SwiftVets.com

[Leeman]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33426929/

Obama is dithering on Afghanistan troops because he is an appeaser, & does not have what it takes to be Commander in Chief. He would rather have a sit down cup of coffee with the Taliban & Chat.
_________________
Leeman

"We are all Ghost now"
"But once we were men"

from an unsigned diary recovered from Cabanatuan Camp

[Me#1You#10]

jalexson
Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 6:10 pm

Does the Obama administration understand why we invaded Afghanistan? Does the Obama understand that we have no choice but to remain in Afghanistan until we can establish a stable government that will not allow the country to be a base for terrorism?

The Christian Science Monitor has reported that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel told CNN it would be "irresponsible" to send more troops into Afghanistan before the political situation is resolved. Actually it would be irresponsible to wait for the political situation to be resolved before committing sufficient troops to stabilize the situation.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/1020/p02s07-usfp.html

We invaded Afghanistan in 2001 because the Taliban government of Afghanistan had allowed the country to be used by a group of al Qaeda terrorists who had attacked New York City and Washington, D.C., on September 11. We cannot afford to leave until we can be assured that the country has a government that will not allow the country to be used to stage any more attacks against the U.S.

Emanuel said it would be "reckless to make a decision on U.S. troop levels if, in fact, you haven't done a thorough analysis of whether, in fact, there's an Afghan partner ready to fill that space that the U.S. troops would create." http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/10/18/emanuel.afghanistan/index.html

Does Emanuel understand what the impact of Soviet rule followed by the rule of the Taliban? Both governments followed policies of discouraging, and in some cases eliminating, those who didn't blindly accept government orders.

The only people who had any experience operating a government were in the Taliban and they relied on terror to rule. Time will be required to find and train honest individuals who will not abuse their government positions.

Early volunteers for government service have often been dishonest, because dishonest people are more willing to take risks than honest people. It will be difficult to attract honest people until we can eliminate the violence that discourages them from getting involved.

If none of those who currently are interested in leading the government are capable of providing effective leadership, we will have to look for and develop new leaders. We may have to rebuild the country beginning at the local level.

Withdrawal before the country has a viable anti-terrorist government is not an option. Osama bin Laden would claim a major victory for violent Islam and use the victory to substantially increase recruitment.

Afghanistan is sometimes compared to my war [Vietnam] because it is a difficult place to defend against a guerrilla war. However, our adversaries in Vietnam never attacked American cities supported terror attacks on the attacks on American cities. Our adversaries in Afghanistan have attacked American cities before and want to use the country as a base for future terrorist attacks against the United States and other countries.

We need to stay as long as it takes to prevent the country from once again becoming a base for terrorism even if that takes another 20 years. We still have troops based in Germany and Japan 64 years after we defeated them in World War II even though they are peaceful countries.
_________________
"That awful power, the public opinion of a nation, is created in America by a horde of ignorant, self-complacent simpletons who failed at ditching and shoe making and fetched up in journalism on their way to the poor house."
-- Mark Twain

note: The above is a response posted by jalexson which I somehow managed to separate from the topic...mea culpa/me#1

[greasepaint]

the only stable gov't possible in Afghanistan
is the Taliban, or something just as bad.

these people are tribal.
they don't care if you build a water treatment plant for them.
they only understand force.
everybody wants to join the Taliban, because they
act like gangsters.

90 % of the world is cheering for the Taliban.

if you are unfamiliar with the Taliban,
substitute the words, 'Viet Cong'.

Afghanistan is a warrior and honor type
society. They don't want democracy or prosperity.
They don't want to be loved,
they want to be feared.
that is why they are winning.

[Navy_Navy_Navy]

[1991932]

I love it when a specious argument is dis-assembled, piece by piece.

"Hyperbole"...that's a great choice of words.

Thank you, 3N.

(I do understand greasepaint's cynicism, however.)
_________________
Former "War Criminal"

[greasepaint]

(Navy_Navy_Navy, thanks for responding to my post)

let me add, something important is not being discussed.
IMO, part of the reason for the success of the Taliban,
is that their struggle seems to overlay with what I call
the Pashtun's War of liberation and unification. Pashtuns
are about 40% of the people in Afghanistan (mostly in the South), the rest being various stanians. The Pashtuns want independence or dominance. In addition, just as bad,
is that across the West Pakistan border, are lots more Pashtun, who want to unify. In addition, just as bad,
is that in Pakistan, there are 4 or so major tribes, that
want independence, (in addition to Pashtuns), Pujabs,
Sinds, and Baluchis. The Baluchis want to unify with their
brothers in Iran.
BTW, I have written many time here, that something similar is happening in Iraq.

Lack of '''security''' is only the tip of the iceberg.
These people are tribal.
People in Afghanistan have as much loyalty to their
country as people in the US have to their
telephone Area Code.

[Navy_Navy_Navy]

[TEWSPilot]

Navy, you have hit on the solution!

[Me#1You#10]

[Navy_Navy_Navy]

LOL, TEWSpilot! Bet that'd fly!

[greasepaint]

there are limits to what you can expect in the
idea of a generational commitment.
consider the Arab-Israel conflict.
From what I call the four (maybe eight) year Tour of duty effect from the changing US presidents,,,
what you get is, " I need to take the best shot at fixing the middle east in 4 years, otherwise someone
else gets the credit if it happens after me" . So you get
the same thing, every change of president.
...........................................
about the tribal situation, in my previous posts in this thread,
the borders need to be redrawn. Both Iraq and A-stan.
Neither Bush nor Obama seem to be up to the task.
in lieu of redrawing the map of the area.
I contend the Muslim world benefits, and the US suffers,
with the war in A-stan. The US economy is being bled dry,
and these wars burn up a lot of fuel, for which we get nothing.The people of A=stan don't want democracy or prosperity. They want their tribe to be on the winning side. They want their tribal enemies. to be poor. This is a warrior and honor society.

[LewWaters]

He may wait until late November now to issue any decision.

[TEWSPilot]

...the same Leftists who helped orchestrate the loss of the Vietnam war implementing the same losing strategy of abandoning the remote outposts and using a small force to defend the cities. The influence of the Taliban will increase everywhere until they take over the country again. Obama and his idiots inherited a winning plan and strategy, they tossed it, but they will still find a way to blame Bush and Cheney.

[BuffaloJack]

Nobody can ever pacify Afghanistan.
The British were in India (including Pakistan and the surrounding areas) from 1602 until the middle of the 20th century. During that time nobody was ever able to hold the Khyber Pass or any other part of present day Afghanistan. It was always too tribal and wild and filled with extremists. The best anyone can ever hope do there is to go in, punish the evil doers and bug out as quickly as possible. That's about it. It's been like that for centuries and will probably never change.
_________________
Swift Boats - Qui Nhon (12/69-4/70), Cat Lo (4/70-5/70), Vung Tau (5/70-12/71)

[Me#1You#10]