It ain’t easy, is it? Rummy, Georgie and Cheney never read a book on history in their whole lives, and their works show it! Leave it to the next generation to deal with it!
I have never been president. But it makes sense to me that if the president said: “It’s time to leave. Let’s bring everyone home,” it could be done. He is, after all, commander-in-chief.
I understand that the logistics of bringing all our stuff back will be time-consuming, as bringing it all over there was (and expensive!). But troops move when they are ordered to move. I cannot see why they cannot be brought home today.
You are absolutely right. You can’t “help” people who don’t want your help. We have paid Karzai over $100 million in cash to be our friend, and he hates us too.
You can’t make people like you when you hit them with a stick. Nor can you buy their friendship, although it can look like that at times.
The Taliban are repressive, and the Afghanis are better without them. But we can say that about many regimes throughout the planet, and we do not have the resources, the backing, nor the desire to change every crooked government.
The initial reasons for our actions in Afghanistan were not sound, in my opinion. The objective should have been to find Osama bin Ladin in an international manhunt. Once found, he should have been taken out. Problem solved. The world was behind us until we decided that occupation and regime change were more important. Can you say “quagmire”?
The main objective for our troops these days is to stay alive and ensure that their fellow troops stay alive. There is no other goal. This is beyond foolish, bordering on criminal. Why not drop them into a pit of poisonous snakes and say, “good luck”? It would be just as valuable in the long run.
It matters not how much time, effort, lives, and money have been lost; none of it justifies the loss of more time, effort, lives, and money. The first rule of holes: when in one, stop digging.
I have read that we will never fully leave. And that we will keep “advisors” there until the sun stops shining. I just see no point.
As to the equipment being left, I have also read the same thing. It’s too expensive to bring it home. Of course, the time to have thought about that was before it was shipped over there. This calls into question the value of the concept of “fighting them over there, so we won’t have to fight them over here”. My thought at the time was, why don’t we make them foot the bill for transporting troops and machinery? Why should we bring the fight to their turf?
The reason that Afghanistan is the destroyer of empires is that everyone fights them on their home turf. They have nothing to lose; this is their homeland, and they’ll fight anyone who wants to take it over. The invaders don’t want to stay there; the weather is horrid, there is no culture to speak of, there are none of the comforts of home, and the Afghanis will never surrender. It makes it hard to maintain motivation, assuming there was ever a good reason to start with.
I’m sorry I can’t provide sources, but I am sure I have seen it more than once in my “travels” through the print and internet media.
“Yes, and the Dems are without fault, because the wool was pulled over their eyes, and they were too stupid to get their own facts. And even though they hated both Bushes, they were gullible enough to believe both.”
I see it similarly, but differently. First off, the Democrats share fault/responsibility, precisely BECAUSE they had the wool pulled over their eyes, and they were too stupid to get their own facts.
At one time, the party that didn’t occupy the White House went along with most initiatives proposed by the White House, primarily because of respect for the office. (Of course there was no wholesale adoption of the other party’s platform, but there was some semblance of cooperation.) They also realized that some day the shoe would be on the other foot, and they would hope for similar deference in the future. Those days are long gone, but that was part of the equation in 2001.
Another part of the equation was the unification of the country after 9/11/01. Although it was great to have a nation that had found its resolve, unfortunately the stunned public was too willing to believe its leaders would never do anything harmful. Hence the PATRIOT act, among other things, which people in their right minds should never have accepted.
Although it IS Bush’s fault, as he was the occupant of the White House at the time, the Dems share responsibility for not doing due diligence and for voting without reading (sound familiar?)
But we should be fair. Republicans also had the wool pulled over their eyes, and they were too stupid to get their own facts. This helps explain one of the largest expansions of government power, and one of the largest expenditures in the history of the country—the Department of Homeland Security—championed by the party that claims it wants smaller government and fiscal responsibility.
““And, there ya go! A real Obama scandal. He chose to double down on Dubya’s stupidity in Graftistan.”
Does this mean Obama’s twice as dumb as Bush?".No, just not making the correct decision and bringing our troops home. President Obama has too many advisors telling him to stay there. As I Play One on TV said: “Troops home now.”
Cheney and Rumsfeld were more about permanent bases in Iraq and Afghanistan to control Iran and Pakistan, than resources per se, though the DID think they’d get the oil pipeline form Karzai that the Taliban government denied them.
“He is following The Time Line set by Bush.Once again, you do not understand 4th Grade Civics.”Did you read my comment? Can you tell me when Congress last passed a Declaration of War without going to Google? There was no Declaration of War against Afghanistan, the Taliban, Iraq or Al Qaeda. I’m not actually sure that we can declare war on non-state actors. That merits a Google search.Congress, including Senator Clinton, voted to give Bush discretion to deploy troops in Afghanistan & Iraq. But, even my feeble understanding of the Constitution tells me that wasn’t the same as an official Declaration of War.But, since we’re talking about 4th Grade Civics, while technically only Congress can declare war, who has the authority to declare peace? More specifically which person has the authority to order the movement of our troops? I think that person would be called the “Commander in Chief”, but what do I know.
“Recall it was Poppie that committed the first war crime against Iraq with lies to march on Baghdad.”Yeah… he did a fantastic job of staging Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait. Almost as impressive as the fake moon landings.
“However, in the 2013 elections, both the President and Vice President…”2013 elections? Now I remember! That’s when we voted for the new dog catcher.Just to make my point clear, we did well by using a very small force of a few thousand troops to topple the Taliban & break up Al-Qeada’s training camps. We should have kept a very low profile in Afghanistan after that. All we had to do was make sure any new government understood that hosting global terrorist training camps wasn’t in their interests. Instead, Bush decided to play Kingmaker & invested in a corrupt hack to lead Afghanistan.By 2008, anyone with an ounce of sense understood Karzai was useless to us & Afghanistan was going to have to find their own way forward. Instead of ordering an immediate removal of our troops, Obama ordered more troops to Afghanistan. Over 1,500 American soldiers died for nothing. That’s a scandal, but no one seems to care now. Feel free to ridicule me if Afghanistan becomes a model democracy by 2020.
DoctorUmmmNo almost 10 years ago
And, there ya go! A real Obama scandal. He chose to double down on Dubya’s stupidity in Graftistan.
moosemin almost 10 years ago
It ain’t easy, is it? Rummy, Georgie and Cheney never read a book on history in their whole lives, and their works show it! Leave it to the next generation to deal with it!
echoraven almost 10 years ago
Wow. You have humbled and stunned me.
I Play One On TV almost 10 years ago
I have never been president. But it makes sense to me that if the president said: “It’s time to leave. Let’s bring everyone home,” it could be done. He is, after all, commander-in-chief.
I understand that the logistics of bringing all our stuff back will be time-consuming, as bringing it all over there was (and expensive!). But troops move when they are ordered to move. I cannot see why they cannot be brought home today.
You are absolutely right. You can’t “help” people who don’t want your help. We have paid Karzai over $100 million in cash to be our friend, and he hates us too.
You can’t make people like you when you hit them with a stick. Nor can you buy their friendship, although it can look like that at times.
The Taliban are repressive, and the Afghanis are better without them. But we can say that about many regimes throughout the planet, and we do not have the resources, the backing, nor the desire to change every crooked government.
The initial reasons for our actions in Afghanistan were not sound, in my opinion. The objective should have been to find Osama bin Ladin in an international manhunt. Once found, he should have been taken out. Problem solved. The world was behind us until we decided that occupation and regime change were more important. Can you say “quagmire”?
The main objective for our troops these days is to stay alive and ensure that their fellow troops stay alive. There is no other goal. This is beyond foolish, bordering on criminal. Why not drop them into a pit of poisonous snakes and say, “good luck”? It would be just as valuable in the long run.
It matters not how much time, effort, lives, and money have been lost; none of it justifies the loss of more time, effort, lives, and money. The first rule of holes: when in one, stop digging.
Troops home now.
I Play One On TV almost 10 years ago
I have read that we will never fully leave. And that we will keep “advisors” there until the sun stops shining. I just see no point.
As to the equipment being left, I have also read the same thing. It’s too expensive to bring it home. Of course, the time to have thought about that was before it was shipped over there. This calls into question the value of the concept of “fighting them over there, so we won’t have to fight them over here”. My thought at the time was, why don’t we make them foot the bill for transporting troops and machinery? Why should we bring the fight to their turf?
The reason that Afghanistan is the destroyer of empires is that everyone fights them on their home turf. They have nothing to lose; this is their homeland, and they’ll fight anyone who wants to take it over. The invaders don’t want to stay there; the weather is horrid, there is no culture to speak of, there are none of the comforts of home, and the Afghanis will never surrender. It makes it hard to maintain motivation, assuming there was ever a good reason to start with.
I’m sorry I can’t provide sources, but I am sure I have seen it more than once in my “travels” through the print and internet media.
I Play One On TV almost 10 years ago
“Yes, and the Dems are without fault, because the wool was pulled over their eyes, and they were too stupid to get their own facts. And even though they hated both Bushes, they were gullible enough to believe both.”
I see it similarly, but differently. First off, the Democrats share fault/responsibility, precisely BECAUSE they had the wool pulled over their eyes, and they were too stupid to get their own facts.
At one time, the party that didn’t occupy the White House went along with most initiatives proposed by the White House, primarily because of respect for the office. (Of course there was no wholesale adoption of the other party’s platform, but there was some semblance of cooperation.) They also realized that some day the shoe would be on the other foot, and they would hope for similar deference in the future. Those days are long gone, but that was part of the equation in 2001.
Another part of the equation was the unification of the country after 9/11/01. Although it was great to have a nation that had found its resolve, unfortunately the stunned public was too willing to believe its leaders would never do anything harmful. Hence the PATRIOT act, among other things, which people in their right minds should never have accepted.
Although it IS Bush’s fault, as he was the occupant of the White House at the time, the Dems share responsibility for not doing due diligence and for voting without reading (sound familiar?)
But we should be fair. Republicans also had the wool pulled over their eyes, and they were too stupid to get their own facts. This helps explain one of the largest expansions of government power, and one of the largest expenditures in the history of the country—the Department of Homeland Security—championed by the party that claims it wants smaller government and fiscal responsibility.
cjr53 almost 10 years ago
““And, there ya go! A real Obama scandal. He chose to double down on Dubya’s stupidity in Graftistan.”
Does this mean Obama’s twice as dumb as Bush?".No, just not making the correct decision and bringing our troops home. President Obama has too many advisors telling him to stay there. As I Play One on TV said: “Troops home now.”
pnorman1 almost 10 years ago
I assume DaSharkie made a typo and meant to say 2012.
Dtroutma almost 10 years ago
Cheney and Rumsfeld were more about permanent bases in Iraq and Afghanistan to control Iran and Pakistan, than resources per se, though the DID think they’d get the oil pipeline form Karzai that the Taliban government denied them.
DoctorUmmmNo almost 10 years ago
“Does this mean Obama’s twice as dumb as Bush?”Dunno.. what’s two times zero?
DoctorUmmmNo almost 10 years ago
“He is following The Time Line set by Bush.Once again, you do not understand 4th Grade Civics.”Did you read my comment? Can you tell me when Congress last passed a Declaration of War without going to Google? There was no Declaration of War against Afghanistan, the Taliban, Iraq or Al Qaeda. I’m not actually sure that we can declare war on non-state actors. That merits a Google search.Congress, including Senator Clinton, voted to give Bush discretion to deploy troops in Afghanistan & Iraq. But, even my feeble understanding of the Constitution tells me that wasn’t the same as an official Declaration of War.But, since we’re talking about 4th Grade Civics, while technically only Congress can declare war, who has the authority to declare peace? More specifically which person has the authority to order the movement of our troops? I think that person would be called the “Commander in Chief”, but what do I know.
DoctorUmmmNo almost 10 years ago
“Recall it was Poppie that committed the first war crime against Iraq with lies to march on Baghdad.”Yeah… he did a fantastic job of staging Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait. Almost as impressive as the fake moon landings.
DoctorUmmmNo almost 10 years ago
“However, in the 2013 elections, both the President and Vice President…”2013 elections? Now I remember! That’s when we voted for the new dog catcher.Just to make my point clear, we did well by using a very small force of a few thousand troops to topple the Taliban & break up Al-Qeada’s training camps. We should have kept a very low profile in Afghanistan after that. All we had to do was make sure any new government understood that hosting global terrorist training camps wasn’t in their interests. Instead, Bush decided to play Kingmaker & invested in a corrupt hack to lead Afghanistan.By 2008, anyone with an ounce of sense understood Karzai was useless to us & Afghanistan was going to have to find their own way forward. Instead of ordering an immediate removal of our troops, Obama ordered more troops to Afghanistan. Over 1,500 American soldiers died for nothing. That’s a scandal, but no one seems to care now. Feel free to ridicule me if Afghanistan becomes a model democracy by 2020.