3rdnlng Posted October 19, 2010 Posted October 19, 2010 If Afghanistan was the "good war" why is Obama considering letting it revert to pre 9/11? http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Troops-chafe-at-restrictive-rules-of-engagement_-talks-with-Taliban-1226055-105202284.html
BB27 Posted October 19, 2010 Posted October 19, 2010 If Afghanistan was the "good war" why is Obama considering letting it revert to pre 9/11? http://www.washingto...-105202284.html Lets see, because he's an idiot? This was inevitable though. Look at the history of Afganistan. They (tribes) have been fighting each other for centuries. They only seem to get along when they can unite against a common enemy (Russians in the 80's and unfortunately the US now.). I'm not defending Obama's broken policies and programs, just stating what I think is fact. We were going to have to get out of there sometime. What I do think was a dumb move by Obama was announcing that we were leaving in 2012, which just emboldens the Taliban and AlQueda. I guess leaving Afganistan is like leaving the Moon for the last Apollo mission. Eventually, we'll be back......
DC Tom Posted October 19, 2010 Posted October 19, 2010 If Afghanistan was the "good war" why is Obama considering letting it revert to pre 9/11? http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Troops-chafe-at-restrictive-rules-of-engagement_-talks-with-Taliban-1226055-105202284.html Biggest mistake Clinton made during his administration was disengaging from political dialog with the Taleban. Fundamentally, the Taleban is little more than another Afghani tribe/sect. The REAL problem is that they allied themselves with al Qaeda (again, no thanks to Clinton's limp-wristed foreign policy). As long as they forswear that alliance, I have little problem with them.
3rdnlng Posted October 19, 2010 Author Posted October 19, 2010 Biggest mistake Clinton made during his administration was disengaging from political dialog with the Taleban. Fundamentally, the Taleban is little more than another Afghani tribe/sect. The REAL problem is that they allied themselves with al Qaeda (again, no thanks to Clinton's limp-wristed foreign policy). As long as they forswear that alliance, I have little problem with them. Yes, they allied themselves with them before. They obviously didn't see anything wrong with terrorist camps and training grounds. Why would they change now? Aside from how they treat women, I wouldn't care if they got back in the fold as long as they didn't harbor Al Qaeda.
DC Tom Posted October 19, 2010 Posted October 19, 2010 Yes, they allied themselves with them before. They obviously didn't see anything wrong with terrorist camps and training grounds. Why would they change now? Didn't say they would change, just said that's the only real problem I have with them. Aside from how they treat women, I wouldn't care if they got back in the fold as long as they didn't harbor Al Qaeda. Ah, yes, the old "aside from how they treat women" caveat. The same one Clinton used to break off all diplomatic relations with them, from which is a direct line to 9/11. Good job repeating the mistakes of your Democratic forefathers.
3rdnlng Posted October 19, 2010 Author Posted October 19, 2010 Didn't say they would change, just said that's the only real problem I have with them. Ah, yes, the old "aside from how they treat women" caveat. The same one Clinton used to break off all diplomatic relations with them, from which is a direct line to 9/11. Good job repeating the mistakes of your Democratic forefathers. I did not say that we should repeat Clinton's mistakes. All I said was I had a problem with how they treat women. Do you like the way they treat women?
DC Tom Posted October 19, 2010 Posted October 19, 2010 I did not say that we should repeat Clinton's mistakes. All I said was I had a problem with how they treat women. Do you like the way they treat women? I don't think it should be particularly relevant to foreign policy...which I thought was what this thread was about.
3rdnlng Posted October 19, 2010 Author Posted October 19, 2010 I don't think it should be particularly relevant to foreign policy...which I thought was what this thread was about. I think we are saying the same thing pretty much. That Sharia Law is pretty bad for women. http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_272635498.shtml
Nanker Posted October 19, 2010 Posted October 19, 2010 We should declare victory and announce our plans to withdraw. Then, when the scum comes out from hiding - blast them.
BB27 Posted October 19, 2010 Posted October 19, 2010 We should declare victory and announce our plans to withdraw. Then, when the scum comes out from hiding - blast them. I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure......
Nanker Posted October 20, 2010 Posted October 20, 2010 I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure...... That's not at all necessary. Simply put earwigs in their turbans.
Britbillsfan Posted October 22, 2010 Posted October 22, 2010 (edited) At some point peace will have to be made. This means talking to people, many of whom will be pretty repugnant. If you can get rid of the most extreme and worst of the worst you can then think about ending the war. On your terms, more or less. We talked to the PIRA for a long time before peace finally came. Sooner or later the same will happen to Afghanistan. Of course Al Qaeda should always remain in the crosshairs. No real way to talk to those !@#$s. Edited October 22, 2010 by Britbillsfan
Recommended Posts