Congressman Bill Young of Florida is calling for an exit from Afghanistan.  Congressman Young and his wife Beverly have been long time supporters of our troops and have gone weekly to take care of those at Walter Reed, giving them encouragement and taking in care packages.  .  They put their money where their mouths are for the wounded.

According to the Huffington Post:

A Republican congressman who has long been a staunch supporter of sticking with the war in Afghanistan is now changing course, arguing that the United States needs to pull out as quickly as possible.

“I think we should remove ourselves from Afghanistan as quickly as we can,” Rep. C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.) told the Tampa Bay Times on Monday. “I just think we’re killing kids that don’t need to die.”

Young has consistently opposed even setting a timetable for withdrawal from Afghanistan. In May 2011, an amendment requiring the president to present Congress “with a timeframe and completion date” for the war failed by just 12 votes, garnering the support of 26 Republicans. Young, however, was one of the ones who voted to kill it.

Young, who is chairman of the House defense appropriations subcommittee, also told the Times that he believes many of his GOP colleagues now feel the same way he does, but “they tend not to want to go public.” He added that when he’s talked to military leaders about his views, he doesn’t “get a lot of reaction.”

My guess is the military leaders want to safeguard their own jobs.

Apparently Congressman Young’s recent change was brought about by the death of a young soldier who attended his church.  Young also said he has talked with people over the past three months who explained the real “mess’ Afghanistan was in.

According to the Times, Young was particularly affected by the death last month of 26-year-old Staff Sgt. Matthew S. Sitton, who attended the Christian school run by the church Young attends.

Before he passed away, Sitton wrote Young a letter about the problems in Afghanistan, including with the command structure and the fact that they were “being forced to go on patrol on foot through fields that they knew were mined with no explanation for why they were patrolling on foot.”

I commend Congressman Young, who is the chairman  of the House defense appropriations subcommittee, for his change of heart.  Congressman Young and his wife live here in Prince William County and their children attended and graduated from Prince William County Schools.   If Congressman Young says its time for the troops  to come home, then its time.Thanks to Congressman Young for having the courage to state his convictions when many  in his party are so myopic.

 

Bev and Bill Young help the wounded troops–an interesting read about Bev taking on anyone standing in the way of “her” marines!  She is a fierce mother bear!

 

13 Thoughts to “Rep. C.W. Bill Young Drops Staunch Support Of Afghanistan War: ‘We’re Killing Kids That Don’t Need To Die’”

  1. Starryflights

    I agree. 11 years is enough. 2 more years won’t change anything the previous 11 have not. His GOP colleagues need to get off their butts and support him.

  2. kelly_3406

    This is exactly what I was trying to say a week or two ago. The current strategy in Adghanistan is failing. The President either needs to change the strategy or quickly withdraw our troops.

  3. marinm

    +1 Kelly

    We need to get out and give the zoo back to the animals.

  4. I am not sure there is such a thing as quick troop withdrawl.

    Now I can see that Mr. Obama is going to get the blame for Mr. Bush’s war.

    The point of thread showing up on our blog was for a change of pace. I featured local Republicans who are national in stature. I put them in a positive light. I included a blog spot that shows Bev Young …well…the REAL Bev Young. She is quite a character.

    If she is on your side, there is no fiercer advocate.

  5. kelly_3406

    I did not say anything negative, except that the strategy is not working. It took Bush several tries before he got the strategy right in Iraq. It took Lincoln three years and multiple generals to get the Civil War on track. There is nothing new about revising strategy to counter a cunning enemy.

    The only thing I object to in your last statement is a reference to Bush’s war. The war is now owned fully by Obama. The current strategy belongs to him. He should take full responsibility for it and make a strategic decision about the way forward.

    If he announced that the strategy is not working and chose to withdraw troops within a year, Obama would probably get a huge bounce. I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s an option being looked at right now.

    1. He pretty much did say that a year ago and everyone moaned and groaned. I think an ongoing war like Afghanistan is always going to be Bush’s war. You don’t change horses midstream. How does Bsuh’s war differ from Obama’s war?

      What I object to is zooming right past the obvious intent of the post to land on Obama. It is neverending.

      I could save myself so much time by just having the same thread posted daily: I hate Obama because…..

      The only reason I don’t is because I am not going to provide free bitching space on my nickel.

      Obama will never own this war any more than Truman really owned WWII. I am not sure that Tricky Dick ever owned Vietnam. It was always Mr. Johnson’s war. He probably hated it worst of all of them.

  6. kelly_3406

    I will say this — the debates should be good. I hope Romney has the good sense to hit Obama over the Benghazi assassination and Afghanistan strategy. Both are clear cases of incompetence in the Administration.

    You are absolutely right that I bitched about the timeline for pulling out of Afghanistan and now we are paying the price. The instant the timeline was announced, the Afghans lost all motivation to cooperate with the U.S. because they have to deal with the Taliban when we leave. Cooperation with the U.S. could be deadly for entire families if history is a guide.

    And it is has become clear that there was plenty of warning in advance of the embassy attacks in Egypt and Libya. Yet the administration did nothing. There was no beefing up of physical security and no marine contingent to provide defense. The entire incident was bungled from beginning to end.

    1. I disagree. Of course, I don’t have an inside right wing source to tell me every bungled move.

      What I do not fault the administration for is not instantly declaring terrorism in Benghazi. That would have been irresponsible. No adminstration in modern times would have done that. I am not even sure any attack would be called terrorism. Armed attack yes. Terrorism? Maybe, maybe not. To date, the FBI has not been able to get into the site. The evidence has been compromised. The FBI is working from 400 miles away.

      On the other hand, do we want facts or politics?

      Libya is a brand new country. Do we want a consulate protected by a battalion of marines? Maybe if that is what is needed we shouldn’t be there.

      Am I surprised that this has turned political? Not in the least. Mitt Romney tipped his hand in the middle of the battle by declaring our president disgraceful. No, Mitt is disgraceful. He should have waited for the facts.

      While he is at it, he needs to stop pretending he is head of state. He isn’t. He had no business meeting with his good buddy Nitenyahu. Constitutionally there is only one president at a time. When and if he wins the election, then he can speak for the American people.

  7. Emma

    These wars would have ended much sooner if Americans were asked to fund them up front.

  8. I agree. Think how badly the howling would have been if the draft had been reinstituted. Fine to kill someone else’s kids it seems.

    It’s ugly business to use an atm to fund a war.

    Those of us who aren’t military never felt a thing.

  9. Ray Beverage

    @Moon-howler
    “I am not sure there is such a thing as quick troop withdrawl.” Actually, Moon, there is…you blow up everything on the way out of the country preferably with thermite gernades or white phosporus so it burns fast and is basically unusable. Lots of overseas places I had served in had such plans. Pull the pin and get out. Leave with you “A” bag only….and that bag is the pack you toss on your back. Hell, even on the DMZ in Korea the Burger King and Popeyes were converted RVs so they could either bug-out or be blown in place!

    Now, one other thing…you wrote in the intro: “My guess is the military leaders want to safeguard their own jobs.”

    Military Leaders wearing Uniforms are under Oath to obey the orders of the President. To not protect means discharge (maybe forced retirement if lucky) or a trip to the Big House on the Kansas Plains known as the United States Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth. Your phrase would be more appopriate if you had said the Civilian Politicians who think they are leaders want to safeguard their jobs by using the kids in the sandbox as a political excuse or stand.

    1. Ray, I was speaking in generalities. I wasn’t implying any one person disobey orders. I was speaking of the need for old generals to have a war to go too. Please throw in a good sprinkling over hyperbole in my speech always.

      I was raised by WWII parents…both military and civilian. I grew up with healthy criticism of the brass. I also worked with a whole bunch of second career colonels. No hero worship here. Please allow me the privilege of a little tongue in cheek.

      As for the quick troop withdrawl, I am just not sure that is diplomacy in the world.

Comments are closed.