Kerry: Before Troops, Decide Afghan Vote

(CBS)  Senator John Kerry said today that more U.S. troops could not be sent to Afghanistan before a conclusion has been reached in that country's disputed presidential election.

In an interview with CBS News while visiting U.S. troops in Afghanistan, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said, "I don't see how President Obama can make a decision about the committing of our additional forces, or even the further fulfillment of our mission that's here today, without an adequate government in place or knowledge about what that government's going to be."

With results from the controversial election (in which independent monitors have said there was vote fraud) currently undergoing a recount, the possibility exists that President Hamid Karzai may be forced into a runoff election with his nearest challenger, Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, further delaying the installation of a new administration.

The charges of election fraud and other allegations of corruption which have dogged his government further jeopardize the legitimacy of his re-election should the recount put him on top.

Kerry said it was time for Karzai to "step up" and share a vision of how the Afghan government can be a functioning partner in the mission.

The full interview will be featured on CBS' "Face the Nation" on Sunday, October 18, 2009.

[aldon61]

Although Kerry actually makes sense, I disagree. This is a war that's necessary. Bush under-committed us at the beginning, then diverged away from it to fight an un-necessary war. Osama Bin Laden MUST be killed and the terroists MUST be crushed! Committ the necessary resource to do the job and then come home. Sure, Karzi is currupt, but let the aphgans take care of the situation and "butt out" of their politics. We're over there to do a job, do it and bring our forces home.

[stn_sage]

aldon61:

You are wrong,sir...this war is NOT necessary!

First, you assume Bin Laden is still alive. There's no proof that he is!
With thousands of men searching the hills and mountains on foot, with advanced ground-penetrating radar, and high-sky photo observation cameras, and they've never found him?

And, if you look at the CIA-provided tapes, you'll notice his facial parameters vary...as if it's 2-3 different Bin Ladens!

NO! I suggest to you, that he's already dead. Also, even IF he were alive...how much of a threat is he, hiding out in a cave? Not much!

The huge network the Bush admin claimed existed...NEVER existed!

Terrorism has been used as an excuse to keep small, limited wars going to enrich the makers of war materials, AND the political allies in Washington, D.C.; while the American public sacrifices it's family members to death, injury, and dishonor!

[jefleshman]

by stn_sage October 19, 2009 10:30 AM EDT
aldon61:

1. You are wrong,sir...this war is NOT necessary!
2. First, you assume Bin Laden is still alive. There's no proof that he is!
3. ... while the American public sacrifices it's family members to death, injury, and dishonor!
--------------------------------------------

1. (response to your point this war is not necessary)

Your response is a 2001 response and does not hold water now. WE ARE HERE and there is no denying that. The year is 2009 not 2001 anymore.

The Afghan citizens have a vote. We removed the brutal regime of the Taliban in 2001. Their human rights violations have been well documented. In removing the "Taliban government", we made a promise to the people of Afghanistan that we will also provide a better way of life.

Thus, we are held accountable for that action we took in October 2001. War may not have been a valid course of action from your point of view in 2001, however we have moved beyond this argument. Our reasoning in staying here is valid. We owe it to the citizens of Afghanistan and for our international community that Afghanistan will never again be a free staging ground to plan an attack on the US or the free nations of this world.

Finally, the international community has a vote, for they have dedicated time, resource and troops to this cause as well. We do not stand alone in the Global war on Terror. We are united with 42 x Troop Contributing Nations in Afghanistan alone, plus, an additional 80 x Donor Nations. If the past week is not a wakeup call to the true threat of Global Terrorism, I do not know what is. Pakistan and now Iran are feeling the effects we felt on September 11th 2001 by ignoring terrorism thinking it was some fairy tale.

2. (response to your point: First, you assume Bin Laden is still alive. There's no proof that he is!)

You are right; he may have been the main reason for coming here but as all things in life, a plan is only good until your start and then things change and life has a funny way of letting you know how much it likes your plan. You have to adapt to the situation. Though, OBL has been marginalized, do not for one instance think... the threat is over. His philosophy is carried on by his understudies if he is in fact dead.

3. (response for you point: while the American public sacrifices it's family members to death, injury, and dishonor!)

There is no dishonor in serving others. Our service men and women to include 42 other nations are working toward a better Afghanistan for its citizens as well as their own citizens back home. THERE IS NEVER DISHONOR in doing so.

If you think ignoring the problem, will magically make it go away or pulling all our service men and women home and think America will then be safe is the solution, you are blind to the reality of things. Terrorist do not care where you are at. You can either fight them in their yard on your terms or in our backyard on their terms.

[aubfmet]

Kerry may be correct in the logic of what he says, but I feel that his manner of speaking negates this. I react to his presence that he is pompus. His perceived pomposity turns me off. If you don't want to listen to someone, it doesn't make any difference what he says.

[stn_sage]

When has the U.S. ever cared that the government of the country we're intervening in is beloved 'by the locals'! We haven't, that's ridiculous! They only pertinent matter is, whatever govt is seated allowed us to be there...that's it.

Both Emanuel and Kerry are full of it! They're trying to 'buy time' for Obama to delay his having to make the decision to escalate there!

Mr. Obama is losing credibility with the U.S. public, even his own base want him to take us out of Afghanistan. If he expands Bush's war, he's hurting Dems in elections next year and himself in 2012!

Mr. Obama is straddling the divide between keeping the war going while APPEARING to be working to end it...and the public is being played as 'suckers!'

[truth-b-toll]

If Kerry had been elected we would not be in this QUAGMIRE!
THANKS BUSHIES!
THANKS FOR RUINING THE USA!
WE KNOW YOU NOW!
NEVER VOTE REPUGLICAN!
GOS BLESS THE USA!

[roach9703]

A valid reason for increasing the troop strength in Afghanistan is to improve the security of the forces already there. More troops provide more flexibility in meeting the various threats that unexpectedly emerge in Afghanistan. The consequences of leaving Afghanistan is less reliable intelligence, a lessened opportunity to reduce support for Al-Qaeda,and lost credibility of the U.S. to meet its obligations.
We don't need to stay until a perfectly viable nation is developed. However, we do need to be there until we have a reliable system of intelligence to evaluate threats, and enough internal structure to at least maintain some control of over how the Taliban aids Al_QAEDA.

[rplat]

The ketchup lady needs to find that jerk something constructive to do.

[riddelup]

Everyone should know Karzai is corrupt as well as his entire faction. What difference does that make. Our task is to get rid of the terrorist before they accomplish their stated goal of attacking us again.First we chase the terrorist out of Afghanistan into Pakistan were they thrive because of the political climate in Pakistan . Now we are allowing the terrorist to return as Pakistan mounts its long awaited offensive. Next we will get up the nerve to aggressively pursue the terrorist the political tide will turn in Pakistan.

[Orlandojon]

The Afghan vote is none of our business and has nothing to do with eliminating the Talaban

[docpeter1953]

Well, actually it does.

Our military is like, technically, an invited "guest". Karzai is technically our host. If Karzai winds up losing the election and some radical islamist wins then we will/would/could be considered a foreign invading army and Afghanistan, the government itself, could declare war to rid their country of an invading army, the USA and multinational force(s).

An Islamist Pres. could forgo diplomatic relationship(s) with the USA, move to secure Sharia Law and install and instill Taliban rule. Then the USA is then at square-one in its war with Afghanistan. The only difference would be that we already have forces and equipment on the ground there.

So, yes the election does matter.

[lmartink]

You don't get it. Bush's puppet, Hamid Karzai, is as corrupt as he can be. One of his best buddies is a former warlord, another has grown rich exporting opium. And there is a very serious question of some of their massive amounts of money going to the Taliban. We should not send our young people to uphold a corrupt regime. Karzai's crimes are sufficient to investigate, and throw him in jail.

[drew4321]

There is one simple reason for Obama's delay to commit troops. The November 2nd election. All 435 seats in the House are up for grabs and Obama knows he is already going to lose a handful. He knows Dems will lose even more if he committed 40,000 troops right before the election. McCrystal will get his troops on Nov 3rd. The political games are endless and the people of this country have officially lost their voice under this administration. We are not represented anymore, we are just told what is best for us.

[mav547166]

The dems will lose more than a few seats if he loses afghanistan. The Democrats are the ones that politicized the war for gain, and now they get to reap what they sowed.

[sjc_1]

Democrats will lose in November 2010 is the economy is not better. They will lose if they have a mandate without a Public Option. There are several ways they can lose, but I do not think Afghanistan is one of them. We can do the vote there AND set a new military strategy at the same time, one does not have to come before the other, do them in parallel.

[spedling]

Why are we even listening to this moron, Kerry? Has everone forgot the side-show of an election where he ran for President? The man has no clue. I agree with vuenbelvue, we should get out of every muslim country. Islam is in no way compatible with democracy. Let the them klll their women and children all they want. the only thing we should do with any muslim country is develope a trading relationship much like Russia or China. All the muslims want out of American is for all Americans to die. However they DO like our I-pods, dvd players, tv's, money, etc. Again, why are we even listing to this idiot, Kerry?

[nextgenman09]

However they DO like our I-pods, dvd players, tv's, money, etc. Again, why are we even listing to this idiot, Kerry?
------

We don't make any of that craap. Its all foreign made. But then for the below average American, just saying something is supposed to make it true. After all, for the NASCAR Belgian Bud Light drinkers, stupid is the new smart.

[smiley520]

I agree. Kerry is a complete idiot. His solution is to let our soldiers die while the political arena is worked out. Either get in with force and win or get out. I am tired of seeing our men and women die because we don't want to do what it takes to win. I say nuke the SOB's or come home.

[mljohns00]

He's probaly right, but there's no way to even GUESS how long it'd take to have a "fair" election. But our Generals say if we delay any longer, the War is log.

So, two choices:
1) Put in a U.S.-chosen dictator. Maybe one of Saddam Hussein's cousins?
2) Get out now.

[maistir]

You're right, mljohns00, unless a second round of voting can be organized immediately or a coalition of Karzai and Abdullah can be put together in weeks, the delay could last until next May. I don't believe the Pres. can wait that long for a decision on troops. Sen. Kerry never sees more than one move ahead at a time.