On, that I agree completely. They can help, as they did in Iraq, but Afghanistan is miles behind Iraq in terms of civic infrastructure. 18 years might not be enough.
I’m not sold, either. Even if we are successful with that strategy, without a strong central government, the Taliban will waltz back in as soon as we leave. Which Obama has already told everyone will do fairly soon.
Historically a big Obama fan here, but very disappointed at this decision. My choice would have been pull them all home tomorrow. I strongly favor the type of intervention mswas describes, than largescale boots-on-the-ground nation building.
I agree with much of what you’re saying here, gonzomax. However, Obama got himself into this mess by appointing McChrystal, a known war criminal, to head this whole Afghanistan “mission” up, not to mention his other appointees. To be truthful, I did a write-in vote at the polls a year ago last month, because I knew, at a gut level, that no matter which of the two parties were elected, we’d continue to get screwed…big time, and I’m not wrong. It was clear to me, pretty much from the get-go, when Obama voted as he did on the FISA Bill, and his war votes, even after having gone on record as opposing our war on Iraq, and the FISA Bill, that Obama would be little or no better than G. W. Bush was.
I think Feingold summed it up better than I could’ve:
Yep - pretty much my thoughts as well.
Not the type of decision I had hoped for from the man.
[Colicchio]I felt like he could’ve done something to bring out the heat. The heat was there, but I felt it kind of disappeared into the rest of the dish.[/Colicchio]
[Padma]I thought it was very pedestrian.[/Padma]
He is far better domestically and there are quiet background moves that indicate he may be even better than he shown so far. But huge forces move the US. Big money and big army. Who can stand up to the huge political forces that feed off the Financial Institutions or the war contractors?Someday Obama may stand up to them. But he missed this chance. If he would have given up on Afghanistan, the Fox news and other conservative forces would have made very loud angry noises drowning out any peace lovers. We go broke and they still want more wars.
McChrystal never explained his part in the Pat Tillman fiasco. I am waiting for that.
:eek: But then where would we get our heroin?!
Last night, Obama became just another president. History gives presidents a chance but they rarely take advantage. They never have the guts to stand up to the big powers in America.
It takes a little critical thinking of what he said. Do you believe he will leave Afghanistan if things are a mess? If he would leave when things are a mess, then now would be the ideal time to leave. If you believe he won’t leave things in a mess (I believe he won’t), then given that he provided a time frame, the logical conclusion is that he thinks everything in Afghanistan is going to be fine within that time frame. If he didn’t think everything would be fine in 18 months AND he won’t leave Afghanistan when things are mess, then he wouldn’t have given the timeframe.
Given the history of Afghansistan, it would be incredible naive of Obama to believe everything will be fine there in under 18 months. So that leaves us with the final scenario: Obama believes Afghanistan will be a mess **and **he won’t pull the troops out, **but **for political expediency, he *says *otherwise
N.B.: Obama is not promising to pull out of Afghanistan in 18 months, but to start drawing down U.S. troops in Afghanistan in 18 months – the start of a very gradual process that will still leave some troop presence there for years to come.
He didn’t say he would leave. He said he would start drawing down. The plan still calls for a 5 year draw down after this new escalation, so waving around the “18 months” is kind of a red herring.
Halliburton is building an army of robot poppy-farmers at their secret island base. They’ll be available to the US under a no-bid contract.
It’s not as if Bush and friends left the poor bastard with any decent choices here. I’d’ve preferred a total pullout by 2012, but I can see why Obama’s taking a gamble on Karzai. If it even kinda works it’ll do wonders for Liberal foreign policy cred; not that the right has anything to talk to mom about in that department these days.
OK. We got (A) Obama’s plan, we got (B) “give up and go home”. What’s Plan C?
I don’t know why anyone is really surprised by the decision. Obama campaigned on the notion that Afghanistan was the real war of necessity and that it needed to be given more focus and effort. Did you think he was lying?
He probably made the right decision, although coupling it with a ‘timetable’ is not strategically smart.
Look, Afghanistan is a really tough problem. I’m skeptical of the possibility of turning it into a stable, well-governed country that defends its borders from infiltration by militants. I don’t know that that is possible in any timeframe short of decades.
But I also know that an immediate withdrawal would send signals that would embolden terrorists around the world and damage the U.S.
I also think that occupation of Afghanistan can be defended on humanitarian grounds - specifically, the treatment of women. One thing that the NATO occupation has done for Afghan women so far is that it has given them 8 years of having the ability to go to school. That’s not a trivial thing. Perhaps building up an educated female class is one of the changes Afghanistan needs to turn a corner and start plodding slowly towards modernity.
One thing different about Afghanistan in terms of domestic politics is that this is a bipartisan war. There are opponents and supporters of it throughout the left and right. Hopefully, this means we can have a rational discussion about it.
Also, unlike Iraq, this is not just an American war. Canada has had as many casualties there as a percentage of the population as has the U.S., and Canada has taken on leadership roles in that war as well - especially when the U.S. was pre-occupied with Iraq. We’re having our own debate about the future role of Canada in the war, as are all the other NATO countries.
Hopefully, all this means we can have a reasonable, substantive discussion of the Afghanistan conflict, as devoid of partisanship as possible.
Well, “alternatives” he suggested last night included (C) ramping up with no timetable, and (D) continuing to muddle on with existing troop levels. I think something along the lines of the “RDF” mswas suggests may well be yet another option.
Eh. It’s a giant bureaucratic government decision, as approved by the senior bureaucrats of America’s biggest, most bloated bureaucracy. Does anyone seriously expect that the timetable will be met?
Crush them.
Third option , quit supporting Karzai. How is he part of the solution?