Hey Dems: Obama will Increase War in Afghanistan

Afghanistan is not a country, it is a concept

The Last conqueror to relly defeat the Afghans was Alexander the Great--he did it by killing nearly every adult male in what we now call Afghanistan--That set them back for a generation or so.

 

How many times does this make it that someone has stated that this, that, or the other thing could be Senator Obama's Waterloo? Yet, it hasn't happened all year.

I don't think that we can afford to lose in Afghanistan. I don't understand why those who say we can't lose in Iraq are apparently willing to see us lose in Afghanistan. I know they say the same thing about those of us who want an exit out of Iraq by the end of 2010. However, the folks that attacked us on 9/11/2001 operated out of Afghanistan, not Iraq.

 

To be totally non-political for a minute, Afghanistan, as I said above, has not been conquered since Alexander the Great, who accomplished it with a brutality that no Western nation, including ours, is ready to employ. To quote an old intel type, "the only thing this loose aggregation of tribes that we call Afghans agree on is that they don't like you being there if you are not one of them." The Russians were on the way to accomplishing the task, because they have no qualms about brutality, then that wonderous rogue, Charley Wilson, put together the most outlandish and largest illegal arms operation ever seen (far worse than Iran-Contra, and just as illegal), and he got away with it. With stinger missiles, the Russian armored Helicoptors were neutralized, and the war swung irrevocably away from the Ruskies.

Heroin is devastating the East Coast of the US. Friends of mine who are counselors tell me it is the most devastating drug epidemic they have seen, far worse than crack or speed, and it is all due to Afghanistan. The Taliban (everybody does something good, even murderous wacko religious fanatics from time to time) outlawed the Opium trade, and they were brutal enough to make their point. Now, half or more of the Afghan GDP comes from opium that makes its way down the Silk Road to New Jersey, via Turkey, bringing AK 47s and other things on the return trip. The 6,000 year old set of caravan routes we call the Silk Road, doesn't carry much in the way of silk any more--just opium out and guns in. So, here we are--do we pull out of Iraq to make a larger commitment to Afghanistan? Probably whoever gets elected will do that--and regret it.

 

And not to mention, Major, the human trafficking.

http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportId=73300

So, in other words, Major, all of those Dems who carp about GW Bush and Republicans being war mongers are basically just carping.

 

Our interests in Afghanistan, as I see them, are quite narrow: to destroy al Qaeda and its Taliban allies, a job I think we should have finished before any consideration was given to invading Iraq. The Afghans can rule their country as they see fit outside of that. I have been quite consistent in my position on Afghanistan on this board and elsewhere.

There has been a demand for recreational drugs in this country for as long as recreational drugs have existed and I don't see that ending. That should not deter us from the goal of wiping out al Qaeda and its Taliban allies.

 

So you have no problem with the drug and human trafficking, then?

You are really naive about the basic Afghanistan war lord and Al Qaeda and the Taliban, Ken. You need to brush up on the facts.

 

Perhaps so.

For the record, I don't think that anyone should use recreational drugs beyond moderation and there may be some drugs that there is no such thing as moderate use of and these should not be used at all. As to which ones those are I leave that up to the experts to decide.

 

As McCain asked O-BA-MA, without getting an answer: "Are you ready to invade Pakistan?" Because that is where the bad guys are holed up, in the middle of the ultimate autonomous region in the world.

A friend and professor, now deceased, was the chief of mission in Kabul back in the days when the king still ruled (we did not have an ambassador at the time, because none of the political appointees wanted it!). He received an urgent message from Foggy Bottom (the State Department), that they needed to know GDP, birth rates, fertility rates, infant mortality rates, agriculture stats...ad infinitum. My friend got an audience with the King and made his request. The king said, "Oh, we don't keep such records. Allah gives us children and enough food to feed them." Well, Dr. John (my friend) sent that message back to Foggy Bottom, and they rather indignantly refused to accept it. Dr. John then did the thing that any operative should be able to do, and that is, he drew a bottle of bourbon and a case of beer from the embassy storeroom, locked himself in his office with an old-fashioned adding machine, a typewriter, and a ream or two of paper, and over a three-day weekend, he created the statistics, based on his knowledge of the country (which was better than most, for he was fluent in Farsi, Arabic, Pashtu, and was not bad in some of the other tongues found there).

A few years later, after the king was thrown out and a Socialist government government installed, Dr. John was working an assignment at the UN, and he encountered the stats that the Socialist government was using, and realized that they were his old invented stats, with a few percentage points added for growth.

 

Apparently Ken has flipped once again. This time on war. He now supports a war monger Barak Obama.

 

To my knowledge, Senator Obama has not changed his position on the Afghanistan war during this entire campaign. I could be wrong but I believe this is the case.

 

Brother it is still war and you are anti war and have called others war mongers because they supported war of any kind. Now that your beloved candidate supports you are all for it. You are free to change your mind till the Lord returns but it looks even worse when you use such titles.

 

1) If I have come across as being anti-war in any circumstance then that was a mistake on my part for which I apologize.

2) If I have called someone a warmonger for any war in any circumstance then I apologize for doing so.