Afghanistan: We'll Get Back To You

Of course I assume that's the Taliban talking to us. It seems General Obama is in charge here. Such strong language ... for our military before he tucks tail and runs. Just words.

They don't want another "Vietnam". You know, like Iraq. Democrats still don't have the stomach to fight and win a war and the consequences of that could prove devastating for America in a number of ways. Terrorists - 1; Obama - zero. Literally.

PRESIDENT Barack Obama has demanded that American defence chiefs review their strategy in Afghanistan before going ahead with a troop surge.

The Pentagon was set to announce the deployment of 17,000 extra soldiers and marines last week but Robert Gates, the defence secretary, postponed the decision after questions from Obama.

The president was concerned by a lack of strategy at his first meeting with Gates and the US joint chiefs of staff last month in “the tank”, the secure conference room in the Pentagon. He asked: “What’s the endgame?” and did not receive a convincing answer.

Because every war comes in a neat little package with a beginning, a middle and an end. What, you haven't read any History?

Comments

[AllenS]

Since Obama is the Commander in Chief, shouldn't he be running the show. Shouldn't he be issuing the orders, telling the commanders on the ground what the objectives should be? This is just another example of Obama voting present.

[Mark_0454]

It was always a scam. Afghanistan was just one more argument to use when listing the reason why we should get out of Iraq. As soon as we were out of Iraq, there would be an excuse to leave Afghanistan. They couldn't be honest during the campaign and say they would withdraw from both under any circumstances because that would have cost votes.

Now that Iraq is not in the news, the goal will be to find reasons to leave Afghanistan.

[Fred Beloit]

The end game? The end game is when the enemy is destroyed or his will to resist is broken, meaning they are all dead, when they stop resisting and go home, or when they surrender. This isn't even military 101, it is military first grade and is also the mission of the Infantry branch of the U.S. Army.

Of course the President hasn't been to first grade in this school.

[Fred Beloit]

Let's say Obama decides for some reason to confine the combat to certain geographical areas, the end game in these areas should still apply. When the end game above no longer applies, when the President no longer wants to win somewhere, that is called stalemate and we should get out. Think Korea, another place, another Democrat, another time. Almost 60 years later, our enemy in North Korea is still making trouble every day and we still have many troops there.

[Sadie]

It's not such a stupid question though is it? What IS the end game in Afghanistan? The only reason we're in Afghanistan is because that country played host to AQ and allowed it to have training camps and a safe place to plot its attacks on us. If there's some way to make sure that doesn't happen again, what's our interest in Afghanistan? And it is possible that the Taliban won't make the same mistake twice. So we get out, the Taliban take over and as long as AQ is kept out, why is that not sufficient for American interests?

[Fred Beloit]

I'm not sure you know much about the Taliban, Sadie. They did more than just "allow" training camps. They blew up archaeological monuments, governed by sharia law, publicly stoned women accused of adultery, etc, etc. They welcomed and helped establish training camps. They are as much our enemy as is Al Qaeda.

[Sadie]

"I'm not sure you know much about the Taliban, Sadie. They did more than just "allow" training camps. They blew up archaeological monuments, governed by sharia law, publicly stoned women accused of adultery, etc, etc. They welcomed and helped establish training camps. They are as much our enemy as is Al Qaeda."

I know all that about the Taliban and so what? And what do their barbaric practices against their own people have to do with American interests? As long as they aren't blowing up anything here in the USA or allowing anyone else to plot such attacks from Afghan soil, we have no stake in that country.

[old trooper]

"As long as they aren't blowing up anything here in the USA..."

Sure and FDR didn't want to have The Final Solution to get any press in the US. The Holocaust was none of our business because it did not happen here. Lets pull our Troops out of Bosnia & Kosovo because their Genocide was none of our business. It did not happen here. 90% of the raw product for the manufacture of Heroin comes from Poppy Crops in Afghanistan. Lets not interfere, it is not happening here so it is none of our business.

That logic fits your assumptions nicely.

[Fred Beloit]

Well, al Saidie, you make a case for disbanding the military. Is it a good case? Not really. Hitler didn't attack U.S. territory. It allows for an easier next 9/11. The training camps reopen, bigger than ever. More attacks on us are planned and executed. Would that be jake with you?

[Sadie]

You can point to a lot of places on the map where terrible things are happening or where people are in charge who hate America and oppress their own people, Burma, Tibet, Venezuela, Cuba, Zimbabwe, Sudan, just to name a few. The American military isn't some humanitarian, social engineering institution(at least it shouldn't be), it's a war fighting machine. But not intended to fight wars to protect other people, it's supposed to fight wars to protect the United States of America, not to save Buddha statutes in Afghanistan or to keep Muslim men from oppressing their women.

Bush wouldn't have gone to war in Afghanistan if Mullah Omar had agreed to kick out AQ. He made that demand, remember? And Omar refused. So here we are almost 8 years later and Obama (who I did not support) is ridiculed for asking, what's our mission in Afghanistan and how we do accomplish it?

And BTW we didn't enter WWII until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. The death trains were running in Germany well before then.

[Todd]

I see nothing wrong with Obama questioning the strategy before committing more troops. The strategy hasn't been working very well so far. Why not ask the Pentagon to review the strategy and see if it can be improved upon?

Wouldn't we have done better in Iraq earlier on if we had had more self-examination in 2003-2005, and not placed loyalty above competence?

[Dan]

My darling, Sadie. For me, the point isn't Obama questioning this, or that. It is the fact that he used his Afghanistan statements to convince people during the election that he wasn't your typical cut and run, lib, remember? he was going to get Osama come hell or high water and that meant doing whatever it took in Afghanistan.

Turns out that was a lot of bull like everything else. He never said he wanted to udnerstand the "end game" when campaigning. He claimed to know it. Kill Osama because Bush hadn't. Now he's doing probably just what Bush might have done, depending in what the Generals say. And actually, I fear Obama is more likely toover rule the generals, or make sure the wrong ones are in charge, whatever the decision.

He completely bullshitted his way to the presidency far more than most ever have. And I care more about that, than I do what he does or doesn't do, in some ways. It disqualifies him from being trustworthy imo.

[Fred Beloit]

"...where terrible things are happening or where people are in charge who hate America and oppress their own people, Burma, Tibet, Venezuela, Cuba, Zimbabwe, Sudan,"

Clinton saw some threat in Sudan. He bombed an aspirin factory there. But anyway, the headquarters of Osama, who has threatened to destroy the U.S., is or has been in Afghanistan. Obama agrees with this. So now, what is he going to do about it? The Left has bugged Bush on this question for years. "Iraq is the wrong war, Afghanistan is the right war." All of a sudden al Saidie wants us to fold up our tents and come home because Afghanistan is the wrong war.

[Chris S]

Iraq has shown a great truth - that the U.S. military, if deployed in enough numbers and with enough courage, is utterly unstoppable. Obama should take note - all he has to do is listen to his generals, give them what they want, and within 5 years Afghanistan will be a pacified nation well on its way to prosperity.

[Randall Rawther]

Anybody heard from our Secretary of State?
Has she even traveled outside of the U.S. yet?
She set up a couple of envoys so she would not have to do any traveling.

---------
Obama is oriented to the big city life of the U.S. He has no interest in international affairs.
We thought Jimmy Carter was bad, well Obama is on-track to beat him as worst President in modern history.

[Tappo]

Here's an idea.Since Obama is closing Gitmo, why doesn't he just send them to Afganistan for "Training". There's enough money in the stimulus package for education.

[templar knight]

Well, what about Pakistan? I thought our dear leader had decided to pacify the savages in the tribal areas of Pakistan. Won't he need the bases in Afghanistan for his Pakistan foray?

[jolee]

Obama is asking a smart question about the end game in Afghanistan-the history and the geographics of that country could keep us pouring our young brave troops in there like Vietnam, yes, it would be called Obama's Vietnam-if he's not smart about anything else, he is getting could advice about this. Our allies do not want to send additional troops....Nato is practically useless-we'd be doing the majority of the heavey lifting. We have to think this over carefully and ask ourselves is it worth it?

[Fred Beloit]

jolee, Obama did think it over carefully during the campaign didn't he? And he said he would go after bin Ladin wherever he was. Or are you saying he didn't think it over carefully but now he is? Or are you saying he lied to the nation during the campaign? Or are you saying he had some kind of epiphany after the election and became a Bushite? Bush didn't fully commit militarily to the Ahghan, which was one of the things Obama was complaining about as a candidate.
Please enlighten us.

[Joe Six-Pack]

The desert is the 2nd best surface on Earth for a mechanized force like the U.S. maintains to fight on. (The ocean is the best)

The mountains are the worst surface on Earth for us to fight on.

Makes sense that in Iraq we are able to hold our own. This helps make Afghanistan a much more challenging 'end game'.

[PROUD PARENT USMC]

MARINES DON'T QUESTION ORDERS! BUT WE SHOULD, AS THIS IS THE VERY RIGHT WE SEND OUR BRAVE SONS, FATHERS, FRIENDS, TO DEFEND; ANYTHING LESS IS WHAT IS REALLY UNPATRIOTIC!