A counterpoint to today's new found Taliban-related sophistication, this comes from the second Obama/McCain debate and was and parcel of Obama's empty blustering about going hardline on Pakistan if they didn't crack down on militants. After the inauguration Karzai had to intervene and tell our nuance-filled international celebrity to "settle down" and use "better judgment," lest he find himself without even erstwhile allies in Central Asia.

Bonus: this is the same answer where Obama talked about sending more troops to Afghanistan and linked AfPak instability to resources diverted into Iraq. I cropped out the the resources part because I'm not sure why he made the claim, given that he started running from it even during the primaries. The "more troops" promise is a bit more timely given how he's barely clinging to "keep troop numbers stable" these days. He was on quite the roll that night, wasn't he?

They are plotting to kill Americans right now. As Secretary Gates, the defense secretary, said, the war against terrorism began in that region and that's where it will end. So part of the reason I think it's so important for us to end the war in Iraq is to be able to get more troops into Afghanistan, put more pressure on the Afghan government to do what it needs to do, eliminate some of the drug trafficking that's funding terrorism. But I do believe that we have to change our policies with Pakistan. We can't coddle, as we did, a dictator, give him billions of dollars and then he's making peace treaties with the Taliban and militants. What I've said is we're going to encourage democracy in Pakistan, expand our nonmilitary aid to Pakistan so that they have more of a stake in working with us, but insisting that they go after these militants.

And if you want to know why CBS's Lora Logan was so emphatic about tearing into the WH's moronic pronouncements today, here's Obama during the campaign bloviating to her about what a grim anti-Pakistani realist he is. Yes, of course the word "I" was prominently featured: