Comments on: U.S. Troop Buildup Planned For Afghanistan

Heavy Spring Fighting Expected As Taliban Stages A Comeback

[justafriend1]

I have friends who were in the process of coming home, and friends who actually made it home and now have to return to Afghanistan. I can't imagine which would be worse.
My thoughts and prayers to all our service members and their families.

[exusmcsgt]

so true exusmcsgt.....so true....and yet the very people that need to accept the inevitable are too blinded by arrogance and greed to see it...

Posted by missmyhubby at 09:52 AM : Jan 25, 2007

I would not agree that the Neocons are so much blind to it as they are desperate to avoid two truths.

First, that Bush will have the legacy of a moron.

Secondly, that they stupidly played right into Iran's hands and gave Iran exactly what it wanted. That is, an opportunity to expand it's sphere of influence into SE Iraq.

Saddam made sure that Iran never achieved this. The Neocons handed it to them on a silver platter.

[missmyhubby]

so true exusmcsgt.....so true....and yet the very people that need to accept the inevitable are too blinded by arrogance and greed to see it...

[exusmcsgt]

So, my question is simply this...Is our government comfortable leaving our service men and women in the political handcuffs that have been place upon them?
Posted by missmyhubby at 09:43 AM : Jan 25, 2007

Considering that this invasion was illconceived and not based on sound military strategy, the administration has only one of two choices available to it at this point.

One is to continue the deffective strategy in hopes of avoiding the inevitable disentegration of Iraq into secular states.

The other is to pull out and allow Iraq to disentegrate into secular states.

The end result will be the same regardless of what we do. The only question to be answered is how many more warriors will be killed or maimed and how much more treasure will be wasted before we accept the inevitable.

[missmyhubby]

The United States Military is not the World Police Force...and our Armed Services need not be used that way! Our President states that the Iraqi people deserve freedom. What is freedom if the voices of the people can not be heard? Is the American government listening to the voices of our people? As I see it, the government has two choices: 1. Take the political handcuffs off our troops and let them go in and clean house. OR 2. Pull our troops back (whether that be to the borders, Kuwait or home) and find a political solution.

I'm finished now....

[missmyhubby]

Is our government willing to continue to sacrifice the blood of our sons and daughters for a civil war that we can not control? Does our government have the wherewithal to stand up and stop this debacle before more lives are lost, billions more in funds spent, and our worldly reputation tarnished beyond recovery? The November elections clearly showed that the American people have had enough. Our troops are frustrated and discouraged over the mishandling of this war, the lack of a plan, ineffective leadership too worried about upsetting %u201Chigher ups%u201D, and the fact that they are being asked to do things the Iraqi government will not do! Prime Minister Al Maliki has stated he wants Coalition forces out of Baghdad, he wants to handle the violence. Why are we not listening? It is clear that the Iraqi people are also saying that they have had enough! Has our government had enough? It is the duty of our government to listen to the people....and the people have spoken! Is the government listening? The situation in Iraq is beyond disgusting! The sectarian violence encompassing Iraq is out of our control. We cannot stop what has already begun...we are seen as occupiers, not liberators. Our troops are killed as propaganda and trophies for the battling factions. The people of Iraq have to stand up and take their country back. The Iraqi people have to want to be free. The Iraqi people have too long been allowed to use our troops and not contribute to their own wellbeing.

[missmyhubby]

exusmcsgt--I agree--we can not defeat the insurgents given current practices. Given that, here is what I think... As Iraq continues to spiral into a civil war, and it is a civil war, our brave servicemen and women are stuck in the middle as mere security guards. Our soldiers have not been allowed to "fight". This situation is not a "conventional war", so why do we continue to try to fight it using conventional methods? We lose soldiers, marines, airmen and sailors everyday to roadside bombs (IEDs), VBIEDs, small arms fire, as well as organized attacks on our troops. This is unacceptable. Our soldiers should not be used as security guards and policemen. They are told to detain, detain, detain...then those very detainees are released back out to continue to maim and kill our troops! Our soldiers cannot fire on the enemy until fired upon, detain "suspects" unless they are caught "red handed", detain politically "important" suspects (ex. imams) because it would cause too much "stink" and disrupt the ever absent political process. So, my question is simply this...Is our government comfortable leaving our service men and women in the political handcuffs that have been place upon them?

[exusmcsgt]

There's a concept that liberal Democrats and their fellow pals in our corrupt liberal MSM wolfpack need to start warming up to......... and that is because the international community failed to help Afghanistan after the Soviets pulled out in the 1990's.... this left a power vacum that the Taliban filled and with their Al Queda allies trained thousands of terrorists.
Posted by perception5 at 08:47 AM

I will retort that there is as concept that the NeoCons need to start warming up to. That concept is that a competent guerilla force with the support of the local populace will never be defeated by a standing army, regardless of how much power is projected.

You mentioned the USSR in Afghanistan. It tried for 12 years to defeat the guerillas and then realized it would never happen and packed up and went home.

We tried unsucessfully for 20 years in Viet Nam to win with the same defective strategy and then packed up and came home.

Guatemala's guerillas sucessfully fought for 36 years before sitting down at the negotiating table.

The Phillipines and Colombia have been failing at the strategy for 40 years now.

Smell the coffee, perception5.

[grumpas]

Even though I am not a right wing conservative and never have been. I will have to agree that Barry Goldwater was the last decent conservative! He was a nice man and not the wacko a lot of current conservative's are. The whole idea went to hell in a handbasket when Ronald Reagan took it over. He let a bunch of far right wing nut cases take the party over! And set the wheel's in motion for the ruination of the party and conservatism! Barry Goldwater was considered Liberal by a lot of the current Conservative's!

[observantx]

Finally. Here%u2019s a surge I can agree with.

Afghanistan is where we should have been in force all along instead of Iraq. Maybe if El Grande Presidente knew how to look at a globe he would see the proximity of Afghanistan to North Korea, China, and Pakistan, all whom have nukes. I%u2019m betting OBL has been trying to buy a nuke from Kim Jong Il for some time now. I wouldn%u2019t be surprised if he has been feeding cash to Kim to help with the development of the weapon.

But where are we in force? On the other side of that continent where the oil fields are. So, instead of going after the real terrorist sob who killed the people in the twin towers, our boy king and his Uncle D*ck have wrapped their arms around the Iraq oil pipeline and are french kissing the spigot.

The wrong country. The wrong targets. The wrong motive. The wrong strategy. The wrong results.

Heckovajob, Bushie.

[shingles1]

Hey, Barry Goldwater was a Lincoln compared to the bozos in the current Republican party. At least he was honest and consistent in his conservatism.

[antoniof123]

If the right wing would just shut up and leave things alone to the adults then we will be able to fix the mess they made. I hope that America has learned it lesson do not allow children to come to power. Barry Goldwater was a loser I guess are parents new what was right.

[shingles1]

perception5 is right about the dangers of leaving a failed state in our wake.

Of course, Iraq wouldn't BE a failed state (in the sense of a chaotic lack of central authority, militias, etc.) if we hadn't blown it apart in the first place.

Oh, irony.

[rharrin1]

And what politician was first to say Afghanistan needed more troops =======Sen Clinton that should take care of right wingers talking about her no experience.

[shingles1]

"Interesting that a lot of the clowns who say Bush should have completed the job in Afghanistan first, or not go into Iraq period are saying we should have left Osama and the Taleban alone.

Posted by lieberman18"

Who says we should have left Osama and the Taleban alone? Name some real names.

Except for a miniscule # of clowns on both the far left and far right EVERYBODY was in favor of going into Afghanistan in response to 9/11. Why do you think Bush's poll numbers were so high in late 2001/early 2002? Because 1. The country rallied together in response to an attack, and 2. Bush went after the CORRECT enemy.

PS, anybody who uses the phrase "the jooz" is probably a right wing anti-semite himself. Waving the bloody shirt of anti-semitism for completely superficial and partisan reasons demeans and belittles the memory and suffering of millions.

[perception5]

There's a concept that liberal Democrats and their fellow pals in our corrupt liberal MSM wolfpack need to start warming up to......... and that is because the international community failed to help Afghanistan after the Soviets pulled out in the 1990's.... this left a power vacum that the Taliban filled and with their Al Queda allies trained thousands of terrorists. The terrorist's that struck the USA on 9/11 had all been through training in Afghanistan before they came to the USA to complete their mission.
We and the rest of the world need to make sure this doesn't happen again. It will take time but eventually both Afghanistan and Iraq will be able to, with their own security forces, defend their country. At that point the international community needs to make sure they provide economic and military aid to ensure that these young democracies succeed.

[exusmcsgt]

And for those of you so excited about increasing the number of troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan, there is a local recruiting office in your city or town!
Posted by missmyhubby at 08:28 AM : Jan 25, 2007

This a common practice among "hawks". They are the first to call for troops and the last one's who'll sign up. (lerberman, etc.)

In regards to "what else can you do?", vote for people who favor coexistence over conflict.

Take care and our thoughts are with you and your warrior, ma'am.

[missmyhubby]

The bottom line is simply this...our military CAN NOT sustain the deployments that are being put upon them by our government. Our soldiers DESERVE to recover...Let's not forget that along with the 3200+ troops just extended in Afghanistan, there are troops being extended in Iraq, sent early without the adequate recovery/training time and there has been no major change in policy! The number of troops "on the ground" doesn't mean ***....it is just a number...don't forget that the Army band was sent to Iraq...they count those soldiers as "boots on the ground"...but they are not doing the raid, ambushes and patrols my husband and his guys do everyday in SW Baghdad! So let us not fool ourselves...the government can only sacrifice the lives of our soldiers and their families for so long...it is time for our voices to be heard. I have written my congressman and senators, what else can I do?? And for those of you so excited about increasing the number of troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan, there is a local recruiting office in your city or town!

[skyk-2009]

Every American should be VERY thankful that our Allies in NATO have stood by us. Because President Clinton helped them out with Bosnia, we have enough good will left to maintain, for the present, that alliance. If it were Bush? Well there is NO member Country in NATO that does NOT fear Bush and wonder what the hell we are doing keeping him in charge. Concider a recent poll in England where the VAST majority of the citizens of that nation feared Sir Lies-A-Lot MORE than the leader of NORTH KOREA! How far we have fallen in such a short time... how far indeed.

[bluestardad]

Remove the Restrictions on the rules of engagement.