Vote !!!! Send more troops to Afghanistan or not ?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 21, 2009 4:04 PM GMT
    What would we do if we were Obama having just received McKristals report and request for more troops? There are so many aspects to this bleak situation, with a shaky government over there, losing the battle to win the hearts of the people due in part to our very presence. Most importantly is the driving question of "why are we there"? So what to do? Lives are being lost and some major shift needs to take place. What do you think?
  • Koaa2

    Posts: 1556

    Sep 21, 2009 4:52 PM GMT
    I think we should pull out and look for Obama wherever he might be as that is the reason we went there. I think he is probably staying in Trump Towers by now!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 21, 2009 7:40 PM GMT
    Koaa2 saidI think we should pull out and look for Obama wherever he might be as that is the reason we went there. I think he is probably staying in Trump Towers by now!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>UMMM !!! you did mean Osama didn't you? Knowing you I'm sure you must have.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 22, 2009 2:21 AM GMT
    I started in support of the Afghanistan war (I was against the current Iraq war from the start), but now I also think the Afghaninstan war is also a mistake. The reason for the war was to get Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda has probably already moved into Pakistan. I would say not to send more troops. The way to combat terrorist activity is by increased intelligence and diplomatic relations - not by bombing a country and causing an overwhelming number of innoccent people being killed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 22, 2009 2:31 AM GMT
    I say flood the place with CIA like originally planned until Bush pulled them out per Rove to get the American public interested in a war. CIA the fuck out of the place...
  • lostlogic

    Posts: 223

    Sep 22, 2009 2:46 AM GMT
    I used to think Afghanistan was the place to take out the taliban's HQ, which it once was when we decided to attack Iraq for false documents. But it seems that Pakistan is where the leading forces are.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 22, 2009 3:00 AM GMT
    lostlogic saidI used to think Afghanistan was the place to take out the taliban's HQ, which it once was when we decided to attack Iraq for false documents. But it seems that Pakistan is where the leading forces are.


    The Taliban never had anything to do with the reasons for attacking Iraq. Some people (misguidedly) suggested that Al Qaeda had links to Iraq though. I hope you, and others, are aware that the Taliban and Al Qaeda are not the same group.
    Al Qaeda is a gobal network determined to use terroist means to attack the "West". The Taliban is an regional extremist group (mostly limited to Afghanistan). The "beef" the US had with the Taliban is that they provided a "safe Heven" for Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda (not the Taliban) planned and carried out the Sept. 11th attacks.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 22, 2009 3:12 AM GMT
    Having lost the love of my life in 9-11, I say send more troops. Pull out of Iraq and send them to Afganistan. Its the place we should have stayed in in the first place. And Obama if not careful is going to learn the hardway. He is asking for an Afgan version of "Black Hawk Down" if he keeps this bs up. He needs to grow a set of balls and put his democrat is line with what he wants and furthermore needs to stop trying to be a damn pre-madonna and get shit done. He keeps this crap up kiss the house and senate good bye and get ready for PALIN for 8 years.

    that could be a good thing though.. then hillary might still have a chance to clean up all this mess.
  • lostlogic

    Posts: 223

    Sep 22, 2009 3:15 AM GMT
    phemt said
    lostlogic saidI used to think Afghanistan was the place to take out the taliban's HQ, which it once was when we decided to attack Iraq for false documents. But it seems that Pakistan is where the leading forces are.


    The Taliban never had anything to do with the reasons for attacking Iraq. Some people (misguidedly) suggested that Al Qaeda had links to Iraq though. I hope you, and others, are aware that the Taliban and Al Qaeda are not the same group.
    Al Qaeda is a gobal network determined to use terroist means to attack the "West". The Taliban is an regional extremist group (mostly limited to Afghanistan). The "beef" the US had with the Taliban is that they provided a "safe Heven" for Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda (not the Taliban) planned and carried out the Sept. 11th attacks.


    Yeah, I do know the reason why Bush wanted to go to Iraq didn't have much to due with 9/11 any way. But many Americans saw Arabs on TV and thought, "terrorists! we're fighting them terrorists!" :p
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 22, 2009 3:35 AM GMT
    Ryan_Andrew saidHaving lost the love of my life in 9-11, I say send more troops. Pull out of Iraq and send them to Afganistan. Its the place we should have stayed in in the first place. And Obama if not careful is going to learn the hardway. He is asking for an Afgan version of "Black Hawk Down" if he keeps this bs up. He needs to grow a set of balls and put his democrat is line with what he wants and furthermore needs to stop trying to be a damn pre-madonna and get shit done. He keeps this crap up kiss the house and senate good bye and get ready for PALIN for 8 years.

    that could be a good thing though.. then hillary might still have a chance to clean up all this mess.


    Sorry to hear about losing the love of your life. People in Afghanistan are also losing the "loves of their lives" by US actions in their country. Don't you think those Afghans will develop hate towards the US when we kill their loved ones?A lot of innocent Afghans civilians have been killed because of the war.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 22, 2009 3:48 AM GMT
    Obama should listen to the man for which he appointed and show people the reason that he appointed him. Who better to know the next step than the ones over their fighting and seeing this war first hand. In most cases the people that are doing the work usually know best in how to do the work correctly. Let's face it, not many of us have been over their in this war and we can't even imagine what it's like. These troops know what's going on and know truths that we may never know. So I say let them decide and not some politician sitting pretty in the White House or in Congress. Just my honest opinion which is nothing more than one of the many opinions LOL!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 22, 2009 3:54 AM GMT
    As an active member of Iraq Veterans Against the War (ivaw.org), I think we should have an immediate withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan NOW.

    This war has nothing to do with fighting terrorism (it's fueling terrorism actually)--but is about protecting a natural gas pipeline to Europe PLUS controlling a region that is strategically important and is rich in oil and natural gas, particularly the countries surrounding it. This is classic imperialism.

    TROOPS OUT NOW! So much for the antiwar candidate, Afghanistan is Obama's Vietnam.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 22, 2009 4:12 AM GMT
    phemt said
    Ryan_Andrew saidHaving lost the love of my life in 9-11, I say send more troops. Pull out of Iraq and send them to Afganistan. Its the place we should have stayed in in the first place. And Obama if not careful is going to learn the hardway. He is asking for an Afgan version of "Black Hawk Down" if he keeps this bs up. He needs to grow a set of balls and put his democrat is line with what he wants and furthermore needs to stop trying to be a damn pre-madonna and get shit done. He keeps this crap up kiss the house and senate good bye and get ready for PALIN for 8 years.

    that could be a good thing though.. then hillary might still have a chance to clean up all this mess.


    Sorry to hear about losing the love of your life. People in Afghanistan are also losing the "loves of their lives" by US actions in their country. Don't you think those Afghans will develop hate towards the US when we kill their loved ones?A lot of innocent Afghans civilians have been killed because of the war.


    Well said and I know and understand that fact. Its sad. very. I feel for them. I think it was dan rather that once said prior to Gulf War 2 in comparing what the youth of america and iraq are seeing happening. A young american is at home seeing his country defend the will of the world in keeping weapons of mass distruction at bay and out of the hands of bad people whilist a young iraq sits at home seeing and hearing his country being bombed by a nation from a far. what are we sowing now for the future of not just this country but of this world? of these generations? I remember those words and it runs though my mind every day. Collateral damage is sad and I wish it wouldnt happen. I feel bad that innocent people are dying and I know their pain just the same. They attacked two 110-story buildings & 4 airplanes that were not occupid or in use by an military sector of the United States. With that said...add up all thoes lives lost. I am a firm beliver that a milltary attacks another millitary and not civilians. The problem is just that. I hardly doubt that the number of Afgan innocent lives lost add even closely to thoes lost on that one day 8yrs ago. the problem is that their own people are killing them. insurgeants dont care who they kill as long as its another american dead. That should not be held agaisnt the US Military. I think with more troops you can control the day to day lives of Afgans and give them more security and more freedom and win over hearts and minds. All that rebuilding going on in Iraq needs to be happening over in Afganistan. If we had done that from the beginning we wouldnt still be in this mess.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 22, 2009 4:14 AM GMT
    IlliniXMarine saidAs an active member of Iraq Veterans Against the War (ivaw.org), I think we should have an immediate withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan NOW.

    This war has nothing to do with fighting terrorism (it's fueling terrorism actually)--but is about protecting a natural gas pipeline to Europe PLUS controlling a region that is strategically important and is rich in oil and natural gas, particularly the countries surrounding it. This is classic imperialism.

    TROOPS OUT NOW! So much for the antiwar candidate, Afghanistan is Obama's Vietnam.


    Obama didn't run as an anti-Afghanistan war candidate (he was against the Iraq war). He actually called for increased invovlement in Afghanistan. At the time I also supported increasing the Afghanistan war effort. Now I agree the war was/is a mistake. I appreciate hearing a Veteran, like yourself, views on these wars.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 22, 2009 4:22 AM GMT
    "Obama didn't run as an anti-Afghanistan war candidate (he was against the Iraq war). He actually called for increased invovlement in Afghanistan. At the time I also supported increasing the Afghanistan war effort. Now I agree the war was/is a mistake. I appreciate hearing a Veteran, like yourself, views on these wars."[/quote]

    Thanks--and you are absolutely right about Obama. Unfortunately, however, much of the Antiwar Movement supported Obama on the pretext that he was an Antiwar candidate. They should have listened more closely to his rhetoric!

    The war is absolutely UNWINNABLE. As award-winning unembedded journalist Dahr Jamail put it today, "The United States Empire is following a long line of empires and conquerors that have met their end in Afghanistan. The Median and Persian Empires, Alexander the Great, the Seleucids, the Indo-Greeks, Turks, Mongols, British and Soviets all met the end of their ambitions in Afghanistan.

    And today, the US Empire is on the fast track of its demise. A recent article by Tom Englehardt provides us more key indicators of this:

    # In 2002 there were 5,200 US soldiers in Afghanistan. By December of this year, there will be 68,000.
    # Compared to the same period in 2008, Taliban attacks on coalition forces using Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) has risen 114 percent.
    # Compared to the same period in 2008, coalition deaths from IED attacks have increased sixfold.
    # Overall Taliban attacks on coalition forces in the first five months of 2009, compared to the same period last year, have increased 59 percent.

    Genghis Khan could not hold onto Afghanistan.

    Neither will the United States, particularly when in its desperation to continue its illegal occupation, it tosses aside international law, along with its own Constitution."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 22, 2009 4:33 AM GMT
    IlliniXMarine said
    Thanks--and you are absolutely right about Obama. Unfortunately, however, much of the Antiwar Movement supported Obama on the pretext that he was an Antiwar candidate. They should have listened more closely to his rhetoric!

    "


    Yeap, sadly people often don't know/understand the views/positions of the people they vote for. I voted for Obama both in the Illinois primary and the general election (I orginally was for Hillary Clinton but changed right before the Illinois Primary). I don't agree 100% with Obama, but I think he was the best candidate. People who paid attention to his history/stances would had realized he wan't an extreme liberal some often try to paint him out to be - especially the Afghanistan war issue.

    Glad you are exposing the truth about the Afghanisten war icon_wink.gif

    So far this forum has stayed civil - I wonder how long that will last.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 22, 2009 4:48 AM GMT
    I think that they should send more troops.

  • Mepark

    Posts: 806

    Sep 22, 2009 11:59 PM GMT
    I say hand the country over to Iran. Expect Iraq to be on the menu as well. In fact, I think that's exactly why Obama wants to negotiate with them. If you really know Mid-East politics, you'll see that the U.S. is shifting allies from Sunni states to Shia (Iran). Good bye and good luck Saudi Arabia.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Sep 23, 2009 12:02 AM GMT
    Listen to the military experts, go in and win this thing once and for all. For those who would argue that "there is no winning" -- losing is simply NOT an option.

    What I would like to see is Obama put his true leadership skills to work and build a stronger coalition to help us get the job done. If the Taliban and Al Queda is, indeed, a threat to the world, then where is China, Russia, Japan and others on helping us get the job done?
  • bottomline

    Posts: 331

    Sep 23, 2009 12:11 AM GMT
    NO
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2009 12:45 AM GMT
    ABSOLUTELY NOT... NO

    It is a pointless war (like all wars), that has no determined objective other than to secure pipeline routes, implant large military bases in Central Asia to guard over Central Asia's vast natural gas reserves, through which Afghanistan is a key transport route.

    New strategy developed in the past few years points to a growing persistence to aggravate and destabilize Pakistan. The destabilization of Pakistan is a direct result of the NATO presence in Afghanistan. The total destabilization of Pakistan would be a disastrous event or momentous historical significance, and would likely catapult the region into further chaos.

    Why do you think the former military commander was fired? As a military man, he has to look at the situation from a logical, strategic view - and with that, he knew that expanding the war into Pakistan would be an astronomical mistake and political-strategic disaster.

    so he was replaced with McCrystal, an imperialist sycophant and morally deprived individual, who, according to Seymour Hersh, was the head of Cheney's secret assassination squad.

    This man is an ethical abortion, and you follow his advice at your own peril.

    Imperialist powers have attempted to control Afghanistan for centuries, and have NEVER succeeded. It is an endless war.

    Even the entire US intelligence community released a report in November of 2008, called Global Trends 2025. This is where all 16 US intelligence agencies released a report of their trend forecasts up until the year 2025.

    They admit that the US and likely NATO will be in Afghanistan until 2025, but they also state that the war is "unwinnable" and when it comes to "reconstruction", it is entirely futile, as no matter what is constructed, what infrastructure is set up, institutions built, government created, no matter what social structure materializes (if any), it will all be torn down the minute we leave, because it will be viewed (and rightly so) as the institutions and infrastructure of foreign imperialist powers attempting to exert their political hegemony over them.

    Get out NOW.

    No more innocent (and predominantly poor minorities) being sent off to fight a pointless war in a far off country.

    Support the troops... bring them home.
  • bottomline

    Posts: 331

    Sep 23, 2009 1:24 AM GMT
    @MeOhMy Thank you.....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2009 2:52 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidListen to the military experts, go in and win this thing once and for all. For those who would argue that "there is no winning" -- losing is simply NOT an option.

    What I would like to see is Obama put his true leadership skills to work and build a stronger coalition to help us get the job done. If the Taliban and Al Queda is, indeed, a threat to the world, then where is China, Russia, Japan and others on helping us get the job done?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well the Neocon view comes forward again, win and show the world out strength once and for all. Listen to the military experts with tunnel vision who mainly see winning as who shoots the most bullets with the best moves to bring about a backdown from the enemy. Seems to me we lost back in 03' when Bush took the attention off catching Osama, and put his attention on an unecessary war in Iraq, and thereby left an opening for the talaban to regain prominence. What historical experts are trying to get accross to the president and to the military is that our presence as an occupier who keeps killing off far too many innocents along with the talaban, is in itself causing us to lose, because everytime this happens we make thousands more enemies than we kill. I we were there we wouldn't have them as an enemy now would we. Anyone bothering to ask how much our presence has to do with the neocon interests involved in the pipeline crossing through the area? There's that damn OIL showing its ugly face again. Why are we there again, since Al Quida has basicly been weakened, run off and scattered around the borders of Pakistan? I think we need to concentrate on shifting focus to winning over the populace or no matter how many bullets are shot we will lose and further destabalize that part of the world. Those pipelines the neocons got us into this over, need to be seen as helping the country their running through more than to help the US INTERESTS, which seem to keep us at odds with that part of the world. When we are seen as not interfering in their affairs we will cease to be their enemies, those issues need to be settled then we can win, bullets alone won't do it.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Sep 23, 2009 6:17 AM GMT
    realifedad said
    CuriousJockAZ saidListen to the military experts, go in and win this thing once and for all. For those who would argue that "there is no winning" -- losing is simply NOT an option.

    What I would like to see is Obama put his true leadership skills to work and build a stronger coalition to help us get the job done. If the Taliban and Al Queda is, indeed, a threat to the world, then where is China, Russia, Japan and others on helping us get the job done?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well the Neocon view comes forward again, win and show the world out strength once and for all. Listen to the military experts with tunnel vision who mainly see winning as who shoots the most bullets with the best moves to bring about a backdown from the enemy. Seems to me we lost back in 03' when Bush took the attention off catching Osama, and put his attention on an unecessary war in Iraq, and thereby left an opening for the talaban to regain prominence. What historical experts are trying to get accross to the president and to the military is that our presence as an occupier who keeps killing off far too many innocents along with the talaban, is in itself causing us to lose, because everytime this happens we make thousands more enemies than we kill. I we were there we wouldn't have them as an enemy now would we. Anyone bothering to ask how much our presence has to do with the neocon interests involved in the pipeline crossing through the area? There's that damn OIL showing its ugly face again. Why are we there again, since Al Quida has basicly been weakened, run off and scattered around the borders of Pakistan? I think we need to concentrate on shifting focus to winning over the populace or no matter how many bullets are shot we will lose and further destabalize that part of the world. Those pipelines the neocons got us into this over, need to be seen as helping the country their running through more than to help the US INTERESTS, which seem to keep us at odds with that part of the world. When we are seen as not interfering in their affairs we will cease to be their enemies, those issues need to be settled then we can win, bullets alone won't do it.



    You and that "Neocon" stuff -- sheesh! icon_rolleyes.gif

    All I have to say is that I suspect no one on this site is a military expert or a foreign relations expert, so I will trust that our President will make the right decision after counseling with people who actually are experts in such matters and who likely know things that we simply are not privy to. I'll support whatever decision he makes and I just hope and pray that it is the right one.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2009 6:29 AM GMT
    "All I have to say is that I suspect no one on this site is a military expert or a foreign relations expert, so I will trust that our President will make the right decision after counseling with people who actually are experts in such matters and who likely know things that we simply are not privy to. I'll support whatever decision he makes and I just hope and pray that it is the right one."[/quote]

    ***************
    I disagree. I think we actually have an obligation to question those in power, particularly when they are putting people's lives--both Afghan and American--in harm's way.

    If we can learn anything from US history--it is to question those in power no matter which party affiliation they belong to. If anything, Afghanistan is revealing (once again) that the Democratic Party is just as war-mongering as the Republican.

    The best book I've read on Afghanistan thus far is Bleeding Afghanistan: Washington, Warlords, and the Propaganda of Silence by Sonali Kolhatkar & James Ingalls.

    Anyone else have any recommendations?