http://www.killingtrain.com/node/643

For what?
chimpy isn’t thinking about bin Laden. Didn’t chimpy proclaimed this?
USSR tried to win Afghanistan in vain.
Why in hell do we want in Afghanistan 6 freakin yrs later?

Whether or not Chimpy gives a damn about getting the real Al Qaeda and bin Lauden, Al Qaeda is still a threat, they are reponsible for the Embassy Bombings and The Cole attack, if not for 9/11 as some believe.

We helped create Al Qaeda by training them to fight the russians. We released that monster on the world and it is our responsibility to clean up our own mess.

Iraq was a travesty we should have avoided, Saddam did not have WDMs and was not even building them, the UN sanctions were working and Iraq was under control. Bush and Co LIED to us and took their eye off the problem of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, os that now the Taliban is in control of about 50 % of Afghanistan again and Al Qaeda is hiding at the border.

good_golly4 Says:
The U.S. stragegy in Iraq has worked well, thus freeing up troops for the coming Surge in Afghanistan. This should make both Republicans and Democrats happy.

You and mccain, bush and halliburton are the only people on the planet that think Iraq has been a sucess.

It will be historically known as a blunder under republican disfunctional management.

Just because things have settled down does not indicate sucess….time will tell. In addition it was a horendous mistake in the first place so how can it be called a sucess?

For what?
chimpy isn’t thinking about bin Laden. Didn’t chimpy proclaimed this?
USSR tried to win Afghanistan in vain.
Why in hell do we want in Afghanistan 6 freakin yrs later?
August 20th, 2008 at 2:01 am
______

Stability in a precarious narco-state. Bin Laden or not, we have an obligation to leave Afghanistan better than we found it in 2001, with a rural infrastructure and security force that can prevent the Taliban and related groups from resurging. Just as it was in Iraq, a “surge” will be useless by itself – our troops and other NATO forces must be integrated with NGOs and local tribal and provincial leaders to provide some tangible and visible improvements in the daily lives of rural Afghans. This will keep them from growing poppy and keep out the Taliban. And the better integrated we are with local Afghans, the less chance we’ll be bombing innocent civilians.

And no it’s not hypocritical to support withdrawal from Iraq and redeployment to Afghanistan. They’re two different countries with different needs. Iraq’s stability depends on us leaving. Afghanistan’s stability depends on us staying a bit longer (and not bombing any more weddings).

So how soon till some are sent to Pakistan as well…
August 20th, 2008 at 1:31 am
_______

They’re already there. We have special forces working alongside the ISI in the NWFP right now.

The addition of troops in Iraq was successful in lowering violence there. Rail against that all you will, throw in your provisios, but it is a fact.

No, it is not a fact. In addition to the awakening and other reasons mentioned above, Sadr had something to do with the reduction of violence. The “surge” was announced in January of 2007. It was built up slowly from 01/07 – 07/07. That period was the deadliest part of the war. If more troops equal stability, then as troops rose, violence would decrease. Then, at the end of August 2007, Sadr announced his cease fire. Magically, the next month, casualties decreased. We can discuss what affect the surge did have (specific evidence would be nice), but it no more a fact that the surge lowered violence than my headache caused it to rain.

…if the mantra has been, “we took our eye off the ball” in Iraq, surely troop increases in Afghanistan is putting our eye back on it.

Does it really matter if the ball is in the catcher’s mitt? Over simplifications are nice aren’t they? You comment is the equivalent of a doctor saying that he will now disinfect your gangrenous leg…that may have worked when the wound was new, but if he doesn’t adapt to the changed situation, you should probably find a new doctor.

A Surge in Afghanistan will also help improve security.

That is true, most have been calling for this for a while, however, if we don’t provide humanitarian assistance, we will have the same problem we had in Iraq. Sadr and many of our enemies gain support by giving food, water, and medical care. Maybe we should use our whole toolbox instead of trying to build a house with only a hammer. We cannot defeat our enemies if we are unwilling to understand them.

The trick will be to reduce troops in Iraq, increase them in Afghanistan, and do it in such a way that the Army and Marines get a breather while the foe does not. Petraeus is the man for that job, which is good, since he is getting it.

Maybe you should be looking for the magic wand that Bush is always talking about. Yes, it would be nice, but like everything else in these two wars, the burden will be placed SOLELY on the military and their families. Especially if McCain is elected. He has voted AGAINST the military at almost every turn in the recent years (Webb amendment and GI bill to name a few). If any other Americans were asked to sacrifice, they may not stay as silent as they have all these years…move along, nothing to see here.

cabbinbagger Says:
I suppose someone should tell your man Obama, then, since he has recommended an increase in U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, and Pakistan…etc. etc. etc.

Besides, you just don’t want to admit that Afganistan is where we should have been for the last 6 years instead of Iraq. Now we are inevitably left to clean up the mess that all of America and the entire world were on board for before your guy decided to make a little money since the opportunity was there in Iraq.

I don’t think Obama will try to make a career out of Afganistan and he will engage other countries sucessfully in the effort…..something bush was unable to do and it has cost us in the long run.

Americans love war for profit and democrats have been guilty of it in the past too. This however is the first time that a president has turned our entire economy and future of America over to military and war.

We must decide if this is how we want to live.

chimpy isn’t thinking about bin Laden. Didn’t chimpy proclaimed this?

USSR tried to win Afghanistan in vain.

Why in hell do we want in Afghanistan 6 freakin yrs later?

After reading that article I had a disturbing thought that Bill O’Reilly would erupt with glee that his boycott of France has worked. Nicolas Sarkozy, the new Tony Blair.

move along

It is hard to believe that John McNuttyWars talks about “getting Bin Laden.” Pray tell, sir, are you going to dig him up out of his grave? I guess that folks, especially Americans, hate to give up on their mythology of foreign evil… Actually, imperial America is the main source of misery in this world.