Democrats warn if Obama sends more troops , they will add a new tax

[Robor]

Update from Yahoo! News

From the story...

"I feel very confident that when the American people hear a clear rationale for what we're doing there and how we intend to achieve our goals, that they will be supportive,"

Given the modern political climate in this country I'm guessing support will be mixed. Hard core D's will support it because it's a campaign promise Obama plans to keep and the GOP will find something wrong because that's what they do now.

 

[waggy]

I dont think the military is large enough to keep fighting more wars. This concept of a leaner meaner military is not working that well. Remember at one time we had 300,000 troops in Iraq. Who thinks we will have enough troops to manage Iraq and Afghanistan? We have already stretched to the limit the national guard and reserves. Either increase the size of the military or pull out of Iraq. Only way to manage this is pull out of Iraq or pull all of our troops out. The only other way would be to increase the size of the military. This might be a way to actually create jobs.

not to mention they are keeping them there past the time they should. I agree we do not have the military to fight 2 wars.

though we never should have went to Iraq and sadly we fucked up Afghanastan beyond repair.

 

[Lemon law]

There is another downside to the get the hell out of Afghanistan position.

Namely will the international community allow the US to pursue our own diplomatic necessities ever again if we simply walk away from a mess we made worse.

Certainly the GWB little boy who cried wolf about WMD in Iraq does not help, and the UN was refusing permission for the continuation of the US dominated Iraqi occupation unless GWB agreed to turn over control of Iraq to the designated Iraqi government.

A similar UN imposed deadline is likely for Afghanistan, even though its widely assumed that the designated Afghan civilian government is hopelessly corrupt and cannot govern. And in fact it was similar corruption left over from the Russian withdrawal that paved the way for the rise of the Taliban. Meanwhile the Nato lead occupation has seriously destabilized Pakistan, and any Nato withdrawal will likely lead to a Taliban led take over of the tribal areas of Pakistan.

In short, GWB horribly damaged international trust in the USA, especially in the area of human rights, Obama has done much to rehabilitate that trust, and an Obama led withdrawal from Afghanistan would undue much of that rehabilitation. And do lasting damage to the USA long after Obama leaves office.

And that old pottery barn rule still applies regardless if we like it or not, we broke it and now we bought it. And Afghanistan is sure not going to be easy to fix at this late date. But given we have been doing nearly everything wrong since the word go,
I happen to think its possible and not that expensive to fix Afghanistan once Nato starts doing the right things.

On previous threads I have outlined what we were doing wrong, and what we have to do now to fix it, but it still boils down to winning the hearts and minds of the Afghan people.

 

[Robor]

There is another downside to the get the hell out of Afghanistan position.

Namely will the international community allow the US to pursue our own diplomatic necessities ever again if we simply walk away from a mess we made worse.

Certainly the GWB little boy who cried wolf about WMD in Iraq does not help, and the UN was refusing permission for the continuation of the US dominated Iraqi occupation unless GWB agreed to turn over control of Iraq to the designated Iraqi government.

A similar UN imposed deadline is likely for Afghanistan, even though its widely assumed that the designated Afghan civilian government is hopelessly corrupt and cannot govern. And in fact it was similar corruption left over from the Russian withdrawal that paved the way for the rise of the Taliban. Meanwhile the Nato lead occupation has seriously destabilized Pakistan, and any Nato withdrawal will likely lead to a Taliban led take over of the tribal areas of Pakistan.

In short, GWB horribly damaged international trust in the USA, especially in the area of human rights, Obama has done much to rehabilitate that trust, and an Obama led withdrawal from Afghanistan would undue much of that rehabilitation. And do lasting damage to the USA long after Obama leaves office.

And that old pottery barn rule still applies regardless if we like it or not, we broke it and now we bought it. And Afghanistan is sure not going to be easy to fix at this late date. But given we have been doing nearly everything wrong since the word go,
I happen to think its possible and not that expensive to fix Afghanistan once Nato starts doing the right things.

On previous threads I have outlined what we were doing wrong, and what we have to do now to fix it, but it still boils down to winning the hearts and minds of the Afghan people.

Hmmm... Where have I heard about that before?

 

[Lemon law]

I have to ask Robor what he means and what he advocates after saying, " Hmmm... Where have I heard about that before? "

After all, its not hard to figure out the ways to make the lives of the Afghan people better and it is not hard to figure out why Nato made their lives much worse.

People are people the world around, all we have to do is look at it the problems from their perspective.

Even though its somewhat assumed that Iraq is on the mend, the almost universal man on the street consensus is that their lives were better under Saddam Hussein than they are now.

 

[Lemon law]

the submit button is too sensative.

 

[Robor]

I have to ask Robor what he means and what he advocates after saying, " Hmmm... Where have I heard about that before? "

After all, its not hard to figure out the ways to make the lives of the Afghan people better and it is not hard to figure out why Nato made their lives much worse.

People are people the world around, all we have to do is look at it the problems from their perspective.

Even though its somewhat assumed that Iraq is on the mend, the almost universal man on the street consensus is that their lives were better under Saddam Hussein than they are now.

If we didn't win the hearts and minds in Iraq what makes us think we can do it in Afghanistan?

 

[Lemon law]

If we didn't win the hearts and minds in Iraq what makes us think we can do it in Afghanistan?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly the wrong statement Robor!!!!!!!!!!!!!

While I agree we screwed up in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq, and it cost us as a result, what happened to learning how to win hearts and minds and get a win instead?

We had to hit the ground running with a correct strategy, instead we hit the ground crawling with the wrong strategy.

We reap what we sow, its not hard to understand at all.

 

[xj0hnx]

Even though its somewhat assumed that Iraq is on the mend, the almost universal man on the street consensus is that their lives were better under Saddam Hussein than they are now.

Been conversing with a lot of Iraqis have you?

 

[JSt0rm]

Here is my position. I don't give a damn who started it and neither should anyone else.

really? So we shouldn't learn from the past to protect our future? He's taking some time to think about the problem instead of going with his "gut".

Back to work for me... :\

 

[Pneumothorax]

If we didn't win the hearts and minds in Iraq what makes us think we can do it in Afghanistan?

Yup, it's much harder. It will take many GENERATIONS to bring a willingly ignorant group of people into the modern world. Not to mention that there is no money/livelihood from that worthless place other than opium.

 

[Zebo]

Democrats warn if Obama sends more troops , they will add a new tax
------------
About 8 years to late. Better late than never I guess but maybe not so in this case as many lightly defended outposts were overran because TPTB wanted thier tax cuts and war.

 

[Zebo]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly the wrong statement Robor!!!!!!!!!!!!!

While I agree we screwed up in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq, and it cost us as a result, what happened to learning how to win hearts and minds and get a win instead?

We had to hit the ground running with a correct strategy, instead we hit the ground crawling with the wrong strategy.

We reap what we sow, its not hard to understand at all.

Hearts and minds? Who gives a fuck? Did we worry about winning hearts and minds of Germans or Japanese? Or Sherman worry about the hearts of the southerners when scorch earthing across the South? I never heard, not once Roosevelt wanting to win hearts and minds. No he talked about killing them until they unconditionally surrendered. No war has been won by jaw jaw or bribing people not to attack you like they are doing in the surge. Because once the infidel money has gone dry they'll go straight back to attacking with even increased incentive now as they know you're dumb enough to pay them not to.
Warfare, and the middle east especially, its about who carries the biggest stick, not who can engage in the most dialog or bribery. Funny thing is, and you cant see it, is we have been trying to win hearts and minds since Korea and have not won a war since.

 

[Lemon law]

Been conversing with a lot of Iraqis have you?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a matter of fact, no, I just read and research issues. And yes polling data is available in Iraq and I am just reporting to you what those polls reported.

If you do not believe me, do your own research. If you do the research honestly, you will get the same results in poll after poll after poll.

You can find the same on network TV also, its just more rare to find them reporting on the subject.

 

[Lemon law]

Yup, it's much harder. It will take many GENERATIONS to bring a willingly ignorant group of people into the modern world. Not to mention that there is no money/livelihood from that worthless place other than opium.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolute crap of an assumption. The bulk of Pakistan in the non tribal areas of Pakistan have already gone for democracy and modern values. So by in large has Iran, they gave up burkas long ago, and the Taliban can't sell their program in those areas.

Blaming primitive conditions is just a cop out, Nato loses because all they brought is corruption and anarchy in their wake.

 

[Elias824]

Hey, let's start a 5% tax for the war, then steal it to hide the cost of the upcoming cost shifting legislation. Then we pull everyone out of Afghanistan, and not repeal the tax. Sounds like a sure fire DC plan to me.

This is exactly how we ended up with income tax, aka paying for the civil war.

 

[lokiju]

Obey's opposition to funding a troop increase in Afghanistan without a new tax would pose a significant problem for Obama if he decides to send more troops (a decision the White House says the President could make as early as November 30).

That just kills me.

As early as?

 

[EagleKeeper]

Obey's opposition to funding a troop increase in Afghanistan without a new tax would pose a significant problem for Obama if he decides to send more troops (a decision the White House says the President could make as early as November 30).

That just kills me.

As early as?

You can not make an important political announcement over a holiday.

People would not be paying attention and the opposition would be able to chew it up into pieces before the masses were brainwashed.

The important ones that need to be ignored/covererd up are anounced after COB the day before a holdiay (preferably a 3 or 4 day weekend type).

 

[Lemon law]

Zebo show his confusion with, " Hearts and minds? Who gives a fuck? Did we worry about winning hearts and minds of Germans or Japanese? Or Sherman worry about the hearts of the southerners when scorch earthing across the South? I never heard, not once Roosevelt wanting to win hearts and minds. No he talked about killing them until they unconditionally surrendered."

And Zebo would be absolutely correct if this was still a war, but the war in Afghanistan is long over and the war in Iraq was won one a week.

The point being, both Afghanistan and Iraq are military occupations, and wars and military occupations are two totally separate things.

After all, what is the point of winning the war if you do not win the peace?

Perhaps most graphically shown in Afghanistan, because if we leave now, we will leave Afghanistan in basically the same shape as we found it, except Taliban prestige will be enhanced, US prestige will take a huge hit, and Pakistan will be less stable.

 

[xj0hnx]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a matter of fact, no, I just read and research issues. And yes polling data is available in Iraq and I am just reporting to you what those polls reported.

If you do not believe me, do your own research. If you do the research honestly, you will get the same results in poll after poll after poll.

You can find the same on network TV also, its just more rare to find them reporting on the subject.

I don't have to read polls I was there. I've talked to a few iraqis that thought things were better under Saddam, but it was admittedly because they didn't like the war going on in their country, but the majority of people we worked with and talked to were overwhelmingly happy that he is gone. Polls without data can't be trusted, in this, or any other case. Depending on what area you are polling in the religious landscape can have dramatic sway over the results, as well as questions asked. If you want to trust polls go ahead, I am continuing to trust what I saw.

 

[halik]

I vote get out. Nobody has ever won in Afghanistan, we wont be the first I think.

I'm thinking the same, Russians spent 20 years and who knows how much in that shithole.

 

[spidey07]

I heard on the news the proposal is 1% tax on families making under 150K. It goes up from there.

I thought there would be no tax increase on those making under 250K? Obama lies, taxes rised.

 

[Zargon]

You can not make an important political announcement over a holiday.

People would not be paying attention and the opposition would be able to chew it up into pieces before the masses were brainwashed.

The important ones that need to be ignored/covererd up are anounced after COB the day before a holdiay (preferably a 3 or 4 day weekend type).

sure you can!

he'll just take over all the major networks for a few hours, AGAIN.

 

[Ausm]

Translation: But Bush! Obama is trying hard. GWB! ARGGHHHH!! WARGARBRL!!!!!

Fact: More troops have died this year under Obama's 'plan' and 'leadership' than any other year under Bush. If thats what you mean by 'moving foward' and 'infinitely superior' then I guess we are speaking a different language.

~630 U.S. soldiers died under Bush's command in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2008. ~297 U.S. soldiers have died under Obama's 'wait wait wait wait wait wait' policy and there is still over a month to go in the year. Obama needs to make a god damned decision before more of our troops DIE under HIS command which has been MISERABLE.

Bush would have been even more ahead if he wouldn't have pissed away American soldier's lives in Iraq.

 

[Ausm]

I heard on the news the proposal is 1% tax on families making under 150K. It goes up from there.

I thought there would be no tax increase on those making under 250K? Obama lies, taxes rised.

That was with the health legislation you fucking moron. You have to give Obama props at least he includes the cost of the wars in the budget unlike Bush did and hoped the cost of it would "go away".