Rep. Grayson (D-FLA): "End the war now!"

[mhgaffney]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ka55UikRrU&feature

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Grayson is my new hero.

Loved his remarks about the rightards and the Nobel Peace Prize.

[Meck77]

Barrack Bush doesn't care what Americans think about the war.

[cutthemdown]

Barry Bush getting it done.

[Dukes]

Barry Bush, that has a good ring to it.

[Meck77]

It simply amazes me how quiet the anti war crowd here has become.

[Dukes]

Originally Posted by Meck77

It simply amazes me how quiet the anti war crowd here has become.

They can only claim that Obama's admin has been infiltrated by the US military industrialized complex, or whatever the wackos call it.

Oh, and Obama's a warmonger.

[Requiem]

Originally Posted by Meck77

It simply amazes me how quiet the anti war crowd here has become.

I'm not so sure why that would be the case. Most people who voted for Obama last year should have actually known he was serious about Afghanistan from the get go. It is too bad his policy in that area is absolute ****. Some things we can learn from history. The country isn't known as the graveyard of empires by chance. It is an bottomless pit that will take forever and more to get out of. We need to stop the war(s) now.

[Bronx33]

Originally Posted by Meck77

It simply amazes me how quiet the anti war crowd here has become.

They are hypocrites.

[Bronx33]

Originally Posted by Requiem

I'm not so sure why that would be the case. Most people who voted for Obama last year should have actually known he was serious about Afghanistan from the graveyard. It is too bad his policy in that area is absolute ****. Some things we can learn from history. The country isn't known as the graveyard of empires by chance.

Thats what you think and heres what the troops ( that are there) think, also the only thing holding back a win in afganistan is the ROE and obama unwillingness to do this right to keep his constituants happy (politics again keep american troops from winning) obama don't want to win anyways.

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=87547

[orinjkrush]

Originally Posted by Meck77

It simply amazes me how quiet the anti war crowd here has become.

QFT. Its amazing how inured many, many people have become to everything.

we should have burned down wall street.

the only protesters out there are the tea baggers and the illegals.

[Requiem]

Originally Posted by Bronx33

Thats what you think and heres what the troops ( that are there) think, also the only thing holding back a win in afganistan is the ROE and obama unwillingness to do this right to keep his constituants happy (politics again keep american troops from winning) obama don't want to win anyways.

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=87547

There are a lot of things that are making success in Afghanistan difficult. Hundreds of years of cross-cultural conflicts, differences and a vast, hectic geography is one of them. The United States Military and all encompassing factors in this situation are not prepared well enough to deal with the complicated matters at hand.

This isn't a battle that can be won with the might of our tremendous men and women who serve our country. It is deeper than that. Us not understanding that deepness is what caused us to lose Vietnam, mess up in Iraq I and II and is destined to lead us to failure in Afghanistan.

In my eyes, this is a situation that is not winnable. As much as I'd love it to be. As much as I'd love to get rid of the Talqaeda grasp on that region. I'm probably a realist in that regard, and I just do not see any good out of increased troop involvement in that area.

And thank you for the link. I have a family member and several friends who have been in the area and each have their unique stories and thoughts on the matter. I've come to gather from most, that the reality of the situation there is much harsher than we want to face.

Under Bush, Afghanistan was a focal point for a short while, which went by the wayside as soon as Iraq became #1. Years later, after extreme amount of changes, America wants to go back in under Obama with more troops in order to reduce terrorist control and yada, yada.

Obama's foreign policy for Afghanistan sucks, and is an extension (in many ways) of old Bush doctrine that helped make Afghanistan a worse hotzone than it was previously. There are few things (basic points) I can agree with.

The U.S. and it's allies going back there now is like an immigrant going back to their home country after being away from it for several years. You use all you can inside to adapt to the new changing world around you, yet forget that the same is happening back home. This leaves one without a sense of identity.

That is exactly what Afghanistan is. A nation-state with a lack of identity. It has none of its own. It has been the bastard child of played politics by the British, Russians and now Americans. We have no reason to be involved in a mess that was started by all the wrong intentions by others. We saw how things ended up for the other two mentioned above. The more things change, the more they stay the same -- and Afghanistan being a Graveyard to Empires is certainly one of them.

That much, I know, is inescapable.

[Bronx33]

Originally Posted by Requiem

There are a lot of things that are making success in Afghanistan difficult. Hundreds of years of cross-cultural conflicts, differences and a vast, hectic geography is one of them. The United States Military and all encompassing factors in this situation are not prepared well enough to deal with the complicated matters at hand.

This isn't a battle that can be won with the might of our tremendous men and women who serve our country. It is deeper than that. Us not understanding that deepness is what caused us to lose Vietnam, mess up in Iraq I and II and is destined to lead us to failure in Afghanistan.

In my eyes, this is a situation that is not winnable. As much as I'd love it to be. As much as I'd love to get rid of the Talqaeda grasp on that region. I'm probably a realist in that regard, and I just do not see any good out of increased troop involvement in that area.

And thank you for the link. I have a family member and several friends who have been in the area and each have their unique stories and thoughts on the matter. I've come to gather from most, that the reality of the situation there is much harsher than we want to face.

Under Bush, Afghanistan was a focal point for a short while, which went by the wayside as soon as Iraq became #1. Years later, after extreme amount of changes, America wants to go back in under Obama with more troops in order to reduce terrorist control and yada, yada.

Obama's foreign policy for Afghanistan sucks, and is an extension (in many ways) of old Bush doctrine that helped make Afghanistan a worse hotzone than it was previously. There are few things (basic points) I can agree with.

The U.S. and it's allies going back there now is like an immigrant going back to their home country after being away from it for several years. You use all you can inside to adapt to the new changing world around you, yet forget that the same is happening back home. This leaves one without a sense of identity.

That is exactly what Afghanistan is. A nation-state with a lack of identity. It has none of its own. It has been the bastard child of played politics by the British, Russians and now Americans. We have no reason to be involved in a mess that was started by all the wrong intentions by others. We saw how things ended up for the other two mentioned above. The more things change, the more they stay the same -- and Afghanistan being a Graveyard to Empires is certainly one of them.

That much, I know, is inescapable.

You know what we will probably end up leaving with our tail between our legs obama decision to send more troops ( no enough IMO) was to keep two sides happy. Now you combine that with goverment restrictions and ROE we will end up getting more americans killed in the process ( for nothing) the whole idea in the first place was to get rid of terrorists and the potential buliding of a terrorist state.

If obama unleashed the full might of the military and destroyed every ememy combatant in front of it the troops could be home in less than two years maybe less but as it sits nows obama is banking on dragging this out so it gets unpopular here at home ( then he pulls em out) and says "look i tried" and it goe down in history as a fail just like vietnam which was lost by politics.

[sisterhellfyre]

Originally Posted by orinjkrush

QFT. Its amazing how inured many, many people have become to everything.

Not inured, at least not for me. I'm more hovering between "waiting to see what happens" and "disillusioned / lied to / betrayed."

I didn't vote for Obama to see the war in Afghanistan escalated.

I didn't vote for Obama so I could be, along with millions of other Americans, on the receiving end of some sh##-stick so-called "individual mandate" for health insurance that is only going to cost us even more money -- while leaving the corporate health industry in place and essentially unchanged in their all-out drive for profit at our expense.

I didn't vote for Obama to see the Democratic party, which he heads, abandon their mandates for change first to a Gang of Six, including three Republicons, and then sell our collective souls down the river to Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson, and Mary Landrieu.

I didn't vote for Obama to see him sit back and play pattycakes with the JCS about repealing "Don't ask, don't tell."

I didn't vote for Obama to see him kowtow to the Wall Street mandarins by recycling more of the same old talking heads (Geithner, Bernanke, Summers) that helped create all the financial system problems in the first place. And that's not even touching on the ground-zero disaster that his program for foreclosure relief has turned into.

I didn't vote for Obama to continue -- and refine, and extend! -- the Shrub's half-baked policies on indefinite detention. And I definitely didn't vote for Obama to defend what the Shrub's cronies and hired guns did while the inmates ran the asylum!

There's more, but I think you begin to get the idea. Right now it looks like more of the same old slow-motion trainwreck of the last 30 years. That's what led to my comment in another thread that I'm tired of voting for the lesser of two evils (because it just sustains the system that keeps presenting us with evils from which to choose).

[Tombstone RJ]

Originally Posted by Requiem

There are a lot of things that are making success in Afghanistan difficult. Hundreds of years of cross-cultural conflicts, differences and a vast, hectic geography is one of them. The United States Military and all encompassing factors in this situation are not prepared well enough to deal with the complicated matters at hand.

This isn't a battle that can be won with the might of our tremendous men and women who serve our country. It is deeper than that. Us not understanding that deepness is what caused us to lose Vietnam, mess up in Iraq I and II and is destined to lead us to failure in Afghanistan.

In my eyes, this is a situation that is not winnable. As much as I'd love it to be. As much as I'd love to get rid of the Talqaeda grasp on that region. I'm probably a realist in that regard, and I just do not see any good out of increased troop involvement in that area.

And thank you for the link. I have a family member and several friends who have been in the area and each have their unique stories and thoughts on the matter. I've come to gather from most, that the reality of the situation there is much harsher than we want to face.

Under Bush, Afghanistan was a focal point for a short while, which went by the wayside as soon as Iraq became #1. Years later, after extreme amount of changes, America wants to go back in under Obama with more troops in order to reduce terrorist control and yada, yada.

Obama's foreign policy for Afghanistan sucks, and is an extension (in many ways) of old Bush doctrine that helped make Afghanistan a worse hotzone than it was previously. There are few things (basic points) I can agree with.

The U.S. and it's allies going back there now is like an immigrant going back to their home country after being away from it for several years. You use all you can inside to adapt to the new changing world around you, yet forget that the same is happening back home. This leaves one without a sense of identity.

That is exactly what Afghanistan is. A nation-state with a lack of identity. It has none of its own. It has been the bastard child of played politics by the British, Russians and now Americans. We have no reason to be involved in a mess that was started by all the wrong intentions by others. We saw how things ended up for the other two mentioned above. The more things change, the more they stay the same -- and Afghanistan being a Graveyard to Empires is certainly one of them.

That much, I know, is inescapable.

We can win Afghanistan, the problem is that Al Queda and the Taliban operate out of Pakistan.

Do you see the problem now?

I can't believe you and your family don't understand this simple concept. You claim to be involved in politics, etc., whatever.

The problem with Afghanistan is that it's a vacuum. It's a place where the terrain and the tribal conflicts make it extremely difficult to maintain any kind of coherent and long lasting government.

The only way to actually win in Afghanistan is to go in with overwhelming force and then dig in and yes, STAY!

Then you start to rebuild the infastructure. You start to build friendships with the locals. You start to understand their needs.

You have to be committed TO THE PEOPLE.

If you do this, then their is a chance that a stable government can be set up. There is a chance that extremists like Al Quaida and the taliban will decide to leave and go somewhere else.

But, you have to show that you are willing to be there for the long haul.

If you don't the terrorists will come right back in.

[Tombstone RJ]

And, don't even get me started on Vietnam. We lost Vietnam for several reasons, one being that Johnson tried to control the military out of the whitehouse. He dictated strategy and tactics and what the military could and could not do from the oval office, thus severly hamstringing the US military.

That was just ONE of the reasons we lost Vietnam.

[Requiem]

Tombstone, don't talk down to me as if I'm a child. I understand Pakistan and the ISI's two-faced role in AfPak and realize how it contributes to our inability to succeed overall. A majority of the things you outline, I agree with. Hence why I callde Obama's AfPak policya complete and utter failure elsewhere. We aren't going to be giving that committment for the long haul. The United States isn't good with nation building. We know this. Time to leave.

[mhgaffney]

Tombstone and Bronx,

Incredible that after 8 years of the Bush nightmare you still don't get it. These US imperial wars have nothing to do with stopping terrorism. It's a global chess match being played by the power elite -- to try to maintain the waning superpower status of the US by controlling the oil,. gas and mineral wealth of central Asia.

It never had anything to do with al Qaeda. If al Qaeda did not exist -- we would have had to create it.

In fact, that's exactly what we (the US power elite) did.

[mhgaffney]

The US GIs -- young men and women -- are being used as cannon fodder to shore up US imperial interests.

If you care about freedom then you should oppose the wars -- not support them.

[mhgaffney]

Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ

And, don't even get me started on Vietnam. We lost Vietnam for several reasons, one being that Johnson tried to control the military out of the whitehouse. He dictated strategy and tactics and what the military could and could not do from the oval office, thus severly hamstringing the US military.

That was just ONE of the reasons we lost Vietnam.

You are an idiot.

It was not LBJ who dictated the policy in the Viet Nam War. It was Wall Street's War from the get go. The CIA staged the war from the start. They murdered JFK to keep it going. They lied to LBJ at the time of the Gulf of Tonkin incident to expand it --

This was an imperial war -- fought by and for Wall Street -- just like the present war(s) in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan -- and now Yemen.

The Neo cons are part of this war cabal - as are the Zionists. Obama is just the pretty face they use to steer the masses.

[mhgaffney]

LBL withdrew and refused to run again in 1968 because her knew he had been nothing more than a tool of the real men who rule Amerikkka.

LBJ was shamed into retirement.

[mhgaffney]

The limited war policy in Vietnam reflected the new political/military reality of the Cold War.

The same reality explains the creation of the National Security State in 1947-48.

The US power elite understood that in a world of nukes -- it would be necessary to pursue the global chess match by other means. Hence the creation of the CIA -- and the world of covert ops and covert war.

The policy was vigorously pursued by John Foster Dulles and Allan Dulles -- on behalf of the US power elite -- I.e., Wall Street.

[Tombstone RJ]

Originally Posted by Requiem

Tombstone, don't talk down to me as if I'm a child. I understand Pakistan and the ISI's two-faced role in AfPak and realize how it contributes to our inability to succeed overall. A majority of the things you outline, I agree with. Hence why I callde Obama's AfPak policya complete and utter failure elsewhere. We aren't going to be giving that committment for the long haul. The United States isn't good with nation building. We know this. Time to leave.

What about Japan?

What about West Germany (and much of Europe after WWII)?

What about South Korea?

What about Iraq (I don't agree why we went, but we did and now we have to "see it through")?

Those are just off the top of my head. This is why I don't really understand you and "your family's" opinions. If you really know history, then you understand that nation building can be done and has been done in the past.

When the CIA left Afghanistan in the 1980s, they know they made a mistake that help initiate the current terrorist enclave.That is, if the US would have stayed in Afghanistan and helped the locals build some kind of ligitimate goverment, the terrorists would not have had a place to set up camp.

However, when the russians left, so did the CIA. There was no leadership aside from radical islam and look what happened.

Now we are there, and we have an opportunity to build a lasting and peaceful government!

If we pull out before the job is done, then we went there for nothing and our troops died in vein. I'm sure your comfortable with this.

[Requiem]

First and foremost -- the situations in Japan, Germany and Korea are a lot more different than what we have going on in Afghanistan. This is something I could discuss for hours on end, but don't have the time right now and don't need to. You are really trying to make things much more simpler than they really are to support the notion that we can effectively nation build.

You might be able to pass that off on someone who is naive, but not me. The way things were at the respective time, especially after WWII -- made nation building much easier for Japan and Germany. The scenario we are facing now in Afghanistan and elsewhere isn't even remotely close. The challenge we face there is a lot more difficult than rebuilding the nations of defeated enemies that were obliterated by nuclear war and ready to move on.

And you could spare me the history lesson on Afghanistan. I'm quite familiar.

"Opportunity" is the key word. The chances of that being realized are slim and none.

Our troops are already dying in vain. I'm not comfortable with that at all. I don't like us being over where we don't need to be. Fighting multiple wars, on multiple fronts, which have endangered America in more ways than one could imagine.

Take a look around that area of the world. How many democracies exist? If they do, why so? It is chaos. Apologies in advance if I don't buy archaic 50s and 60s neo-con doctrine preaching that democracy can be, and should be spread all around the world. Easier said than done. History indicates that. Where you bring up a few examples (erroneously at that) -- many more exist that show otherwise.

Time to snowblow. G'day.

[Tombstone RJ]

Originally Posted by Requiem

First and foremost -- the situations in Japan, Germany and Korea are a lot more different than what we have going on in Afghanistan. This is something I could discuss for hours on end, but don't have the time right now and don't need to. You are really trying to make things much more simpler than they really are to support the notion that we can effectively nation build.

You might be able to pass that off on someone who is naive, but not me. The way things were at the respective time, especially after WWII -- made nation building much easier for Japan and Germany. The scenario we are facing now in Afghanistan and elsewhere isn't even remotely close. The challenge we face there is a lot more difficult than rebuilding the nations of defeated enemies that were obliterated by nuclear war and ready to move on.

And you could spare me the history lesson on Afghanistan. I'm quite familiar.

"Opportunity" is the key word. The chances of that being realized are slim and none.

Our troops are already dying in vain. I'm not comfortable with that at all. I don't like us being over where we don't need to be. Fighting multiple wars, on multiple fronts, which have endangered America in more ways than one could imagine.

Take a look around that area of the world. How many democracies exist? If they do, why so? It is chaos. Apologies in advance if I don't buy archaic 50s and 60s neo-con doctrine preaching that democracy can be, and should be spread all around the world. Easier said than done. History indicates that. Where you bring up a few examples (erroneously at that) -- many more exist that show otherwise.

Time to snowblow. G'day.

You said it can't be done and I give you examples of success, and you say those don't count... uh ok.

What about Bosnia? That's a more recent one, how are you going to deny that?

Also, and don't mean to be preachy but I can't help myself because AGAIN, I'M CORRECT--I've said in previous posts that the War on Terrorism is going to look much like the COLD WAR.

Go ahead, do a search.

I'll say it again:

The War on Terrorism is going to be much like the Cold War in that it will take many, many years to win and that it will be won not through overwhelming strength, but though many smaller tactical clashes around the world, and be fought in smaller nations.

Hmmmm, sound familiar?

It's a war based on the worst of all things: religion (and I'm a Christian).

Its going to take many, many years to win. If we flee from Afghanistan than we set the precedent for all future islamic nations who embrace radical islam.