Did you see President Obama's speech last night? Do you think his plan for Afghanistan is in the best interest of American troops and the Afghan people?
Well, he did advertise it when he was running, so it isn't any surprise, disappointment, but not surprise. I am glad he has put a deadline on it. Let's hope that holds. Also, I agree with Tex; This country needs to see to the rights of its own.
He inherited a totally fucked up situation and is now trying to make the best of it. That covers a multitude of BushTard sins.
My preference would be to declare Victory and leave (Iraq, too). Unfortunately Democrats have to play we'retough on national security card or get slammed in attack ads that liken them to Bin Laden.
"When you look for the bad in mankind expecting to find it, you surely will." ~ Pollyanna
I agree Rusty--he chose the best of some pretty crappy options. My problem is with the Rethugs who insist on giving a blank check for military action, but won't cough up a penny for healthcare, then try to call themselves fiscally conservative.
If he would have said this during his campaign, he wouldn't be President. I don't know anyone who would have voted for him with a pro war agenda.
Who in the hell are we to say what's in the best interest of the Afghan people. It's not our country - nor should we be telling them what's best for them. Maybe the Afghan people don't like the way our country is run, should they invade us and tell us what's best for us? I think not.
That's just my opinion.
Submitted by MacLass_19 (not verified) on Wed, 2009-12-02 10:08.
Uh...this is absolutely what he said in his campaign--that we took our eye off the ball and were fighting the wrong war in Iraq. He always said he intended to pursue a strategy to try to stabilize Afghanistan.
"US allies are ready to send at least 5,000 reinforcements to Afghanistan after President Barack Obama's decision to begin a troop surge, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said on Wednesday."
Here we go again....the US pledges an additional 30K troops to an eventual 100K total while NATO pledges 5K of its 70K troops with possibly more.
How are we going to pay for this? And when are we going to fight for equal rights here? It's okay to send troops and civilians to fight for security and rights in a long time hostile land while we have an increase in crime, unemployment and our Congress stalls ENDA, repeal of DOMA and repeal of DADT?
So, we're going to secure the region in 18 months or less, persuade the government to change their corrupt ways, secure human rights, and clean up the world's largest drug production. Okay, I'll gladly go with that. BUT, in 18 months or less I expect civil rights for all Americans in return. Is that too much to ask for our sacrifices?
God's speed to those deployed and hired to perform this job....God's speed to those left behind....
Comments [8]
Saw it coming
Well, he did advertise it when he was running, so it isn't any surprise, disappointment, but not surprise. I am glad he has put a deadline on it. Let's hope that holds. Also, I agree with Tex; This country needs to see to the rights of its own.
BushTard
He inherited a totally fucked up situation and is now trying to make the best of it. That covers a multitude of BushTard sins.
My preference would be to declare Victory and leave (Iraq, too). Unfortunately Democrats have to play we're tough on national security card or get slammed in attack ads that liken them to Bin Laden.
"When you look for the bad in mankind expecting to find it, you surely will." ~ Pollyanna
I agree Rusty--he chose the
I agree Rusty--he chose the best of some pretty crappy options. My problem is with the Rethugs who insist on giving a blank check for military action, but won't cough up a penny for healthcare, then try to call themselves fiscally conservative.
Tex
I agree!
War is never the answer.....
If he would have said this during his campaign, he wouldn't be President. I don't know anyone who would have voted for him with a pro war agenda.
Who in the hell are we to say what's in the best interest of the Afghan people. It's not our country - nor should we be telling them what's best for them. Maybe the Afghan people don't like the way our country is run, should they invade us and tell us what's best for us? I think not.
That's just my opinion.
You are mistaken
Uh...this is absolutely what he said in his campaign--that we took our eye off the ball and were fighting the wrong war in Iraq. He always said he intended to pursue a strategy to try to stabilize Afghanistan.
MacLass
EXACTLY!
NATO...
"US allies are ready to send at least 5,000 reinforcements to Afghanistan after President Barack Obama's decision to begin a troop surge, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said on Wednesday."
Here we go again....the US pledges an additional 30K troops to an eventual 100K total while NATO pledges 5K of its 70K troops with possibly more.
How are we going to pay for this? And when are we going to fight for equal rights here? It's okay to send troops and civilians to fight for security and rights in a long time hostile land while we have an increase in crime, unemployment and our Congress stalls ENDA, repeal of DOMA and repeal of DADT?
So, we're going to secure the region in 18 months or less, persuade the government to change their corrupt ways, secure human rights, and clean up the world's largest drug production. Okay, I'll gladly go with that. BUT, in 18 months or less I expect civil rights for all Americans in return. Is that too much to ask for our sacrifices?
God's speed to those deployed and hired to perform this job....God's speed to those left behind....
Twitter Time @kdhales