Will we never undertand we can no more pacify this country than Alexander the Great, the Mongols, the British or the Russians could? Is it really in the United States' national interest to secure Afghanistan? Does anyone seriously think American voters have the patience and persistence to sacrifice their soldiers and treasure for countless years to come? Never mind the shameless corruption of the government we are supporting there, we need to cut our losses now and make an honorable withdrawal before it looks even worse later. That is my position along with really exploring the option of using nuclear, if that is what it takes to get Osama Bin Laden.
Since most of you are waiting to pounce on Obama what ever decision he makes. Why don't we ask you now, you are Obama, more troops, how many more, or get out now. iIknow it is easy to criticize after: so Baxter, Jim, Richie, Hags, and Riegal, lets see you make the decision now. You are President for a day>
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Terry,
Not a hard question. If I have called it a "war of necessity." if I have hand-picked my general, and if my general says I need a minimum of 41,000 troops to execute the strategy proven to work for counter insurgencies, then I support my general's request.
We didn't pick Afghanistan, Bin Laden did. We don't have pacify Afghanistan. We need to help make it inhospitable to Bin Laden and the Boys.
Next question?
Hags
I notice none " of the No party " jumped in with their solution. They must be waiting for Obama to make the call and then critize. so typical. 8 years in Afghanistan and what do we have to show for it. Come on tell me! define "mission accomplished". Hags the country is inhospitable by it's nature. It's rocks and wind and no one ever wanted it. that is the definition of inhospitable
Terry:
Hags answered you and I laid it all out in my Afghanistan post. I agree with the premise of put up or shut up, but two of us responded.
You seem to hold a rather defeatist view without weighing the implications of a hasty exit. No one wants to go the route of Viet Nam and I do not think that is an appropriate comparison. I am glad Obama is stepping back and evaluating his options. The status quo or handing the place back to Talibs is not an option. We need to be successful.
Rich is correct! Hags is always correct! Barry did hand pick McChrystal and he also picked Gates as the SECDEF. As the POTUS he needs to listen to those that he has chosen because they are the experts. If Barry listens to the Left Wing Wack Jobs like Code Pink and Cindy Sheehan than he will never be much of a POTUS. Barry has stated numerous times that we should be in Afghanistan. He also has said that we must defeat the Taliban. Now he is starting to waffle and try to change what he said with his comments that we are just going after Al Queda. What does that mean? Are we going to invade Pakistan?
Terry you tell us. Are you in favor of letting the Taliban come back into power in Afghanistan? Are you in favor of the US retreating in shame which the Taliban and Al Queda will definitely use as a recruiting tool being able to show that the US is soft and not able to honor their commitments. Why not send in a rather small number of troops like they are asking for, remember we had over half a million soldiers in Vietnam, and use the strategy that the experts believe will work?
To Mark, We have to look at the reason we were attacked on 9/11. Just going after the enemy is part of the solution. I am for exiting Afghanistan and I don't believe it will harm us and here is why. Our policy of backing Israel and ignoring the Palestine people is the root cause of why we were attacked. Just listen to Bin Laden tapes, until we have a more balanced approach to the Middle East we will continue to make enemies. I certainly think we need to rethink our policies. They are not attacking us because we have democracy or a higher standard of living. They are not interested in our way of life. They are not coming over to live and take over our land. It's Israel and our 100% policy of backing them right or wrong. The Palestines did not commit the holocaust, they were living in Jerusalem, and then they were told to move over we are creating a state of Israel. Now the solution is to try and make the best with a two state solution.
So Terry, and honestly this is so silly as almost to defy debate, but lets give it a run.
You answer a question first... we get OBL are we done? The honest answer is no. This is a movement, Religion, ideology, bent on our distruction due to a complicated spectrum of reasons, most of which are related to their ignorance and indoctrination. For the long term safety and security of our country AND THE WORLD, we need to change the equation. As our previous president said, "we cannot wait for the next attack to be in the form of a mushroom cloud".
Second, now you answer this!, we solve our problem with a nuc, next time Russia has a problem with a satellite and they drop one, what can we say? Oh, and by the way, we might not be here given that the rest of the world might react to our dropping the big one with...another!
Lastly, Israel, they have a right to exist, the Indians lost, God knows what happened in past societies, that placed, conquered societies everywhere, but,T, really, do you think some schmo in Pakistan, who neither reads or writes, knows about the geopolitical standing of Israel? You been listening to too much MSNBC.
Earth to T, no Nucs!
Post a Comment