Originally Posted By fkurucz <<Al Qaeda is gone from Afghanistan. Why then should we waste money and lives fighting the Taliban? >> Come on, get with the program. Its about protecting our freedoms, apple pie, motherhood and the American Way!
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 I am sure the military would be mightily pleased if these "terrorists" moved to the Bahama's, the French Riviera or even Rio De Jinero...
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt But on a serious note, I don't get how war with the Taliban is going to protect mine or my country's freedoms. I don't think a strong case has been made to substantiate our current military presence in Afghanistan. What are we fighting for again?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Al Qaeda is gone from Afghanistan. Why then should we waste money and lives fighting the Taliban?>> Because the Taliban is currently as dangerous as Al Qaeda ever was.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt To us or to Afghanistanians? According to today's news Obama has rejected all the options for sending additional troops and is continuing to look at more options. He seems to have deep concerns about ramping up the military presence there without some kind of timetable for an exit strategy.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Ultimately to us. No one thought Al Qaeda posed any real threat to the United States prior to 9/11. You give the extremists any type of staging and training ground, and eventually they will figure out a way to successfully attack us.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Ultimately to us. No one thought Al Qaeda posed any real threat to the United States prior to 9/11. You give the extremists any type of staging and training ground, and eventually they will figure out a way to successfully attack us.*** You're comparing apples and oranges here. Al Quada has always been an international terrorist regime, with a particular focus on attacking America and Israel. The Taliban is a theocratic dictatorial government of Afghanistan, to say "they'll attack us" is to say that Afghanistan would attack us, which if they did would be a very short war effort indeed (if they could, they'd be doing so right now while we're attacking them would they not?). I'm not saying the Taliban is some great thing, but it's a different animal entirely. What thread did the IRA ever pose to America? They were certainly dangerous extremists, why didn't we attack them "just in case"? That line of thinking is exactly what got us into the Iraq quagmire.
Originally Posted By Pal of Minnie Sadly it looks as though Pres Obama is indecisive. Not what I really want to see in a leader. He has been privy to lots of info in regards to Afghanistan for a very long time. He should have plenty of info to make up his mind with. What are the objectives in going forth with an increase? If not an increase-why are our men there at all? To me he had lots more to say about Afghanistan when he was running for president than he does as the president.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***He has been privy to lots of info in regards to Afghanistan for a very long time. He should have plenty of info to make up his mind with.*** Nobody said he can't make up his mind, what they said was he rejected the four choices presented to him. Frankly, that sounds more like a decisive President to me, he basically told his military leaders their conclusions were unacceptable, and to get back to the drawing board. I like it.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy Is there any example in history of a foreign power fighting an insurgency where an escalation of force resulted in positive results? I can't really think of one. The problem with insurgencies is that they are inflamed by the mere presence of occupying powers. The greater footprint you hold in a foreign country, the more insurgents you produce. If you need an example of how this works, just look back about 230 years to our own American Revolution and the actions of the insurgents that we now call patriots and our Founding Fathers.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Is there any example in history of a foreign power fighting an insurgency where an escalation of force resulted in positive results? I can't really think of one.*** Iraqi Surge?
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Iraqi Surge? >> If the insurgents in Iraq were actually Iraqis, I think this would be a good example. The good news in Iraq is that most of the insurgents were coming from foreign countries as well. Once we settled down all of the Iraqi people and were actually able to separate the foreign insurgents (mostly Al Qaeda who were not Iraqi) from the local populations, things became considerably easier there. Iraq isn't a horrible example, but I don't think it represents a true insurgency. In Afghanistan, you have the insurgent fighters coming from the local Afghan population. It's far more difficult to separate the insurgents there.
Originally Posted By Spyderman >>Ultimately to us. No one thought Al Qaeda posed any real threat to the United States prior to 9/11. You give the extremists any type of staging and training ground, and eventually they will figure out a way to successfully attack us.<< false. Al Qaeda was responsible for the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole and two U.S. embassies. I believe they also had a hand in the 1993 WTC bombing. Bill Clinton warned that an attack was possible and proposed going after Bin Laden but the republican congress at the time shot him down. He also informed Bush about the threat and Condolleza Rice has admitted that there was a report from the NSA warning that these guys were gearing up for a possible attack. Hollywood even made a movie about it called "The Siege" which came out in 1998 and essentially predicted 9/11 just as the Clinton Administration had warned. So how can you say "we didnt know"?
Originally Posted By Spyderman Afghanistan brought down the Soviet Union, the British empire, and Alexander the Great. It is a hopeless land we should cut our losses and get out.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Sadly it looks as though Pres Obama is indecisive. Not what I really want to see in a leader.<< Actually, it looks as though he's weighing all perspectives and options. He's demanding more from his advisors, such as a specific, clear plan on how and when the reins will be passed to the Afghanis. Exactly what I wanted to see in a leader. And funny enough, the right was complaining with the Recovery Act and healthcare, why are we rushing it? Why can't we slow down and discuss it? And now here we are, hearing about how President Obama is indecisive. How convenient. >>He has been privy to lots of info in regards to Afghanistan for a very long time. He should have plenty of info to make up his mind with.<< Because the discussions and information are classified, you have no idea how much info he's had, for how long, or how that info has been presented. This is a transparent attack on the President without any facts to back it up. >>What are the objectives in going forth with an increase? If not an increase-why are our men there at all?<< You just complained about President Obama taking too long, yet these are exactly the questions he and Vice-President Biden are asking. They want a clear plan and clear goals with clear objectives to ensure our young men and women don't die in vain. >>To me he had lots more to say about Afghanistan when he was running for president than he does as the president.<< His message throughout the campaign was that Afghanistan is where the fight is, not Iraq. He's lived up to that by focusing on Afghanistan and drawing down troops in Iraq. The man makes a promise, keeps it, and you find fault with him for it? He never laid out a specific strategy on Afghanistan on the campaign trail, it would have been irresponsible for him to do so without all the information. Now he has it, and he's asking for more, and he's weighing his decision. It's what good leaders do.
Originally Posted By fkurucz I think that our current foreign policy, AKA "Invade the world, invite the world" is ludicrous. We are worried about foreign bogeyman and spend billions (if not trillions) occupying their countries, while at the same time our borders are open sieves. IIRC most of the 9/11 terrorists were legally present in the USA. Not that our pourous border would stop any would be terrorists without visas.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***And funny enough, the right was complaining with the Recovery Act and healthcare, why are we rushing it? Why can't we slow down and discuss it? And now here we are, hearing about how President Obama is indecisive. How convenient.*** I thought the very same thing. On the health care thing, I wish they WOULD rush. People are dying! On the war thing, I hope they take their time. Otherwise more people *might* die. Seems very simple to me. I guess I'm just dumb.
