The Afghan troops have been provided training and equipment--the best we could provide. What they lack is solid leadership in all but a few areas. Sadly, that is the problem. You have leadership steeped in Soviet military ethos with little expertise in the sustainment of current capability via logistics and training. After we leave, they will have a good run that will last about 18 months...then all bets are off. At that time, the power struggle for control of the Afghan government will begin anew. The corruption that is part of the government and rife with Afghan police and border agents will again permit external influences to determine Afghanistan's next 20 years. Wish it weren't so. Wish we had colonized instead, or left it alone after destroying the Taliban.

Great theater, sadly. We will never get any accountability because Obama fires this guy who was scheduled to leave next month anyway. That is the ultimate goal here, to dodge any accountability by acting stupidly, feigning ignorance, and pretending to be insulted to have to answer to Congress. Our Democrat handlers want longer time and distance between the reportage and their perfidious acts, coupled with the short-term memory of our so called fellow citizens, and active indifference by the MSM. May our Congress not get winded chasing the truth down. We need dedication and diligence. Thank you and God Bless, Representative Kelly.

We have to use the term "targeting", otherwise, we'd be stuck with "profiling". And everybody knows, profiling is wrong. This cat is a perfect bureaucrat...clueless in the face of interrogation; faceless in the application of tyranny. He is a useful and willing tool and perfectly exemplifies the President's own attitude toward Congress: useful only so much as they bend to his will and disdain for those laws and processes that impede his agenda.

Who gave the orders and when were they given? I guess holding rallies spouting adherence to the Constitution and not littering public spaces is sufficient for government officials to audit your tax returns or use the IRS to intimidate your organization via an "undue" legal processes, specifically if you are politically conservative. Any Libertarian organizations also suffer from these decisions?

Jerry...your column today will leave a mark. One thing for certain is that this will not be publicly discussed on MSM "Money" shows, and if so, your remarks will not be dispassionately evaluated. Get ready to be slandered as the Tea Party has since 2010.

So funny...with Spring in the air, our Presidnt eschews his usual forays onto the links. I wonder why that is...hmmm. Makes me wonder if the sequestration cuts shut down the golf courses at Fort Belvoir and Andrews AFB.

You have to love the blindly obedient MSM. They shield the Obama administration right up to the point where it is their ox getting gored. I guess all that good will from the Correspondents dinner has been spoiled. Best part of this is that the wounds are self-inflicted...Rush Limbaugh was no where near the knife.

Not true Big Dog. The Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) determines what we can do within the battlespace, and they are published standing rules that apply no matter who is President. The ROE (Rules of Engagement) are established by the Combatant Commander based upon policy and national objectives. For example, there are no LOAC prohibitions against calling in air strikes against known enemy positions even if they are colocated in mosques. Our ROE would prohibit strikes against that mosque during times we know it would be used by non-combatant civilians. We are obligated to separate military objects from civilian objects to the maximum extent feasible. Jerry 55 is stating that our present ROE is too restrictive with respect to the LOAC and places our troops in unnecessary risk, as demonstrated in the loss of SEAL Team VI members on that downed helicopter. He is exactly correct.

Having read the string of your replies and responses today, I absolutely want weapons and a bunch of home grown hay. When the time comes, I can protect myself, family and friends that are not stoned, and manipulate those that are. As for the 2nd Amendment, it is all about private ownership...you really should learn to discern the written word better than you have displayed on this thread. But I am happy that you do not want gun ownership and most likely do not possess any at your home...and sad because that leaves you at the mercy of the gov't or anyone that does possess a gun. Additionally, can I sell or trade you some weed for food or gas? See the position you have put yourself in. You need to change your mind, not blow it.

Stoned and stupid...the perfect mix for any SHTF scenario, if you are a prepared person. It is another reason to steadfastly protect your 2nd Amendment rights as when the SHTF, no way do you want the leftists to have a monopoly on force. Get self sufficient as quick as you can, and have a back-up plan. Probably not a bad idea to grow your own weed, as well...not to use, but to barter with. Of course, the medicinal pot is no good with bullet holes, but it could lull you into forgetfulness that you were ever shot. Isn't that what happened in Denver? You know, the MSM never really reported the shooting at the 4/20 pot rally, did they?