General Stanley McCrystal has asked for additonal troops in Afghanistan. It was his opinion:
that the U.S. effort in Afghanistan “will likely result in failure” without an urgent infusion of troops has been endorsed by the uniformed leadership. That includes Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mike Mullen and Gen. David H. Petraeus, the head of U.S. Central Command and architect of the troop “surge” strategy widely seen as helping U.S. forces turn the corner in Iraq.
Meanwhile, President Obama has said that the administration needs time to assess the situation and look again at options and objectives. According to the Washington Post,
Obama’s public remarks on Afghanistan indicate that he has begun to rethink the counterinsurgency strategy he set in motion six months ago, even as his generals have embraced it. The equation on the ground has changed markedly since his March announcement, with attacks by Taliban fighters showing greater sophistication, U.S. casualties rising, and the chances increasing that Afghanistan will be left with an illegitimate government after widespread fraud in recent presidential elections.
Should we risk getting bogged down even further in the war in Afghanistan by sending in more troops? Is it possible to win in Afghanistan? Must we get Bin Lauden to be successful? What would really denote ‘winning?’ Should the Taliban be totally removed?
The Afghanistan government seems corrupt and the elections were questionable. Must the Afghanistan governement be stable? Must the Afghanistan army be able to defend the country before we go? Have there been efforts to make this happen?
The drug situation is still deplorable. The Taliban almost eradicated poppy growing in 2001. Now they do not seem to be quite the intense opponents of the poppy industry as they used to be. This past year was a bumper crop. Much of the world’s opium comes from this area of the world. Can we turn our backs on this cash crop?
Politically speaking, will President Obama lose his liberal support if he continues the war in Afghanistan? Did he make promises about the Afghanistan front or did he mainly speak about the Iraqi war? What does American stand to gain or lose by either action?
If we drive Bin Lauden out of Afghanistan and he moves to Somalia or Malaysia do we then invade these countries? We run the risk of getting bogged down in Afghanistan the way Russia did or we did in Viet Nam. Bush blew it when he pulled out and invaded Iraq eight years ago. Now we are pouring money into a country without a creditable government.
Please…no more war. Send our soldiers home for their sakes, their families’ sakes and ours. We are better served with them here defending us on our own turf. Plus that, it’s cheaper and we need the money.
If we don’t start the end of this war, we are going to bankrupt ourselves and put our domestic safety even more at risk.
I would have to say that I somewhat agree with IVAN on most of his points. However, I think that Obama is showing that he has no clue what to do. If he commits then he will ‘own’ this war with a chance of success (which is what I think he should do) but those of the left won’t like it. If he pulls out then he will ‘own’ this war but as a complete failure and nobody will like it.
Lets pretend he does what Pinko wants, just pulls out now. There is no Afghan military there to defend itself. Terrorist will just set up shop and take Afghanistan over like they did pre-9/11. Yeah, that’s what we want… get real.
“We are better served with them here defending us on our own turf.” – are you referring to our boarders?
Now THERE’S a creditable argument! [cracking up again!]
I have to say, on the world stage recently, Obama is pretty much getting the finger from everyone. He might as well be wearing big floppy shoes, face paint, and a red rubber nose. Everything the man touches turns to crap!
I see the lefties are voicing their support for “getting out of Afghanistan”. What would you tell the last man to die for Obama’s political strategy?
We should NEVER have gotten involved in Afghanistan in the first place. That being said, what possible moral justification can we possibly use to pull out now? The Taliban will fill the vacuum. Before you know it, girls will be banned from going to school, women will have acid thrown in their faces as payback for their “indiscretions,” female obestricians will be forced to do their jobs in full burqa–in so many ways, the country will spiral irreparably back into the dark ages with these animals in charge.
My feelings about this President will be irredeemable if he allows such gross human-rights violations by abandoning the Afghanis once again. It’s bad enough we are so willing to ignore China’s human-rights record because of our massive debt to that country.
President Obama knew what he was getting into when he applied for the job of President. How often do we hear that he has such a huge “mess” to clean up after Bush? If he wasn’t up to the job, then he should have left it up to someone more competent. All of the teleprompted speeches in the world won’t save him if he admits defeat and failure and allows those people to suffer.
By “the first place” I am referring to the ’80s, when we essentially armed and trained the Taliban to defeat the Soviets. Then we abandoned the country, leaving it in the hands of these armed-and-dangerous animals. Congress refused to continue any funding for our presence there, so we left.
It was our actions that empowered the Taliban, and it will sadly be our actions that will allow them to regain dominance once again.
President Obama seems more concerned about his reputation with holocaust deniers and murderous madmen than he is about preventing human-rights violations that we enabled in the first place.
@Posting As Pinko
>>>If we don’t start the end of this war, we are going to bankrupt ourselves and put our domestic safety even more at risk.
We’re already at that point.
Obama inherited a huge mess, both domestic and foreign, when he took
office. Some areas – the economy, Iraq – seem to be slowly and
often painfully moving in the right direction, but Afganistan?
I don’t have a plan except to say focus on main purposes. Yes,
it would be nice to help it turn into a modern state but at the
cost of how much blood and treasure? Our original goal, and
only naive fools would disagree with it, was to rout out and kill
the monsters who planned and put in motion 9-11 (and no doubt will do
it again given the chance). That is the single thing we must do
– we have no choice – either they die or we die.
Ahhh, I haven’t heard “it’s all Bush’s fault” for a while now! Problem is, the “huge mess” Obama inherited was caused by a Democratic-controlled Congress for Bush’s last two years, and THAT hasn’t changed, in fact, it got a little worse. That’s why Obama can’t catch a break in fixing anything, because the maker of “the mess” is still in charge!
Hey MH, how about a thread on what we should do with the terrorists they caught in New York in order to find the others in the group along with the bomb making materials. The non-torture group can weigh in and save the day for New Yorkers I’m sure. Talking softly to them will bore them to the point were they will gladly give up the details to make it stop. Making them view all of Obama’s speeches end to end would probably do the trick, but then that might be bordering on torture, so we probably can’t do that!
Bush II made a horrible error by pushing the invasion of Iraq,
knowing that our vital mission in Afganistan was not completed.
He chose to start a war of choice, when one of necessity
needed our full focus. GWB saved Bin Laden’s neck and promoted
the interest of the tyrants in Tehran.
Slowpoke, you may forgive Bush, but history certainly will not.
First off, I am almost surprised by the virulent hatred of Obama here. It is worse than hatred for terrorists or the Taliban. I am glad I have never hated a president that much. It would simply drain all my energy.
I think Obama must send in the additional troops needed. We should have worried about what it cost 8 years ago. President Bush told us we were in it for the long haul. We had to break up those training camps, capture Bin Lauden, and make it impossible for the evil that bred there to continue. Then President Bush lost his way…and we got side tracked into Iraq.
Afghanistan will continue to be a breeding group for all that is evil until the Taliban is run out and there is a stable government. Send more troops. President Obama needs to step up to the plate and do what is right, regardless of what the liberals in this country want.
We cannot continue to confuse Afghanistan with Iraq. So, I guess that makes me closest in agreement with Poor Richard. Why am I not surprised?
Daisy Cutters R us.
“Virulent hatred”? Did you forget to add “racism”?
These are legitimate concerns. Characterizing them as anything but legitimate concerns just cheapens the debate (or shuts it down, as I suspect the intent is). The President used Afghanistan to his advantage during the campaign. Now he has to step up and make a Catch-22 decision. Perhaps this is the “test” Biden warned us about.
No. Virulent hatred is what was shown Palin and Bush. What we’re doing is calling an amateur and amateur.
What happened to “Mission Accomplished”
He even landed on an air craft carrier is a fighter jet, probably his first time on an air craft carrier.
Slow, you left out Clinton also.
I attributed much of the Bush hate to the election and how it was settled. That was a lose/lose situation regardless of who won.
I always understood why Palin didn’t grant interviews, after that one debacle. Additionally, they weren’t her forte. She needed to play to her strengths.
Emma, you don’t hear racism often out of me, if you recall. Don’t put words in my mouth. I didn’t say racism because I didn’t mean racism. Shame on you for trying to deflect that tired old argument.
Concern is one thing. Virulent hatred is another and that is what I am hearing. If the question is about Afghanistan and what shoiuld be done why is it necessary to launch a full fledged attack on Obama or Bush?
If Pres. Obama doesn’t send more troops to Afghanistan, I will speak out against him on that issue–not because I hate him but because I disagree with a decision he is making. Operative word here is IF.
More correct would be to say Palin didn’t grant interviews to news channels that would tear her apart. Same reason for Obama..Fox would tear him apart and ask him questions tougher than “how ’bout those ‘Sox?”
What’s Palin doing these days now she is a free woman? Did anyone figure out why she didn’t finish out her term? What does she have up her sleeve?
Palin was naive and not wise to the ways of Washington. Had she been, she would have never done a lot of the things she did. Not her fault, just an illustration of why she wasn’t the best person for the VP job.
And meanwhile, back to Afghanistan….doing the right or wrong thing really shouldn’t be about Bush, Palin, or Obama.
I know you didn’t say “racism,” Moon. But many on this blog, including Elena, not only pull out the hatred-for-Obama mantra, but add to it the fact that people simply can’t accept an African-American in the White House. Could that really be all there is to it, unbridled hatred (and racism)? Aren’t we allowed to express the opinion that this President is grossly inexperienced and, in many cases, way over his head, without invoking the hate/racism genies?
And do you seriously want people to hold back their opinion because our intelligent and articulate President is really just a black guy who should get a break? How insulting to him that we can’t challenge his policies, but just politely play along because we’re afraid of being labeled “haters.”
Today we have no good choices in Afganistan – we can only hope to
select the best one.
1)Leave and the 9-11 terror planners have an even better base to
cause more mayhem and don’t doubt they will – here, in the USA.
They won’t stop until they kill us all or turn us into fanatic
Moslem zealots. They started this and see no reason to stop.
2)Stay – send more troops and material. This is a lousy place to
fight – worse than Iraq, worse than Vietnam. A miserable rocky
giant mountain country with only a history of tribal and
corrupt warlord “government”. Logistics is a nightmare. The
Brits tried to manage it in two Afgan Wars while the Russians,
more recently, were also forced out. (Drink a toast to the
late Dr. William Brydon while you mull this – he could have told
us a bit about the Afgans).
GWB’s action was to do a half-ass job and leave the mess for
somebody else while he went off to Iraq to strut around on an
aircraft carrier. Mission Unaccomplished.
Pray for President Obama and Congress to make the best decisions.
Sorry, but I read your “hatred” comment as just one step away from accusations of racism. They seem to go hand-in-hand both on this blog and in other news sources. And it has nothing to do with encouraging a thoughtful discussion on race; it is simply intended to shut down debate.
I do that every day, Poor Richard–pray for this country. President Obama knows he’s in a Catch-22 here.
It’s a shame we didn’t devote our troops to securing our borders instead of deploying them to the Iraq sinkhole.
I think race has been discussed to death. What else is there to say. I think I set the stage to discuss the issues. Instead there was this erruption over Obama.
I called no one a hater. I don’t even know what a ‘hater’ is. I commented on the virulent hate I was reading…and deny it or not, that is exactly what it is.
Poor Richard, You are right, there are no right and easy answers. I think we have to …pardon the expression: Stay the course and send in more troops. To do otherwise leaves a nest of vipers.
I love it! If you disagree with Obama or think he is doing something wrong or doesn’t know what he is doing all together you obviously have ‘virulent hatred of Obama’ and your hatred is for Obama is ‘worse than hatred for terrorist or the Taliban’. What a crock! Please Moon, I think you owe it to allot of people here, please point out a statement which would qualify as an example of someone hating Obama more than terrorists or the Taliban!
You just show your true left wing extremist views with crap like that, if you disagree with Obama you apparently hate him more than terrorist…. are you serious!?
Oh come on, there was virulent hatred for Bush too right after he got elected in the disputed election. Everyone seems to forget that. Both sides are just as guilty of that. It gets tiring of hearing the Dems get all indignant over this when they were guilty of the same exact thing 8 years ago! I’m sure the next time a Republican gets elected president they’ll do the same thing as the Republicans are doing now.
@hello
Yes, I am referring to our borders and our mainland.
Also, I don’t think we can just pull out all at once. That would be foolish and dangerous.
“I commented on the virulent hate I was reading…and deny it or not, that is exactly what it is.” – so do you have virulent hatred worse than that of terrorists or the Taliban for Corey Stewart, Palin, Bush, McDonnell, Republicans in general?
Gainesville, there was a lot of virulent hatred of Bush when he ‘won’ the election. I think if Gore had ‘won,’ the same thing would have happened. Same level of being pissed off but different people. lose/lose situation. Having said that though, this blog was not in existence I can’t speak to it other than I know it existed.
Hello, first off, I don’t owe anyone here jack. Do you think I get paid?
The question was about Afghanistan. You and others launched into an attack on Obama. It is predictable. Perhaps you don’t see it because you are so wrought up with you intense dislike of him.
Let’s put this another way, do you deny that you hate the current president?
I find that the hatred of Obama gets in the way of solutions and in the way of reasonable discussion.
With out a doubt I deny that I ‘hate the current president’ and by no means do I ‘hate him more than terrorists or the Taliban’! I find that comment highly offensive. Again, please point out one single statement of mine here that would warrant such an accusation.
“I find that the hatred of Obama gets in the way of solutions and in the way of reasonable discussion.” – I find that your blind love for and following does the same… which is obvious by your previous accusations that somehow people hate Obama more than terrorist or the Taliban.
…especially since you can’t even come up with a single comment to prove your point…
Hello, it was a general statement made over the virulent hatred I feel people have over the current president. I don’t have to prove my point to you.
You sure took ownership of a general remark real fast–got right on the ropes over it.
As for my ‘blind love of Obama,’ I find that almost funny. You don’t even know that I voted for him or that I even voted, do you?
I do want to give him a chance. If that is blind love, so be it. I did the same for the previous president. Smart people will look at issues rather than the person.
I see Moon, so someone disagrees with the President and you automatically assume it’s because they hate him more then they hate terrorist or the Taliban. I get it now… no need for proof, just the same old tired argument from left wing radicals. You disagree, you obviously HATE our President, not his policy, not his choices, you HATE HIM. Proof, no need for a silly thing like proof when you can just blurt out that they hate HIM more then terrorist or the Taliban. How so very typical…
Hello, stop baiting.
That would be me here, left wing radical.
Regardless of topic, you start whining about the pres. It gets old and actually doesn’t address the topic. How would you know whether he knows what to do or not? I don’t know what his opinion is, which is the main reason for the original post.
It would probably be best if you stopped trying to restate what I think or say. You really have no clue what I think. Furthermore, opinions don’t need proof. They are opinions. That might be part of your problem…an inability to distinquish between fact and opinion. Facts need proof. Opinions don’t.
“That would be me here, left wing radical.” – Finally! I’m glad you have finally given up on the claim that your somehow a ‘moderate’. 🙂
What was done 30 years ago in Afganistan is over and done with. We should deal with present conditions not what other administrations did. The real discussion should begin on 9-11.
So just forget about history, to hell with what Santayana has to say about it. We abandoned ship once to dire consequences, so maybe this time the outcome will be different?
Emma, there really isn’t much anyone can do about our history in Afghanistan now. Much has changed since we were propping up various people in that country. Much as changed as far as our relationship with Russia goes. (or so we would like to think) I think we have to make our decisions on Afghanistan based on the past 10-15 years. I don’t think going in there in the first place was unreasonable. I question the wisdom of getting side tracked in Iraq but that is a done deal also. We can’t turn back the hands of time.
9-11 did not begin on 9-11. The seeds were planted long ago, and there were many policy decisions over the years that enabled the events on that day. Did anyone watch his loony-ness, Mohammaar Qaddhafi, today at the UN? Some consider him the father of state-sponsored terrorism. It’s time we looked seriously at our past blunders and how they contributed to global security (or lack thereof). It would be nice to think that 9-11 just happened in some sort of time-warp bubble, but it did not.
Moon, it wasn’t so much the going in there in the ’80s that is problematic. It is that we armed and trained men that we knew were violence-prone religious fanatics, used them to win the Cold War, and then walked away, leaving the fanatics in charge. There are several still in Congress who were responsible for that whole travesty. If you want the story, presented in a very readable way, read Charlie Wilson’s War. Forget the movie, the book does a much better job of tracing the roots of the rise of the Taliban.
If I had to pick my enemies, I’d take the Soviets any day over these zealots. At least we could laugh at Boris and Natasha.
I don’t disagree with any of what you have said, Emma. I still contend we have to take the current situation and not let the past dictate too much. I don’t believe we totally discount it though.
I will throw out that some of the problems go back to the 1920’s when the Brits talked out of both sides of their mouth in Palestine. I think what I am saying is that every time we go back in the past there is another path to yet another problem.
And yes, we did arm violent people to help overcome the soviets. What to do now? I think we set a realistic objective that maybe doesn’t include or exclude capturing Bin Lauden and supply the troop power to achieve the stated objective.
Emma, Yes I did see him and got tired of listening to him. Isn’t his loony-ness the one who got a couple of his kids blown up because he used them as human shields? Hell of a nice guy.
I do stand corrected as far as stuff beginning on 9-11. I don’t believe it did. I think though that we have to deal with it from that point or be prepared to go back at least a century.
More problems from Pakistan:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/24/world/asia/24military.html?_r=1&th&emc=th