Picture
Earlier this week, on Monday, February 20, 2012, US troops in Afghanistan burned copies of the Koran. They were burned in a garbage pit which added insult to injury as far as the Afghan people went. This sacred, holy book of people who hold the Islamic faith was a huge insult to the Afghan people. There have been conflicting reports as to why and how the Koran books were burned. It was however witnessed and went on to inflame a sensitive situation.

Yesterday, Thursday February 23, 2012, US President Obama offered a sincere apology to the Afghan President Hamid Karzai. Prior to this a senior US military official had also expressed his profound apologies.

In the days following the burnings of the Koran violence ensued. Today violent protests are still happening in Afghanistan. 4,000 people, armed with what ever means possible, mainly rocks and sticks, have stormed the military base in Kabul. A huge police and military presence has kept the area locked down. It is however Friday afternoon, a time when traditionally violence spills out onto the streets following Friday prayers.

Yesterday a man dressed in an Afghan army uniform shot and killed two US soldiers. Seven members of the Afghan population are reported to have been killed, plus many more injured, in running battles with the authorities. The skirmishes have not been confined to Kabul.

GOP hopeful Newt Gingrich has jumped on the bandwagon sensing an opportunity to perhaps appeal to the US voting public and attack Democratic President Obama. Gingrich is plainly appalled that Obama felt a need to apologise and that Obama actually went on record doing so. Of course the President will have followed the advice of others including military leaders.

So what would Gingrich have done, had he been President of the US?

He has maintained that he would have demanded an apology from Afghan President Hamid Karzi for the US military shootings.If only life were that simple.

You have to ask a few questions first such as :
-What caused this commotion?
-Who was responsible for the trouble breaking out?
-Have US troops been thoroughly trained about the culture and beliefs of the Afghan people?
-Will Obama's apology help ease the situation and protect US forces from more harm?

Gingrich said of the incident and the apology, in true electioneering style, "There seems to be nothing that radical Islamists can do to get Barack Obama's attention in a negative way and he is consistently apologizing to people who do not deserve the apology of the president of the United States period. And, candidly, if Hamid Karzai, the president of Afghanistan, doesn't feel like apologizing then we should say good bye and good luck, we don't need to be here risking our lives and wasting our money on somebody who doesn't care."
Gingrich went on to say that President Obama was failing in his role as Commander in Chief. Expecting an outcry a White House official pre empted Gingrich saying "It is wholly appropriate, given the sensitivities to this issue, the understandable sensitivities. His primary concern as commander in chief is the safety of the American men and women in Afghanistan, of our military and civilian personnel there. And it was absolutely the right thing to do."

Sounds to me as if it was the most sensible course of action. The US troops are in Afghanistan thanks to a Republican President. You can argue the toss about why he was forced into making the decision to go to war but the fact that it was George Bush who took the US into Afghanistan is irrefutable.Gingrich's spiel and bravado may carry weight with GOP supporters but it will not do so with all.

 What would he have done if he were President? Of course all of this just shows why he is not up to that job and never will be US President.

 
 
Picture
The front runners in the GOP race for the White House had been trying to play a seemingly fair game. They had made the effort to appear professional as they debated the ins and outs of just why the US public should select them to represent the Republican Party, in the 2012 election.

Now the gloves are off.

As the Iowa caucus draws close Newt Gingrich has attacked his main opponents, Ron Paul and Mitt Romney. This has been brought about by the drop in Gingrich's popularity. A short time age he was on a roll and well in front of the opposition. Not any more.

Today, December 28, 2011, Ron Paul has taken the lead. Using a double edged sword Gingrich praised Romney then said of him, "I don't want to be invidious about Gov. Romney, who I said I think is a very competent manager and a very smart guy But to have somebody who is a Massachusetts moderate, who said he did not want to go back to the Reagan-Bush years, who voted as a Democrat for Paul Tsongas in '92, who campaigned to the left of Teddy Kennedy.... to have him run a commercial that questions my conservatism?"

Only yesterday Gingrich had insisted that he stay in positive mood. Today he seemed far from it. He denied that his verbal lambasting of opponents were attacks, claiming that if they were factually correct they were not attacks. Hmm.

In the past Newt has been happy to use words as weapons but he is loathe to do so right now. His election campaign lacks the funding of opponents. He needs to win the people over and he is trying his damndest to do so. It does however seem to mean that he has to keep biting his tongue. This appears to be getting more difficult to do.

Associated Press has reported Gingrich describing "Mitt Romney as a "Massachusetts moderate" who isn't "man enough" to take responsibility for the harsh attack ads being run on his behalf. And Ron Paul's views as "totally outside the mainstream of virtually every decent American.""

Newt is in a tricky position. If he resorts to his old brash ways his loyal fans will love him for it but he will not win over sceptics. If he appears wishy washy his followers will be disappointed,

Ron Paul is the front runner, at least for today. As they say a day is a long time in politics.