War Mongers

[UltraShy]

October 7th marks the 8th anniversary of the US war in Afghanistan.

I'm an old man so my memory might be slipping, but didn't Obama run on a campaign of getting us out of the wars Bush got us into? Most of you voted for Obama, so perhaps you might recall what he said regarding war. Didn't people vote for Obama because they didn't want a warmongering "McBush" in the White House? Obama has been residing in the White House for nearly 9 months already. When exactly is he planning to get us the hell out of these two wars -- Iraq & Afghanistan? I'm sure some of you will tell me I'm not giving him enough time. 9 months is the length of a pregnancy, the length of three seasons. One might thing something could be done within such a time frame, but all I hear in the media is that some want another 40,000 troops sent to Afghanistan.

Bush was clearly a war monger, but I must say Obama isn't doing much better on that front.

I'm getting the impression that his plan is to bring troops home on the 12th of Never (except in flag-draped coffins, of course, not that anybody cares any longer).

SNL hasn't been funny in years, but any of you saw it over the weekend know it started with a joke about Obama saying he couldn't figure out why the Right was so mad at him when he's managed to do nothing and then went through a list of all his campaign promises and checked off what he didn't do with "nope," "hell no" and other such negatives. The list included items like closing Guantanamo Bay, which is also planned for the 12th of Never.

So much for "Change We Can Believe In."

After Obama was in office for 90 days I asked what everyone thought of his job performance. Most said give him time. Now we're nearing the 9 month mark. Still want to say give him more time?

To be fair, he has done a few things like give us Government Motors. Don't you just love owing a failed car company?

[Amelia]

Maybe the change he was talking about was changing his mind. The US will look like it's turning tail and running if it leaves when the Taliban still have a foothold.

[UltraShy]

Originally Posted by Amelia

Maybe the change he was talking about was changing his mind.

Do I detect a hint that somebody doesn't think he's a god?

Originally Posted by Amelia

The US will look like it's turning tail and running if it leaves when the Taliban still have a foothold.

It's been 8 years. That's sort of a long time. That's how long G.W.Shrub was in office. If we have yet to win after all this time what would give anyone any confidence that we will ever win this no matter how long we stay?

And there is is also the question of money. War wastes a lot of money and there is a bit of a problem in that we don't have any. We were forced to send Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner to China to talk with leaders in Beijing to offer assurances that the US can repay its debts to China. Timmy better learn how to kneel and pucker up, because to get more money he's really going to need to kiss butt in China and elsewhere. Who'd have every thought "the most powerful nation on earth" would be forced to assure some third world country that we're not dead beats and that we'll actually pay them back. This just a few steps above "the check is in the mail" when a collection agency calls.

The US has $12 trillion of debt, which to put it in perspective I pointed out was $40,000 for each & every person in the nation. So that's $160,000 for your typical family of four. Or maybe we can just magically find 250 guys as rich as Bill Gates who are willing hand over 100% of their assets and then our debt will be fully paid, but that doesn't sound likely.

[Kelly]

Obama campaigned on getting us out of Iraq, but on an escalation of troops in Afghanistan.

Have a nice day,
Kelly

[nubly]

yea it was getting out of iraq barry lied about. i think he said by november 2009 all tropps were to be out of iraq. why people thought barry wouldnt lie to get into office is beyond me

[Amocholes]

Not necessarily a lie as such. Events may have extended the timetable. Things like this happen in politics as well as business. Deadlines are always subject to change.

[jer]

Obama wisely chose to keep secretary Robert Gates.

What I dont understand is why Gen. McChrystal and Chmn. Mike Mullen are shooting their mouths off about the Afghanistan situation.
talking about the situation worsening and all that stuff. It was kind of bizarre.


I was wondering about that for a few weeks and voila, sec. Gates yesterday confirmed my thoughts by saying that top Generals should be private about their comments.

All-in-all I think sec Gates has a good grip on the situation and he will do the right thing.

[ivankaramazov]

Originally Posted by nubly

yea it was getting out of iraq barry lied about. i think he said by november 2009 all tropps were to be out of iraq. why people thought barry wouldnt lie to get into office is beyond me

His official commmitment was 18 months.

[Amelia]

Originally Posted by UltraShy

It's been 8 years. That's sort of a long time.

Not really. US troops have been on European soil since WW2. Moreover, if the US left now, they would also lose face with the Russians, who held on in Afghanistan for nine years.

[bobthebuilder]

I think its funny and all a game. oh no no we shouldnt have troops in Iraq! that wont solve anything. Afghanistan was where should have been in the beginning! I dunno, i dont see much a difference between the two: both full of sand and crazy people.

But I can understand why obama would have to go back on the promise of removing troops. Based on what i seen after he was elected, i got a sense that after being elected and briefed, he learned something we dont know and why he could not pull troops out like he said. Good reason or not, i think he did. Not that id be surprised if he was bs'ing from the beginning.

[Hank Scorpio]

Originally Posted by Amelia

The US will look like it's turning tail and running if it leaves when the Taliban still have a foothold.

I'm so sick of hearing that other countries opinion of the U.S. is an excuse for war. They will think exactly what they want to think of us no matter what.

[UltraShy]

Originally Posted by Kelly

Obama campaigned on getting us out of Iraq, but on an escalation of troops in Afghanistan.

Have a nice day,
Kelly

OK, thanks for the clarification, Kelly. Did he set a date for getting out of Iraq? Or is this like doomsday folks who predict "the end is coming" but never set a specific time?

[UltraShy]

Originally Posted by Amelia

Moreover, if the US left now, they would also lose face with the Russians, who held on in Afghanistan for nine years.

We're afraid of looking bad to the Russians? Perhaps we'd best learn how to chug vodka, because those Russians could drink us under the table and we can't have them making us look like sissies!

The Russians (USSR back then) lost after 9 years. They left in defeat because they were losing an average of one aircraft a day, being shot down with heat-seeking missiles. The USSR was the evil empire that we feared for decades during the cold war. They had a massive military and they still lost to Afghan rebels, so what makes us think we can win?

[SilentLoner]

I honestly believe that if we had not gone to Iraq and made a real effort with Afghanistan (not a show to make it seem we were going after those who planned 9/11 and practically forgetting that war once Iraq started) there would be at least some decent stability in the region.

But forget that. The whole thing was doomed the moment the Iraq war began. Beyond repair now.
I hate to imagine what the next generation will have to deal with as a result.

[coldmorning]

Originally Posted by UltraShy

They had a massive military and they still lost to Afghan rebels, so what makes us think we can win?

Difference now is that the Afghan rebels aren't being backed by a superpower. The US was backing the Mujahadeen against the Soviets back then.

[jacksondoug3]

One thing I dont get is why only 30% of americans support war in afghanistan (which we know contains al qaeda cells) but 60% support war in Iran (which may or may not be developing nukes).

[Amelia]

Originally Posted by Hank Scorpio

I'm so sick of hearing that other countries opinion of the U.S. is an excuse for war. They will think exactly what they want to think of us no matter what.

If Afghans and Pakistanis who don't support the Taliban think they're being left in the lurch by one of the most powerful countries on the planet, it's not going to give them much encouragement to resist and build up their country. The Taliban are already spreading into Pakistan, and it's easy to guess which country will be one of the targets if they take over a country with nuclear power.

[UltraShy]

Originally Posted by jacksondoug3

...60% support war in Iran (which may or may not be developing nukes).

Just what we need, a third war. I don't deem Iran a problem. If they dared to launch a nuclear attack they'd immediately be blown off the map by a nuclear counter strike. Starting a nuclear war would be a suicide mission for Iran and they know it.

[quietgal]

What are the chances of this actually happening? Of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal being taken over? Does anyone have any idea?

The whole idea of war with Iran over nuclear weapons that may or may not exist in the future is mind-boggling. I mean, have we learned nothing in Iraq? Do Americans still believe that somehow we can just snap our fingers and whole nations with complex histories and complex societies that few Americans really understand (or for that matter, can locate on a map), will just obediently follow the neat little course that "father-knows-best" America lays out for them?

[quietgal]

Originally Posted by bobthebuilder

I dunno, i dont see much a difference between the two: both full of sand and crazy people.

If this is the attitude we have towards the people and nations we're supposedly there to help, we have no right being in the region, period.