Administration to double troop numbers for Vietman- I mean Afghanistan

[Avanarius]

Wow @ the google ad before I logged in: "Obituary Archives" now that's fucked up.

[archibaldcrane]

Do you think ANY president (see "salesman") is going to do anything to improve this country?

I think for "improvement" to be possible, there has to be "potential".

So clearly noone is going to do anything to improve that country.

[Plow]

Silly rabbits, this is nothing like Vietnam.

Vietnam looked like it might actually have an end someday 7 years into American involvement, duh.



Seriously, though, this isn't really like Vietnam at all. The only really valid comparison I can think of is Iraq, the U.S. has been... let's say, "thoughtless" before, but never so "careless" as with Iraq and Afghanistan.



The problem is as has been pointed out-- this is not "Obama's war." To put it quite bluntly, the shit is so fucking retarded right now that it's unreasonable to expect swift action.


Overall, I approve of the buying time scenario. Quite simply, I never expected universal health care to actually be "on the table" within the first year... and I'll take millions gaining proper insurance before tens of thousands coming back from a war to be stuck unemployed and under-supported, gladly.


Big picture, blah blah.


Also, really, if we belong anywhere these days, it's in S. Korea and Afghanistan. I don't think we should ever drop below a couple thousand troops spread among 10-15 stations through there. Of course, those couple thousand shouldn't all be American, either, it's the simple fact that the world needs to help them maintain a fair and reasonable police force.

[Rhinox]

It is Obama's war. It became his war when he decided to extend it. Just hope he realizes he on his way to becoming a one term president.


He is burning bridges left and right with his base just so he can be seen as Clinton v2. Funny thing is he"ll probably repeal dadt right before 2012 and try and hang his hat on that.

And calling bullshit on the need to have bases anywhere other then on our own soil. There's no need to still have bases in japan and Germany last I checked we won that war over 60 years ago. We just need to mind our own fucking business.

[Shuvo]

I don't get why republicans everywhere keep calling Obama a fake/hypocrite/liar for the Afghanistan surge, he was campaigning on doing just that for his entire campaign...Even the really intelligent well read republicans I know say the same thing. Grasping at straws or what? >_>

Also, isn't the deficient everyone blames him for primarilly because of the tax cuts he put into the middle class, which he also campaigned on doing? Which is what the republicans want anyway? >_>;;;

American politics always makes me /facepalm

[Plow]

It is Obama's war. It became his war when he decided to extend it. Just hope he realizes he on his way to becoming a one term president.


He is burning bridges left and right with his base just so he can be seen as Clinton v2. Funny thing is he"ll probably repeal dadt right before 2012 and try and hang his hat on that.

And calling bullshit on the need to have bases anywhere other then on our own soil. There's no need to still have bases in japan and Germany last I checked we won that war over 60 years ago. We just need to mind our own fucking business.

Plain and simple: it's not that simple.

He can't just go "ok we're outta here" and pack up and move out at this point.


The world needs to step up and help police a number of places, Afghanistan being one of them. The bulk of Africa is bad enough-- and clearly needs it even more. What can't be done is to create more of that... exactly why we never should have been in Iraq in the first place.

What's done is done-- Obama doesn't have a fucking time machine. We have to deal with the reality of what's been put in place, not the fantasy of how things should have been done in the first place.


p.s. You don't get to be one of the guys that actually cares about other people and restrict it to Americans.

[Egon]

I don't get why republicans everywhere keep calling Obama a fake/hypocrite/liar for the Afghanistan surge, he was campaigning on doing just that for his entire campaign...Even the really intelligent well read republicans I know say the same thing. Grasping at straws or what? >_>

Also, isn't the deficient everyone blames him for primarilly because of the tax cuts he put into the middle class, which he also campaigned on doing? Which is what the republicans want anyway? >_>;;;

American politics always makes me /facepalm

It's not a surge.

[Katoke]

War is war. Big woop. We're increasing troop size to stabilize a country. Big woop. We've lost 58,000 troops in Vietnam, compare that to the what, nearly 3,000 we've lost in both Afghan and Iraq war? I'd say we're doing pretty good ona Kill : Death ratio.

[BadKarma]

And somewhere George Bush is laughing "Eheheheh".


LolObama.

[Sgtpayne]

Been there, and was there in the Iraq theatre as well.

There is no 'finishing' a war over there. War fundamentally destabilizes wherever it happens, regardless of how well it is handled. The purpose of occupation is to hold off the (usual) following atrocity that happens when there is no base of power to govern people's actions. People by nature are reactionary, and tend to follow mob mentality.

The middle east is a large uneducated population led by a few influential figureheads that usually use the premise of religion guiding everything, when usually in fact it is whatever that leader wants done in his own interest. Because of this, it only takes a small spark to set off very large amounts of unrest.

Afghanistan is also unique in that much of it's fate is determined by geography and the seasons of the year. During the winter, entire areas get shut down by snow and mud. This is typically when the fighters hole up and lick their wounds while performing hit and run operations, followed by full offensives in the spring and summer months. For this reason (as well as them crossing into Pakistan every time we fought them) there is no decisive victory. You simply wear them down for several months, and then they hole up and recruit/train more fighters (which is why no one can find them).

Also (and I'm sure this sounds really arrogant) the people over there for the most part are not honest. The majority are simply in it to take care of their own skins and watch out for their family, all the time looking for the easy buck (money does not come easily over there). Even our interpreters were sketchy as hell, and it wasn't uncommon to get ratted out by your own guy because of someone getting paid off or the Taliban threatening to murder their family. The only thing they seem to understand is brutal force. However, that only serves to destabilize even more.

In short you're right. This is a lot like vietnam in that the insurgents blend into the populace, use guerilla tactics, border jump, and sap our strength over time in a way that causes dissent back home over the whole thing in the first place. The soldiers are also being ham-stringed by lack of support, lack of funding, and rules of engagement limitations that prevent us from doing what needs to be done when it needs to be done. The only major difference I would point out is that we had definable reason to enter Afghanistan that directly affected us here back home. I don't believe that was the case in Vietnam.

[Demosthenes11]

Plain and simple: it's not that simple.

He can't just go "ok we're outta here" and pack up and move out at this point.

why? what left are we trying to accomplish?

The world needs to step up and help police a number of places, Afghanistan being one of them. The bulk of Africa is bad enough-- and clearly needs it even more.

lmfao

What's done is done-- Obama doesn't have a fucking time machine. We have to deal with the reality of what's been put in place, not the fantasy of how things should have been done in the first place.

exactly. we need to realize we can do nothing more in the region and cut our losses. We chased out terrorists (lol), we installed a democracy, and we gave them infrastructure. They have spit on it and shown they can't handle it. We are stupid for believing we could change people over there in the first place.

p.s. You don't get to be one of the guys that actually cares about other people and restrict it to Americans.

Yet we can't be those guys that think our solution is the best or we are even in places to better people's lives. Sometimes toppling brutal regimes is actually more costly than the regime itself. We are not the world's police. We do not get to be the ultimate judge of right and wrong. We have our own problems and can't even fix those, yet we are out in like 100 different countries and funding what?

what has american interventionist foreign policy accomplished?

[Plow]

why? what left are we trying to accomplish?




lmfao



exactly. we need to realize we can do nothing more in the region and cut our losses. We chased out terrorists (lol), we installed a democracy, and we gave them infrastructure. They have spit on it and shown they can't handle it. We are stupid for believing we could change people over there in the first place.




Yet we can't be those guys that think our solution is the best or we are even in places to better people's lives. Sometimes toppling brutal regimes is actually more costly than the regime itself. We are not the world's police. We do not get to be the ultimate judge of right and wrong. We have our own problems and can't even fix those, yet we are out in like 100 different countries and funding what?

what has american interventionist foreign policy accomplished?

You're completely misunderstanding my usage of the word police.


I'm not saying we need to make their decisions and "fix thur guvmnt!"


They literally need police forces. Literal police forces.

Everyone that's able needs to be helping, and we are most certainly able-- in 2 particular places we are especially responsible for the issues, and therefore most heavily weighed upon to help keep things civil, at the most basic, literal levels.

[Demosthenes11]

we are responsible more or less for the situation in all non first world countries - good or bad.

How do we determine the law in these areas? what if the governments dont cooperate? how many american lives is too many?

[Olo401]

Didnt Obama say during his campaign, that he was going to redirect troops from Iraq to Afghanistan?

What was that you were saying earlier Demo?

No, he's not a hypocrite on this. He campaigned on shifting the focus of our efforts out of Iraq and into Afghanistan, as was mentioned before. However I am with you on the fact that we should not be sending -any- more troops anywhere because doing so accomplishes nothing and only pisses off the people there even more.

-The people inside the Taliban are driven by one thing in particular: To get invaders out of their land.

You are correct to an extent.. their goal is to re-impose hyperconservative muslim/sharia control over the country, which they had before we invaded and still have to a varying degree. Getting us to leave is would allow them to take out Karzai's government and get full control again. That's what really drives them more than anything else.

what the hell else do we have to do in Afghanistan? we went there, plowed the country, set up a new government (which is corrupt as shit and has failed), and failed in finding bin laden. We are never going to weed out every terrorist there, and we sure as hell have spent enough money and blood over the last decade. Leaving now or leaving in 10 years makes no difference - the country is going to suck when we leave it no matter what and we need to accept that fact

If I had to guess, the goal (which the generals are pushing) is to attempt something similar to what we did in Iraq. Boost the troop levels to keep things under tighter control, while native forces are trained and a more stable (and hopefully less corrupt) political environment is created.

Unfortunately I think the generals, and by extension Obama, have been blinded to the fact that it was not actually the increase of troops in Iraq that made securing the country possible. It was a change in attitude of the Iraqi people on a fundamental level to drive out the militant forces and take control of their country, because they figured out that was the only way to get us to leave.

Is it possible that this kind of epiphany can happen in Afhganistan? Sure, it's possible. Is it more likely that the Afghanis will follow their tradition of using force to get rid of an occupying entity? Absolutely. That's why this strategy is not going to work, and why Obama should simply issue a full withdrawl from Afghanistan as soon as possible.

Oh yeah, and we can't fucking afford these damn wars either. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

It is Obama's war. It became his war when he decided to extend it. Just hope he realizes he on his way to becoming a one term president.

I agree with this, but personally I think he might choose not run again. I think he realizes by now, just as most of us do, that he's in waaaaay over his head on just about everything. I could be wrong about that though.

[Plow]

we are responsible more or less for the situation in all non first world countries - good or bad.

How do we determine the law in these areas? what if the governments dont cooperate? how many american lives is too many?

For crying out loud, I'm not suggesting we pull people over for driving their donkey carts too fast.


Most people agree with the general principle that you don't just kill people for believing differently than you.

Unfortunately, others do not, and even more unfortunately, there are those incapable of protecting themselves from those that find violence and killing perfectly acceptable "solutions" to any problem.

[Demosthenes11]

For crying out loud, I'm not suggesting we pull people over for driving their donkey carts too fast.


Most people agree with the general principle that you don't just kill people for believing differently than you.

Unfortunately, others do not, and even more unfortunately, there are those incapable of protecting themselves from those that find violence and killing perfectly acceptable "solutions" to any problem.

if you do it in one place what keeps you from doing it in another? Why is sudan a better place to police than iraq was? how come burma will get a pass but not africa?
There are millions - if not billions - of people worldwide that are repressed and millions whose culture is being eliminated altogether. Funny fact - many of those that are committing atrocities are our friends <3

[Day]

woooooooooo the ignorance in this thread is astounding, and that's coming from a borderline retard.

[Dimmauk]

I still find it funny how republicans are agianst universal health care because its too expensive but the war in afghanistan is nessesary. When the real reason they are against universal health care is becuase it would a huge win politically. So what happends when Obama actually wins in afganistan? He would do something that has never been done in history. That would probably be bad politically too?

[Leif]

Boy, it's amazing how angry everyone is with the Obama administration. I mean, they are actually comparing him to Bush! (A compliment to most, but for those who think Bush is a war criminal (aka you guys), it's actually quite a strong statement!)

I still find it funny how republicans are agianst universal health care because its too expensive but the war in afghanistan is nessesary. When the real reason they are against universal health care is becuase it would a huge win politically. So what happends when Obama actually wins in afganistan? He would do something that has never been done in history. That would probably be bad politically too?

The idea that a Democrat could ever have a more solid foreign and war policy than a Republican is insane.

On a slightly more morbid note, the war in Afghanistan may or may not be winnable. It has a rocky and mountainous terrain (which has no natural resources - making its reason for existence rather unclear) and the populous is actually a bunch of crazies. In that sense, Iraq was completely winnable from Day 1. It has a educated and mentally-stable populous along with a bunch of flat ground (with a lot of natural resources).

So whether or not Afghanistan will be worth our stay is unclear. At this point I'm willing to trust about anyone that isn't a Democrat to determine what the best course of action is.

I agree with this, but personally I think he might choose not run again. I think he realizes by now, just as most of us do, that he's in waaaaay over his head on just about everything. I could be wrong about that though.

Has it not been clear for a long time that Barack Obama has no experience doing anything but voting present? Has it not been clear for a long time that Joe Biden, a proclaimed foreign policy "expert", doesn't have much to speak for it? Has it not been clear that Barack Obama was hanging around with too many corrupt people (and a few domestic terrorists) to be trusted with anything?

[Leif]

And what's with locking the good thread? Debating things we already know (that Democrats can't be trusted with foreign policy) is much less interesting than debating things that are up in the air (that Democrats can't be trusted with domestic policy).