Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by KenH, Sep 24, 2009.
We have been fighting in Afghanistan for 8 years. Should we increase our troop level?
Don't forget that the purpose of the Afghanistan invasion was to get a Russian pipe line thru Afghanistan and to keep the opium growing and flowing.
Time to bring 'em home where they belong. The way our wimpy POTUS keeps apologizing for the USA, looks like we'll need our troops here to defend us from all the illegal aliens and terrorists flocking our boarders.
An interesting article. Very interesting.
"Still, Obama is likely to escalate. Apart from the "credibility" of American power being involved, most key American officers think, to quote chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen, that "the main effort in our strategic focus from a military perspective must now shift to Afghanistan." A few officers, mostly lacking influence, believe it will lead to disaster, and the American military commander in Afghanistan at the end of last September warned that unless there is a rapid escalation of troops within a year the war "will likely result in failure."
Meanwhile, Obama thinks he will win the war by escalation — an illusion that also marked the futile war in Vietnam. He also believes he can "Afghanisize" the war — like Nixon thought he could "Vietnamize" that conflict — even though recruits for Karzai’s army have little motivation apart from collecting their salary, and are scarcely a match for the Taliban — a quite divided, complex organization which today dominates much of the country.
A growing majority of the Afghan population now oppose the U.S. effort because they have led to frightful civilian casualties without attaining decisive military successes. "The mission is on the verge of failing," a writer in the U.S. Army’s quarterly, Parameters, concluded last spring.
That, indeed, may be an understatement."
Seems to me quagmire (hope that is how you spell it is spelled the same way in both Iraq and Afgan. :tonofbricks:
And Obama is doing a fine job creating one.
Go with his general's recomendation or get out of Afghanistan now.
Either way will work.
Not being able to make up his mind won't.
An indecisive CiC gets people killed and gives away victory.
Which is what he is doing now.
My standard response...whether it's a Bush, Obama, Clinton, Reagan, whatever endeavor...
Send enough troops to win.
Let them do what must be done to win (outside of atrocities).
If you can't let them win, or if you can't send enough to win, get them out.
Fight to win, or don't fight.
End of story.
Ditto - fight to win or don't fight.
If you are going to fight to win do so with overwhelming force.
We must send more troops, of course !
Afghanistan, in 2007 produced 93 % of the opiates found on the world market. And i don't speak about the talibans, who must be kept under control.
We must finish the job over there.
How many additional troops is France gonna send?
Hear hear. And do it quickly. Also we shouldn't allow Pakistan to limit us. We need to clean house in the swat valley and In Uzbekistan.
As I understand the other countries that were considering sending additional troops are now changing their minds due to Obama's waffling.
I don't know how many would be necessary, but i think of an equal share between USA and Europe would be good, no ?
No, Spear, since I am opposed to adding any additional troops. I am willing to give the current configuration until the end of 2010 to finish up whatever can be done in Afghanistan and then pull out during 2011.
Great Britain and the Soviet Union couldn't work their will on Afghanistan. It is unwise to think that the United States government can. We have been there for 8 years now. I think that is foolish to think that adding more troops and staying there for no telling how many years longer is going to make any significant difference.
Besides, we all know the United States government cannot sustain the current and oncoming debt load. Therefore, the empire must be scaled back. We can do so at our own discretion or economic necessity will eventually force it upon us.
I understand your point of view, and i imagine it costs much to the country, mostly to USA, who maintain half of the soldiers over there.
I supported the idea of sending more troops because i didn't get an idea of how else we could do to stop the production of Opium and avoid the talibans to overwhelm the country and put it back to the middle ages, making it a good rear base for Al Qaida and any terrorist group, like they do in Pakistan mountains.
Bring the troops home, both in Iraq and Afghanistan.