The point here is that if you are at war, (popular or not) you fight to win. If you tell the enemy when you are leaving , the enemy will just wait you out and then once you are gone, they will take over. It is just plain STUPID to tip your hand. We have the muscle, so let the military do their job.
mrblue... the military has had nine years to "do their job" in Afghanistan yet they aren't much closer to victory & they haven't even nabbed Bin Laden. In any other "job" they'd be fired by now.
The above comments are interesting, but other observations might be made as well. Replacement of Gen McChrystal with Gen Petraeus (remember "Betrayus"?) sounds like a slap in the face to the "doves". The Prez is the C in C of the armed forces; this was done from the git-go (1789) so only a civilian had total control. Congress would declare war, the Prez would prosecute it with the aid of his miltary leaders. It never was necessary for a Prez to have a "military" background.
On the other hand, look at WWII. Hitler who arrogated to himself the title of Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces in 194i, was despite 4 years in the trenches as a lance/corporal, a maker of bone-headed decisions that benefitted our Allied cause.
Concerning McChrystal: if it was a case of insubordination to the CinC, then yes! He had to go. If it was a case of an honest difference of opinion between them, there should have been some discussion and clarification. If no agreement was reached, then, again, McChrystal had to go.
Finally, our armed forces are fighting under different rules. Since the Viet Nam War, a lot of issues such as collateral damage and war crimes are in play. Prior to Viet Nam, once the military was committed, whatever full force was deemed needed, was applied. Now we must be more sensitive to the indigenous people and surrounding situations. Today's military is doing an outstanding job under difficult conditions. My prayers go with Petraeus, that he gets the job done with the least loss of American lives. But was this the right move? We shall see what we shall see.
USEless1....The Clinton's in no way claimed that Saddam had "weapons of mass destruction".
That was a lie told by the Bush administration along with him claiming that Iraq was involved with 9/11 and that Iraq was an "imminent threat to America".
The only role congress played in invading Iraq was believing Bush's lies. Don't try to rewrite history. Everyone remembers how we went into Iraq.
USEless1.....Obama's birth certificate was produced two years ago and that proof has been posted on this board many times.
None of you teabaggers have ever posted any proof that he was not born in America. All you ever do is tell the same lie over and over again even though everyone, even you knows it's a lie.
Keep it up. You show everyone what you teabaggers are all about.
USEless1....The link below is his birth certificate. You can click on any of the photo's for an enlarged image. The report explains how the certificate was obtained.
You claim it's a fraud. Post the proof that it's a fraud, that should be easy enough unless you just made it up, right?
Keep on teabaggin!
It's hard to believe we are still on the birth certificate thing?? It gets tiresome receiving more hot air about what's wrong with the present administration, and name calling, it makes for good sound bytes, but there are no real policy ideas coming from these people, they just like to complain
hope4thevalley you must be living in lefto la la land if you think maybe he wasn't forced to resign. "Chaney put us there to get the oil". Why haven't we got it all these years later? Our only hope is to get rid of this lieing mobster who is not capable of running a service station let alone a country. Look at his results, don't only listen to what he says. Talkers talk and doers do. The man is a talker. We have no hope with him running the country unless you consider high unemployment, high taxes, higher deficits, no economic improvement and a gestapo attitude a form of hope.
I have followed these blogs for quite some time...primarily for the entertainment. It is amazing that some one could post almost 2,000 times and only makes sense in approximately 5 or 6 of those submissions.
Lets face it, we're in Afghanistan and Iraq to collect on foreign investments such as crude oil and the newly found gem mines worth approx $2 trillion. I would rather see our country using these resources than Russia, who invaded Afghanistan and Iraq decades ago, or see these middle east countries attain enough cash to start building nukes. It's tragic the amount of lives lost and what it costs to be in this war, but if we want to secure ourselves as a world-power and leader, we must protect our borders, and establish a military presence in the middle of the Eastern Hemisphere.
Valleys_Voice.....You stated: "but if we want to secure ourselves as a world-power and leader, we must protect our borders, and establish a military presence in the middle of the Eastern Hemisphere."
In the same sentence you call for the securing of our borders and the invasion of other countries by our military so we can make their resources our own?
I'm all for securing our borders but invading other countries because "they have it and we want it" is much worse than sneaking into the US to pick fruit.
We were and still are being deliberately attacked by terrorists who are housed and trained in Afghanistan and Iraq. It's our job to secure ourselves, and why wait for them to come to us? We have invaded those countries to fight them at the forefront, where it all begins. It's not just about getting the resources, although I think that is a large part of why we have invaded foreign countries now and in the past. But in order to protect ourselves at home, we decided as a nation to bring the fight to them and I back our government 100% even if I don't necessarily agree with the Pres and some top notch officials.
Valleys_Voice....Have you ever considered that there are terrorists and people in other countries that would rise up against us because of our history of invading their countries so we can take their resources for our own?
I don't understand how you can so matter of fact feel it's OK for our military to invade other countries because we want their resources.
I'm not saying it's okay to invade foreign countries, but what can I do about it? Am I going to march down to D.C. and tell Obama and the admins to pull out because Valleys_Voice says to? I'm just saying I back our government up, no matter who is in charge and what desicion they make, as long as we are being benefited. It just so happens in this war on terrorism, our benefit would be capitalization on their oil and gem supply, as well as a launching pad for WW3.
Forgotten your password?