
Afghanistan has a population of around 25 million people composed of two major ethnic groups, Pashtun (38 percent) and Tajik (25 percent); however, additional ethnic groups include Aimaq, Balulchis, Brahui, Hazaras, Nuristanis, Turkmens, and Uzbeks. Most people are Muslim (Sunni: 84 percent, Shi'a: 15 percent). Many speak one of the official state languages (Dari: 50 percent, Pashtu: 35 percent), although there are some 30 viable dialects, and the official language of the religious leadership is Arabic. Between 1996 and 2002, religious police enforced codes of conduct that imposed comprehensive constraints on females.
John Walker Lindh, for example, didn't get by when he was in Afghanistan because he knew Persian, Pashto, Hazaragi, Uzbek, Turk or whatever.
He got by because he'd learnt Arabic in Yemen.
Which is exactly what you'd expect if it was a lingua franca.
1) Please refrain from personal attacks.
2) Please read carefully the first line of your first quote. The majority Afghans are illiterate. For Afghans to read and learn a language which is very different from the Indo-Iranian lineage is not a trivial task. Islam had been in Afghanistan since 8-9th Century. Arabic is not the language of majority for a reason..
Quran in madrassas is mostly learnt by rote. In central asia, far-east and the subcontinent there are thousands of ulemas who do not know how to write Arabic but can recite Quran from memory. Also Quran has been translated in most of these languages for ordinary folks to read.
3) As far your point of Arabic being language of religious readership, what percentage of the population do you think is the religious leadership like Mullahs and ulemas? That doesn't make it a lingua franca. In India, the religious language for Hindus is Sanskrit, hardly 0.05% know how to speak it.
4) Most Muslims live in non-Arabic countries and do not speak Arabic.
5) Afghanistan is not an Arab country.
7) Your point about Lindh et al is irrelevant. There are thousands of foreigners who travel and live in this countries for some period without speaking a word of the native tongue.
I'm sorry to spoil your day... (2.00 / 2)
Please explain how you could construe these two separate paragraphs as arguing that because there are native speakers this makes the language a lingua franca without referring to difficulties with reading comprehension or claiming you were being disingenuous.
2) Please read carefully the first line of your first quote. The majority Afghans are illiterate. For Afghans to read and learn a language which is very different from the Indo-Iranian lineage is not a trivial task. Islam had been in Afghanistan since 8-9th Century. Arabic is not the language of majority for a reason.. Quran in madrassas is mostly learnt by rote. In central asia, far-east and the subcontinent there are thousands of ulemas who do not know how to write Arabic but can recite Quran from memory. Also Quran has been translated in most of these languages for ordinary folks to read.
51% of males are literate, 21% of females are. We're not talking about a 99% illiteracy rate here.
Illiterate doesn't mean stupid anyway, most Afghans are at least bilingual.
And central asia, the far east, and the subcontinent weren't under the rule of fundamentalists with Arabizing tendencies.
Arabic was taught not Korans memorized in Taleban madrassas.
Sanskrit isn't a living language with a large body of native speakers, it's a horrible comparison..
Better example would be whether a fair portion Indians in minority dominated areas speak hindu, although that's not a perfect example either.
So, to answer your question, given that the Taleban encouraged learning Arabic probably a fair few. The Talebans valued understanding Arabic.
4) Most Muslims live in non-Arabic countries and do not speak Arabic. 5) Afghanistan is not an Arab country. 7) Your point about Lindh et al is irrelevant. There are thousands of foreigners who travel and live in this countries for some period without speaking a word of the native tongue.
1) Do they have paid translators with them?
2) Are we talking about those countries were locals have a fair knowledge of English?
3) Just checking, but you do know what a lingua franca is right?
in several counts.
1) Taliban although influenced by Wahabi/Salafi tendencies because of Saudi monetary influence, actually trace their origin back to Deobandi school of thought from India. Deobandi Dar-ul-ulum is a conservative school of thought which practices fundamentalist version of Islam devoid of syncretic local traditions and mystical Sufism.
2)Taliban madrassas along with other madrassas in general practice learning by rote. In classical Arabic school tradition learning by rote is the method of teaching and madrassas ran by Talibans are no different. I suggest you refer to this paper http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organizat ion/61473.pdf
3) The lingua franca in Northern India is Hindi. The person who follows Hinduism as his/her religion is known as Hindu. There is a World of difference between the two words.
4) Sanskrit is quite a living language read and learned by Hindu scholars and priests especially in the religious schools. The modern Hindi which is practised and spoken in Delhi and its nearby regions is closely derived from Sanskrit. However my point was that the religious language or the language of the elite in a country can be one but the major spoken language of the country can be a local dialect which can be very different from the former language. The history of Asia is full of such examples. The language of the ruling and learned elite in medieval India was Farsi, but majority of the population had little clue of that language.
5) To most Muslims the Holy Book is Qu'ran and the anglicized version is Koran.
6) Afghanistan has folks speaking several different languages including Pashto, Dari, Tajik, Uzbekh, Farsi, et al. If Arabic was the lingua franca or the language of communication between the various communities then it would have been the official language of Afghanistan in a heartbeat. But it is not, hence it is not considered an official language of Afghanistan.
7)I'll ignore your personal insults. Rest I will leave it for you to go to the nearest University library and discover yourself.
Thanks.
... which is that Arabic is the lingua franca for the entire region. It's even taught in public schools all the way over in Malaysia.
It's not needed as a lingua franca to communicate between communities within Afghanistan because Dari to some extent fulfills that role. Dari is close enough to Persian that movies dubbed in Persian are played in Afghan cinemas. Also because there's some multilingualism particularly with the smaller languages. If you go to Belgium, for example, you can get by with English because it's the regional lingua franca and enough people there know it. Despite that it's not an official language there even though there are two distinct languages used within the country.
All foreign press releases by the Taleban for example were in Arabic. A large corpus of Arabic documents was discovered post-invasion. Because Arabic is the regional lingua franca.
It's not like Pashto translators (which Obama actually also mentioned when he mentioned Arabic) grow on trees. It's better to be able to communicate in broken Arabic than not at all.
Arabic has utility in Afghanistan. It's known. When Afghans do business with the outside world they often do it in Arabic.
Keep in mind that before the U.S. ever invaded Iraq they were looking for Arabic translators for Afghanistan.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/asia/jan- june02/arabic_1-18.html
SPENCER MICHELS: The terrorism attacks and the war in Afghanistan have prompted many Americans to try to learn more about Islam and the Arab world. In addition, U.S. intelligence agencies and the military have been scrambling to hire or train speakers of Middle Eastern languages like Arabic, Farsi, and Pashto, all languages spoken in Afghanistan. This program in near-eastern studies and Arabic language at the University of California at Berkeley is one of fewer than a dozen at major U.S. universities. Sonia S'hiri teaches many of the hundred students who are enrolled in Arabic classes here. More students are expected next semester. But programs like Berkeley's are rare, as sociology graduate student Sara Gilman found out.
This is all without considering the presence of foreign fighters.
Please stop hitting the strawman.
Couple of quick points:
On 1. you mention strong Wahabi influence which confirms my claims that the Taleban had arabizing tendencies then try to debunk that by claiming that the Taleban has lineal descent from the Deobandi school which is irrelevant to the point.
On 2. You're pointing me at a paper that lumps in Indonesian pesantrens which are pretty much equivalent to Sunday schools as part of some kind of dangerous madrassa thing and also states that it's the traditional "quietist" schools (I don't think you can consider the taleban "quietist" or traditional) that teach the traditional rote memorization, and you're telling me to get an education.
Point conceded on 3. you're correct. It's Hindi not Hindu.
Well 5. is just a distraction they're both inaccurate transliterations. Aum, Om, big deal. If you really want to be technical about it, there should be a dash above the 'a' in "Qu'ran".
At this point we're just going to go around in circles, so I'm going to lay it all out. I have personal knowledge that Arabic translators are used to communicate with Afghans (because of Arabic being the regional lingua franca) so I'm willing to argue this point till the cows come home because that knowledge gives me confidence that I'm correct.
So, you don't have to answer this, it's just personal curiosity on my part. But what's your motivation in this argument? What gives you your confidence that you're correct?
To avoid nitpicking "transliteration" should be "transcription" although being inaccurate transliterations is what makes them transcriptions.
I say that, first off, your very first source link is to the incorrect article.
Second, Obama did not call Senator Clinton "Bush/Cheney Lite." That was the NYT editorializing and Clinton presuming insult where there wasn't any. The full quote?
"We can't be afraid to talk to our enemies. I'm not afraid of losing a PR war with Dictators. I'm happy to look them in eye and say what needs to be said. I'm happy to tell them what I think. I'm not going to hide behind a bunch of rhetoric. I don't want a continuation of Bush/Cheney. I don't want Bush/Cheney lite. I want a fundamental change."
Certainly he was responding to a charge that Clinton has used against him, but he was criticizing the policies of Bush and Cheney first and foremost.
Arabic in Afghanistan? Touche, mea culpa. He was wrong on that--though it was not a crime of ignorance but rather a crime of not thinking through the points he was making. He was speaking on important resources that have been diverted from Afghanistan to Iraq; he included military translators in those resources, but the translators in use in Iraq would not be useful in Afghanistan.
I also find it telling that you're citing a story whose VERY NEXT PARAGRAPH begins...
And then there is the allegation of closet homosexual activity. I do not know if these charges are true or not. But republican surrogates, with Drudge in the lead, are starting to circulate the allegations of Larry Sinclair and others claiming that Barack is on the "down low."
Nice.
I won't even bother with the Foreign Relations Subcommittee on European Affairs paean, except to point out that Afghanistan is not in Europe. It is, in fact, in Asia.
PS: As I pointed out above after a bit more consideration... Foreign fighters have entered Afghanistan by the thousands, and many of those speak Arabic. So those Arabic translators in Afghanistan may be useful after all.
Hmmm, whatever happened to O's passport records of his travels to Europe, the continent?
... entire premise (debunked BTW) of your diary, that Arabic translators aren't needed in Afghanistan how?
Hardly. Actually it's an appalling lack of interest on your guy's part. Reminsicent of a sitting president. You can shellac it, put in on a platinum player with a nice sprig of parsley on the side but it can't hide what it is.
Arabic in the Middle East is a lot like English in Europe.
Not sources I'd normally link to, but anyway.
http://www.jamestown.org/terrorism/news/ article.php?articleid=2370097
After the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan, he moved back to his hometown because war among the different jihadi groups disheartened him. At the end of the 1980s, he moved to the Gulf city of Dubai. When the Taliban established control over most of Afghanistan, he returned and became one of the close associates of Taliban chief Mullah Omar and assisted him in day-to-day routine governing matters. He remained there until the fall of the Taliban in 2001. In Waziristan, he began to organize the local Taliban groups. He has excellent communication skills; while Pashto is his native tongue, he is proficient in Arabic due to frequent socialization with Arabs in Afghanistan and also speaks broken Urdu (BBC, April 20).
There's a fair few Arabic speakers wandering around Afghanistan...
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/articl e.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34024
The shortage has caused a backlog of untranslated Arabic materials collected from electronic surveillances of suspected Islamic terrorists conducted in the U.S., and from interrogations of suspected terrorists conducted abroad, mostly at prisoner camps in Afghanistan and Cuba. The backlog also includes reams of documents in Arabic and other tongues recovered in Afghanistan and other countries.
And it looks like they actually do need Arabic translators in Afghanistan...
Hey, whadya know? (Well actually I already did know, but that's because I actually have a vague clue.)
Taleban is an Arabic word, BTW. Did you ever stop to wonder why on earth a group of Afghans would use an Arabic word to describe themselves?
Hrrrm?..
C'mon, if your exalted one passed gas you'd smell lilacs and ask if that was Debussy..
... enter your head that you're being proved wrong because you're wrong?
Or is it all Obama's fault somehow someway?
enter your mind that you are an enabler? No way, right?
Can you link to anyone here ever claiming he is faultless? I doubt it. Sure he makes the occasional slip - what person campaigning every day for 15 months doesn't? Does it matter? Not one bit.
Ah, but you did not criticize Obama for not traveling to Europe enough. You criticized him for not holding NATO oversight hearings about Afghanistan, when in fact his subcommittee has no jurisdiction over Afghanistan and the full Foreign Relations Committee has been the one coordinating trans-continental efforts with NATO.
If you'd like to criticize Obama for not traveling to Europe enough, and instead spending his valuable time abroad in WORTHLESS places like Russia, the Middle East, and Africa... Let's go ahead and have that discussion.
I commented on the subject, as a possible tour guide for O in Erope..
Why I Should Be Obama's Tour Guide (not an official submission)
Dear Sen. Obama, Like you I am bi-racial, grew up on two languages, spent much of my childhood overseas and my parents practiced two different regligions. Also, like you, I have foreign policy experience. As a Little Leaguer, we played against the Japanese All Stars. And I've also served as an unofficial tour guide on the continent for friends and colleagues. (Since you've already been to Great Britain, we'll go there along with Scandinavia, the Baltic States, Germany and Eastern Europe the next time around.)
First stop, Amsterdam. Uh no,not for THAT or THAT, I was thinking the Rembrandt museum. Next stop, Brittany. It's charming, beautiful, the people are lovely and the food is superb. Note; Please don't refer to the English channel as the English channel. I think they call it Le Mer de la France or something like that. They had this war with England that was called the Hundred Years War and some of `em aren't over it. I understand completely. I feel the same way about the Anaheim Ducks who knocked the Red Wings out in the Stanley Cup playoffs last year. Also, skip Lucky Pierre jokes - trust me they don't fly. Also on our itinerary: Alsace-Lorraine, Lugano, Barcelona, Geneva, Vienna, Palermo and Genk, Belgium. Why Genk you ask? Great question. That way we can always say "We've been Genked!" And now that it's euros, you won't have to worry about that "pretty money" with pictures of broads and musicians on it. I was always suspicious of that kind of currency. You will hear jokes about Belgians, I found it best to simply pretend not to understand
. I will also share with you the European idea of Heaven and Hell. Heaven The Germans are the factory workers. The French are the cooks. The English are the police. The Swiss are the bankers. And the Italians are the lovers. Hell The French are the factory workers. The English are the cooks. The Italians are the bankers. The Germans are the police. And the Swiss are the lovers.. Respectfully, Taters
Taters is my handle at NQ. Actually I have always reckoned with the fact that it may be well be Sen. Obama. my decision to support Hillary came Dec. 27, 2007. I could never vote for McCain and O gets Iraq and Afghanistan. I would hope the B teamers such as McPeak, Zbig and the 2nd string Clintonistas would be tossed. And that Orszag and Sperling would help out too. Many of his supporters, I'm not so keen on. Nor am I nuts about every Hillary supporter. I see no difference with O's politics than any others.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications /the-world-factbook/geos/af.html
Sweet.
I'm totally convinced.
Cuz there's no foreign fighters in A-stan.
Right and none of the Pakistani tribesmen speak Urdu.
So he said that we should only get Arabic speakers?
Are we both speaking English? Would you prefer Spanish or French?
Perhaps Urdu?
Omae no nihongo wa sou-sou dana.
Demo kengogaku ni tsuite wa doushitemo misaru kikizaru desune.
Pero, el japonés no es la lengua tampoco de los árabes ni de los afganos, ¿no? Es una opción tanta ridiculosa como el inglés o el español.
Well we certainly don't want to shatter your belief system, do we?
What are you even replying to?
From the NY Daily News..
WASHINGTON - Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama ripped each other as the bigger foreign policy dunce yesterday on the do's and don'ts of dealing with dictators.
The Illinois Democrat stepped up the battle by calling Clinton's approach to world affairs "Bush-Cheney lite."
Clinton slapped back, "This is getting kind of silly." In a CNN interview she said, "You know, I've been called a lot of things in my life, but I've never been called George Bush or Dick Cheney."
The sniping started at Monday's Democratic debate, when Obama answered that he would sit down - without preconditions - to talk with leaders of countries such as Iran, Cuba and Venezuela.
Clinton said she wouldn't because it would risk being used as a propaganda dupe. She followed up the next day by calling Obama "naive."
Obama returned fire from the campaign trail in New Hampshire yesterday. "I'm not afraid of losing the PR war to dictators," he said. "I don't want a continuation with Bush-Cheney. I don't want Bush-Cheney lite."
In a conference call with reporters, he insisted he really believes Clinton's foreign policies would be like Bush's.
"I think that's the record," Obama said, challenging Clinton to explain how putting conditions on talks with Iran and others would be any different than the way Bush shuns such encounters.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world /2007/07/27/2007-07-27_hil__bam_tussle_o n_dictator_talks-2.html
Great.
Faced with the New York Times editorializing a quote, you pull analysis from the New York Daily News instead.
What's next, the New York Post? Washington Times? The Enquirer? Weekly Standard?
This article once again provides the quote out of context, why should any of us trust its analysis? I provided the full quote above for you to judge for yourself.
I'm fairly sure I already did say that.
He did call Senator Hillary, "Bush-Cheney lite". There is a VIDEO of this thing, and it has played many times.
You are correct that there is video!
And if you watch the video, you'll hear the full quote (like I posted above).
Second, Obama did not call Senator Clinton "Bush/Cheney Lite." That was the NYT editorializing and Clinton presuming insult where there wasn't any. The full quote? "We can't be afraid to talk to our enemies. I'm not afraid of losing a PR war with Dictators. I'm happy to look them in eye and say what needs to be said. I'm happy to tell them what I think. I'm not going to hide behind a bunch of rhetoric. I don't want a continuation of Bush/Cheney. I don't want Bush/Cheney lite. I want a fundamental change." Certainly he was responding to a charge that Clinton has used against him, but he was criticizing the policies of Bush and Cheney first and foremost.
You can feel free to interpret that all you like.
Perhaps you can heed your own words. What is your problem with the NY Daily News? Was their reporting on Bernie Kerik flawed too?
Are you serious with this?
Because if you are, you are just a parrot repeating talking points. NATO forces are fighting in Afghanistan. The whole country is under supervision from NATO, and Obama's subcommitte has jurisdiction over NATO.
Yeah. As he said, I was too busy campaigning to pay attention to my responsibilities. What a phoney this guy is. Here was his chance to directly influence policy in the region, and instead he is just yapping and using it to score cheap political points, but not lifting a finger to do his own job.
Your two points are correct, that the European Affairs subcommittee has jurisdiction over relations with NATO, and that NATO forces are supervising Afghanistan.
That does not automatically place Obama's subcommittee in charge of Afghanistan. NATO's forces in Afghanistan are a cross-continental issue, which means they should be handled by the full Foreign Relations Committee--which, as a matter of fact, is doing precisely that.
If we get another genocide in former Soviet Bloc countries, or if the Troubles start up again in Ireland, etc., then come back and talk about Obama shirking his responsibilities. Those would be European affairs.
Nice try, no dice. What you're saying is Nato can do no better in Afghanistan and leave it as is.
What I'm saying is, the European Affairs subcommittee has jurisdiction over affairs that happen in Europe (thus... European Affairs).
And Afghanistan is in Asia, which I might clarify, is not Europe.
And thus, the European Affairs subcommittee does not have jurisdiction over Afghanistan or anything that's happening in it.
Anyway, It's already being capably handled by the full Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, who does have jurisdiction. If Obama's subcommittee started butting in, it would just be too many cooks spoiling the broth.
Obviously you condone Obama's dereliction. This is absurd, a complete and blatant rejection of responsibility. You really should know better. Why bother trying to improve dialogue with our Nato allies in Europe??? Wait, why bother even going to Europe? The sheer inconvenience. And God forbid Obama show some spine.
When was Nato ever involved with the troubles?
NATO was never involved in the Troubles--but that's just it. Obama's subcommittee has jurisdiction over European affairs. It's not the subcommittee for NATO affairs.
Domestic terrorism within the United Kingdom: European affair.
Multinational and multicontinental force engaged in a peacekeeping mission in a nation in southwest Asia: not a European affair.
