• Mike,

    I’m certainly not trying to be rude, I do respect you’re comments. But it is just like you’re quoting the Vietnam play book all over again.

    Did China & Russia have an interest in Vietnam? Of course they did. I don’t know what knowledge you have of Vietnam, but it just like LBJ is setting in the oval office. Obama, needs to man up on his leadership. You have to be kidding me, giving war prisoners Miranda Warning under our constitution on the battle fields of Afghanistan and Iraq.

    I will tell you, I don’t know what to think it’s just like the left is in some other time zone on another planet. You may not care for my opinion, and that is fine with me. I don’t care if the U. S. military levels half of Pakistan then levels the mountains Afghanistan, get the job done then get the Hell out. It will end up with some President building another wall with a list of names that was totally unnecessary because this President couldn’t get the job done. It will be over stupid diplomacy from the far left that will drag this war on.

    We did not need to go into Iraq a dumb move by Bush. We should have taken care of the war in Afghanistan.But it's OB's problem now..

    September 24, 2009 at 2:52 p.m.

  • BSspotter
    On this rare occasion we are in complete agreement.

    I remember writing several posts defending the words of then presidential candidate, Ron Paul, when he said” we are suffering blowback from our actions in the Middle East.”…. As you well know, his anti-Iraq war rhetoric was mocked and often misquoted in the GOP primaries.. As Tom Friedman said "we just used the Middle East for a filling station, instead of using our clout to persuade them to close down the Madrasa schools that were in plain sight… That is water under the bridge; it's the future strategy that counts.

    No such thing as a “war on terror”, since terror is a tactic.

    September 24, 2009 at 12:43 p.m.

  • Mike: "Positive effect on terrorist motivation? I don't think so, the extremists are already brainwashed..."

    That's right, we must first suffer retaliation for killing 100s of 1,000s of innocent Iraqis in that unprovoked, unjust & unconstitutional war. If I had a family member killed in such a war, I'd be a terrorist too.

    Occupation of their lands is one of the major motivations for terror. Un-occupying those lands can only help. We're fools to think we can defeat terrorism (a tactic). We can only make it worse because we've intentionally ignored the root causes of terrorism.

    Is this a 'War on Terror' or a 'Campaign for Terror'?

    Just War Theory:

    September 24, 2009 at 11:48 a.m.

  • I agree the Brits, Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan could not win in Afghanistan but our military leaders realized that and decided to go with a simpler goal of not letting Afghanistan become a haven for terrorist camps again.... I think for now Al Qaeda is happy with Pakistan but they can easily move to Somalia or Yemen…Are we to follow them all over the world?

    “Positive effect on terrorist motivation? “I don't think so, the extremists are already brainwashed... but they don't attack Sweden.

    September 24, 2009 at 11:36 a.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    September 24, 2009 at 11:31 a.m.

  • We will suffer the same fate as the Soviets in Afghanistan. We're already in denial of being broke. The world is close to rejecting the dollar as reserve currency, which is the only thing floating these adventures. When we can no longer export currency inflation, these "wars" will have to end. Perhaps being forced to withdraw our occupations of foreign countries will have a positive effect on "terrorist" motivations.

    September 24, 2009 at 11:15 a.m.

  • The 2001 invasion of Afghanistan was led by the CIA and about 300 Special Forces personnel. They relied exclusively on the Northern alliance to overtake the Taliban…. This has nothing to do with the normal peace dividend cuts that President Bill Clinton made. The right-wing continues to use this as a talking point. The equipment that the Clinton administration left in place was more than adequate….. General Shinseki said it would take 500,000 troops to invade Iraq…He was shown the door. It was Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld that decided to go and lean.

    We did not have that much equipment in Afghanistan when we decided to go to Iraq…. What we did have was allies, interpreters, and the will to tear down the Al-Qaeda training camps, drive out the Taliban and got rid of about 75% of the Al Qaeda forces in Afghanistan…. We didn't finish the job so Afghanistan became a problem again.

    What the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen want is a 10 year commitment of nation building… Read the text of General McChrystal… Not one of them are suggesting the indiscriminate bombing of Afghanistan. Counterinsurgency requires winning the hearts and minds of the civilian population. Bombs will not get the job done.

    According to Mark Hosenball (columnist for Newsweek) there are roughly 800 Green Berets in the Afghan- Pakistan Theater sharing three Chinook heavy-lift helicopters. It requires another $3 billion to get them the helicopter they need…Deficits & debt.

    Our first mission was to rid Afghanistan of an Al Qaeda-Taliban presence, according to General Petraeus, Al Qaeda has moved out of Afghanistan, and is located in Pakistan. ..Pakistan is our ally and they have nukes.

    China and Russia have an economic interest in Pakistan stability…. India is a common economic adversary ….. We tried cowboy diplomacy for eight years without success.

    September 24, 2009 at 11:02 a.m.

  • When I read the summary, especially the VP's strategy approach, I thought the exact same results as itisi. After 9/11, as part of the military, we saw that the mission was coming to shut down Al Qaida. We built up forces, weapons, and logistics that was to kick butt on the Taliban and Al Q. We could do that because, since Clinton downsized the
    military, we went from being able to fight 2.5 to 3 theatre wide wars (thanks to Pres. Reagan) to being able to fight 1.5 theatre wide wars. That means fighting one to win and holding on the other war (not winning).
    We kicked butt in Afganistan when we went in, but the side trip to a war with Iraq took away too much
    warfighting capability. Remember we can only win one
    war at a time with the smaller military we have.
    We do not have the capability we had that won the cold war. Do we want to win in Iraq and Afghanistan? Finish up quickly in Iraq, then win the Afghanistan Taliban Al Qaida fight.
    Remember the Surge that turned the tide in the Iraq War? The forces were taken from Afghanistan.
    The Sec. of Defense and the Joint Chiefs are correct in supporting a "surge" in Afghanistan to turn the tide. I agree itisi getting those B-52's flying from Guam and Diego Garcia to do their job will close those caves down on OBL.

    September 23, 2009 at 11:25 p.m.

  • I'm waiting for OBL to come out of a cave and video an endorsement of BO.

    September 23, 2009 at 10:44 p.m.

  • Hey, Mike, what do you think of the Libyan and Iranian terrorists/dictators endorsing your man Obama before the UN?

    September 23, 2009 at 10:42 p.m.

  • By the way I never supported sending troops to Afghanistan. It is a country that has never been conquered by outside forces in almost 2,000 years.

    September 23, 2009 at 9:02 p.m.

  • The President actions enforces one of the main rules in the War College. The objective of war is to not kill all the enemy, but to destroy his will to continue to fight. It appears to me, the President has lost his will to continue to fight.

    September 23, 2009 at 8:58 p.m.

  • Mike,

    I’m going to tell you, you’re summary of the VP & President Obama on the topic of Afghanistan is totally wrong. The VP is suggesting the same crap that went on with LBJ during Vietnam; this is a complete roll back in history. December of 1972, called linebacker II brought North Vietnam to its knees. If the American military backs off in any form, we will be repeating history because of the stupid Democratic politics and the liberal left wing radical nuts. This President better stop listening to the “LEFT”, this is a damn WAR and better be fought like one. Let the might of the American military fall on Afghanistan. In 1967 if we had drop the bombs that were drop during Linebacker II in 72, Vietnam would have been a totally different place than it is today. Afghanistan will be a repeat of Vietnam. Mike, this is not a copy and paste, I was there and so the damage that was done from the wild blue wonder.

    September 23, 2009 at 7:50 p.m.