Coming from the King of the Twits, an honor, indeed!

backup: I am curious, though, where do you stand on Afghanistan (Pakistan)? Is it worth it? Or should we bring the troops home?

Why? Did we invade that country under false pretenses? I find it hard to believe that you’re so unaware of the historical context, and the differences between Iraq and Afghanistan.

In every case since 1960, the wars we decided to fight – conveniently undeclared, to get around legislative approval, and therefore illegal – it is said these soldiers are fighting for my freedom, sacrificing for my protection. In no case has that been true. The majority of people swallow whole what is told them, without evaluating it themselves. I don’t know whether our schools failed our people so much they do not think critically, or whether they have also the same kind of dishonesty about their own intensions that the Big Guys in DC have.

The courage a soldier must exercise in those horrific places and situations is a wonder; and a testimony to the amazing entity we call a human being. But I do not honor the fighting, the killing, the following the “leader” (who does not lead, but demands, “Let’s you and him fight!”)

No one has sacrificed for my freedom. I have less freedom – as do we all – since the most recent war began. I have never been at risk of being taken over by Communists or Muslims or Socialists. But as surely as I am breathing, I am at clear risk of being taken over (and it has as much as happened, already) by “Democracy,” which has been usurped by Greed, passing itself off as Capitalism.

The one time I (and my peers) were in danger from others was September 11, 2001 and there was no protection or fighting for our safety or preservation of the nation, then.

you got me with the ‘flustrate’, I could use a good spellchecker.

I get your point about the government compassionately suggesting the soldier quit at some point.

I never thought liberals (or anyone opposed to the war) hated the troops.

I respect you opinion on the matter.

I am curious, though, where do you stand on Afghanistan (Pakistan)? Is it worth it? Or should we bring the troops home?

A new word! I like it, too, being a combination of fluster and frustrate.

As a Liberal, let me make it clear the wise decision was to never invade either country to begin with, which always has been my position (no wishy-washy liberal here). After reading the Art of War – the Cliff Notes of strategy – one sees right away that the Bush Admin made every mistake possible. So to attack and invade either nation was obviously idiotic.

And I said that in 2002 and 2003, I screamed it at the top of my lungs from the rooftops. Of course everyone thought I was insane, but that’s because they bought all the myriad of ever-shifting lies the Bush Admin promulgated as justification for the quagmire they intentionally created (how else can one explain the horrific mistakes they made but that they meant to do it this way?).

That said, let me be clear, I do NOT hate ‘the troops’. I do have a lot of empathy for all of them, and this news of Sgt.McDowell saddens me greatly, as does the death of everyone, US soldiers and Afghan and Iraqi alike. The tragic loss for his family is grievous.

I am mildly surprised that he was on a seventh tour. I would reasonably assume that, as mentioned above, once three our four tours you had respectfully earned the right to never go back to the front. And if a soldier wanted to keep going back until the odds of death became certain, then I would have thought the greatest nation on the planet would have more compassion and gently persuade that soldier to stay home. Allowing a soldier to return to combat until the odds of death are certain is callous, at the least, and vicious if intentional.

Does the US have a policy of repeatedly sending soldiers until they are dead?

BTW, my mom has no empathy for any troop. In her opinion, the moment they sign on, they are already dead, and the family would do well to behave that way. By making the agreement to go kill people that are defending their own homes against a foreign invader, the soldier has forfeited any compassion.

I have too much Buddhism in my head for that, I strive to have compassion for all living creatures, from the driver that cuts me off on the highway, to the US soldier that machine guns an innocent Iraqi family in their car as they approach a checkpoint.

The guy is a hero. I’m proud of him. Proud for him.

I understand the left’s offense of the causalties in Iraq; they oppose that.

But, don’t progressives support Afghanistan? Obama does. We all regret every loss of life. But what’s the issue here.

If their going to support the effort, there’s going to be causualties.

My take is this: Regardless of how we got into Iraq or Afghanistan, let’s honor Sgt. McDowell by making sure his sacrifice has some meaning other than dying for a failed effort.

I could try to make arguments about why I also think Iraq is not a black and white scenerio and why there are good reasons to pursue stabilization there.

But, it would probably just flustrate the both of us.

What I’m more interesting in, is commending you for a very straight forward, thoughtful answer.

I understand it and agree with your reasoning on Afganistan.

Do you feel that most other posters here feel that we should stay in Afganistan and that the causalties are different (or more an acceptable loss) because the cause is more legitimate?

May 1st, 2008 at 4:57 pm
_____

I realize that as a conservative you have a very simple mind that is unable to handle anything more complicated than simple black/white yes/no logic, so I’ll try to break this down for you in terms you can understand.

Afghanistan is not Iraq.

Afghanistan is a highly underdeveloped Central Asian country that we thoroughly abandoned after they helped us defeat the Soviet Union, plunging them into near-constant warfare.

Iraq is a country we have shat on steadily since the 1950s, even when we were arming them with chemical weapons.

Afghanistan was the base of operations of al-Qa’ida, which has since shifted to the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region.

Iraq had no connection with al-Qa’ida and posed no threat to the United States.

The invasion of Afghanistan was justified and sanctioned under international law, and even if some of our tactics have been questionable it is still a just invasion.

The invasion of Iraq was illegal, unjustified, and an unnecessary distraction from the effort to prosecute al-Qa’ida.

Afghanistan has a functioning central government that is stymied by the extreme poverty and underdevelopment of the country. It is in our best interests to provide Afghanistan with stability and development assistance in order to prevent them from becoming a base for al-Qa’ida.

Iraq is mired in a five-front civil war that is being refereed by our troops. The one common denominator among all the warring factions is that they want us out, as we are the primary obstacle to stability in Iraq.

See the difference? They’re subtle distinctions, I know. But they’re the reasons why we can maintain two different opinions about two different wars.

I’ve been told (repeatedly) that the blood of the troops and innocent Iraqis are on my hands, because I have supported Bush’s Iraq policy. Fair enough.

Here’s Obama on Afganistan:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/08/01/obama-would-take-war-on-terror-into-pakistan/

If Obama and progressives support the effort in Afganistan, couldn’t the same logic be applied to them.

This soldier, for example, he would not have died, if we weren’t in Afganistan. More soldiers will die if we stay.

And if progressives support Obama and our continued efforts in Afganistan, won’t they conincidentally be responsible for the future deaths of troops and possible innocent civilian causualties there?

It’s a simple and fair question. Should we stay in Afganistan and risk more lives of troops, like Sgt. McDowell, or should we leave today and admit that the policy was probably a mistake?

Is it fair for me to ask what the current progressive position is on Afganistan?

I’m asking this question: Now, that it appears troops will be coming home from Iraq, what is the plan for Afganistan? Will democrats support Afganistan, as they said they did in the past? Or, after we leave Iraq, will democrats concentrate on getting the troops back from Afganistan?

backup Says:

I live under the assumption that the posts at TP happen in concert with some agenda.

You’re projecting your own stupidity on TP. This thread is not about the war it’s about what we’ve asked of our troops and this man in particular. Why don’t you try just this once to show some respect and STFU.

backup,

what’s your point? Iraq is a mistake. this mand is dead becuase there aren’t enough soldiers to go around. you and yours killed him. jerkwad.

Here’s where I going with this.

I live under the assumption that the posts at TP happen in concert with some agenda.

Democrats and progressives, in attempt to avoid appearing too dovish in their disapproval of Iraq, have supported the effort in Afganistan.

Recently, more stories about bad things happening in Afganistan are being posted.

I’m asking this question: Now, that it appears troops will be coming home from Iraq, what is the plan for Afganistan? Will democrats support Afganistan, as they said they did in the past? Or, after we leave Iraq, will democrats concentrate on getting the troops back from Afganistan?

I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer. I’m just see a disconnect in the positions and wonder what the current position of progressives is.

If there’s bad news in Afganistan, do we leave, or do we do what it takes to stabilize the situation?

Good god.

My condolences to his family and friends.

This flag which supposedly stands for justice ?? Americans should be ashamed of themselves…

Do you think Bush or Cheney will pay respects ???

May 1st, 2008 at 2:51 pm
____

The Bush administration.