Exit strategy

Good for you then. Whatever you mean? :laugh:

 

What is the "job in Afghanistan" to be done?

 

Rev. Mitch, you are exactly right on. And exactly what is the job in Afghanistan, anyway, since OBL seems to be hiding out in Pakistan?

 

Capturing OBL was only one goal in invading Afghanistan. The other two goals were to oust the Taliban from power and to deal a decisive blow to al-Qaeda in the area.

We have oused the Taliban from power, but they are still involved with much insurgent activity.

al-Qaeda is still very active in the area as well.

 

Afghan people love to fight. They will be happy as a clam to have more Americans to kill.

 

So then by your analysis....

OBL is no longer in Afghanistan so he is not a reason to stay and the Taliban have been ousted from power so they are no reason to stay.

That leaves us with dealing a decisive blow to al-Qaeda in the area.

What would be the measure of that?

And once that is done we can leave - right?

 

What was Bush's exit strategy? Losing the war?

 

Both of these wars were started by Bush. It was incumbent on him to have an exit strategy. He did not other than losing. Obama is going after what was initially considered to be the primary objective, capturing bin Laden and his leaders. At this point I think the whole government conspiracy theory was a lie (so do the FBI) so maybe we should just withdraw and count both wars a Bush loss.

 

That wasn't my analysis. I was just stating what the goals were.

But, to answer your question. If the goals were as I stated (and I believe they were), then only 1 of the 3 has been achieved. OSL is no longer there, so we don't look for him there. Dealing with the taliban is not done and dealing with al-Qaeda is not done. So, to complete the goals, then those two would need to be finished. When those are finished, why would we stay any longer?

 

What I find hypocritical is for the right to suddenly be concerned about exit strategy when they made such a big deal about victory, or leaving before victory during the election. This tells me you're not really looking for an exit strategy, you're just trying to stir up dust.

MP is correct, no one has ever questioned the war in Afghanistan. Only Iraq. No one has ever demanded an exit strategy from Afghanistan, just Iraq. The question would go to Bush regarding how did you go in without a plan to get out? Obama only inherited this war.

Having said that we all know we will eventually have to deal with Pakistan. We know for a fact that is where the terrorist are hiding and those tribal areas are safe haven's for terrorist organizations. My question to Obama is when will he expand the war into Pakistan so we can someday put an end to this thing?

 

I find it hypocritical for all those who bashed Bush for not having an exit strategy but Obama gets a green light from the left to send more of our troops in harm's way. Suicide bombing in Afghanistan is on the rise, reported this evening. Poppy fields are still growing. Americans are still being killed. American munitions are being raided and for sale on the streets in Pakistan. OBL and the Taliban are still at large. All the money that has been pumped there, like giving the warlords thousands upon thousands of dollars for them to drive around in 4WDs etc has been for naught. As long as islam is the rule of law in Afghanistan, the people will always fight and always be backwards and regressive rather than progressive no matter how many coalition forces are there. That's what their religion does for them. And unfortunately, it kills us. That's what none of the politicians get, no matter which party, no matter which president, no matter how many American lives are lost and American limbs are blown off and American money is thrown down the rat hole. We will be in Afghanistan for several decades. There is no exit strategy.

 

"American lives lost" is a straw man because we "lose" ten times more every year to drunk driving. Maybe invading small countries has become a national sport like base ball and drunk driving.

 

Can you name the exit strategy for any war that we have ever fought. Start with the Spanish American War and bring us up to date. Better yet go back to the Mexican American war. Be sure to include Clinton's exit strategy for getting out of Bosnia.

 

We only asked Bush for an exit strategy to get out of Iraq. Obama has one so no need asking him. I support the war in Afghanistan and want us to stay until the job is done. No hypocrisy there...

 

Yep, WWII was take Berlin and ToJo... WWI was the Kaiser. Poncho Villa and defeat the south to keep the country from splitting. Vietnam was to stop communism and/or defeat the north though we fought that war with one hand tied behind our backs which was a no win situation. We usually have a goal for every war.

 

Again, "stay until the job is done"?

What does that mean?

Will be stay for a hundred years if necessary to "get the job done"?

 

I did not ask about the goal for every war I ask about an exit strategy about which JC is so adamant but can't provide. Neither can you.

As for the Mexican American War. which was fought in 1845, we are still in conquered territory that they think belongs to them. That is the reason for the silent invasion of the illegals. Furthermore, Poncho Villa had nothing to do with the Mexican American War.

As for the War of Northern Aggression we still can't keep the Yankee carpetbaggers out.

In the Spanish American War we occupied the Philippines until well after WWII. We still maintain a Naval Base in Cuba.

There was no exit strategy for WWI, an error that led to the rise of Hitler.

We still have troops in Germany and Japan 60+ years after WWII.

We are still in Korea, ~55 years after fighting stopped.

No exit strategy for Viet Nam other than tuck tail and run [Some call it declare victory and run].

We are still in Bosnia about 15 years after Clinton said we would leave.

So, yep, LeBuick alias JC you are not the historian you believe you are.
__________________

 

Nope, I am not a historian but I made the point that the exit strategy has to do with clear objectives of victory. WWII we need to get to Berlin. That was a clear objective and everyone measured when we'd be home by how close we got to Berlin. We exit when we reach our objective.

Targus is right, "job done" is not a clear objective but it was the only one we have for Afghanistan since capturing Bin Laden became an illusive target. I have to admit, Afghanistan is a clearer objective with job done than we have in Iraq. I never did know the objective of that war.

 

Ao one more time... what is "getting the job done in Afghanistan?

And why isn't sending in more troops a recruiting tool for the terrorists in Afgnanistan like it was supposedly in Iraq?