-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I think Fern is correct, in 2002 we wanted blood and bomb videos on TV as 9/11 was still fresh. The nation building excuse, err mission came later.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok daymat and Fern, go ahead and assert, the USA and Nato accomplished anything by getting out our can of whoopse ass after 911?
If it lead to no improvement in 2002-3, why do you assert getting out in 2003 would be better than getting out in 2012? If it was stupid and non productive in 2002, why should such a turd later age into fine vintage wine that is spoiled?
Those are the questions Fern and daymat fail to answer? If it was stupid in 2002, why do you assert it was not stupid then? Does the cat got your tongue on that point?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok daymat and Fern, go ahead and assert, the USA and Nato accomplished anything by getting out our can of whoopse ass after 911?
If it lead to no improvement in 2002-3, why do you assert getting out in 2003 would be better than getting out in 2012? If it was stupid and non productive in 2002, why should such a turd later age into fine vintage wine that is spoiled?
Those are the questions Fern and daymat fail to answer? If it was stupid in 2002, why do you assert it was not stupid then? Does the cat got your tongue on that point?
I have always said, when the host nation tells us they want us to leave, we should leave.
Fern asks, "Are you now trying to argue that we shouldn't have invaded Afghanistan to go after AQ and the Taliban after it was determined they were behind 911?
If so, go ahead and do so."
Ok Fern I will do so? Because the result proved that it was stupid as we in the USA failed to realize what is Afghanistan and why Afghanistan was the deep do do it was in since basically 1937, the last time Afghanistan had a stable and popular government.
As the USA again made the same mistake it always does, looking at the then government of a given political entity rather than looking at the aspirations of the Afghan people.
As the USA only looked at the rat finks among the Afghan people, corrupt war lords and drug dealers v a popular homegrown reformist movement called the Taliban after 911. That together could not constitute more rat finks than a half a million out of a 31 million Afghan civilian population.
But no no no, the USA was so stupid as to think, that those 30.5 million Afghan population was irrelevant, and instead we should side with the 250, 000 strong set of Afghan thugs instead. And now pinheads like Leon Pinetta and Fern wonder why we failed.
Siding with thugs never works.
Yes. In fact, I thought back then we got assurances that we were NOT going to "nation build".
Fern
Ohhh what a clever spin term for DEFEATED!
no cheap copper and look out! china gets a oil pipe thru the middle of Afghanistan......Money talks, bullshit walks
WTC prices will ramp up another 30% bye bye world subsidizing the usa's oil consumption....
HAHHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHAHA!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Yay, we fucked and abandoned yet another country. This is what, like #12 in the last 60 years?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At least Fern has an answer, but in MHO not a very good one. So we got out our can of US whoope ass, chased the Taliban out of Afghanistan, and brought back the very thugs and drug traffickers that made the Taliban a better choice for the Afghan people than the very turds Nato allied with. If Fern is right, why did not Nato get the hell out in 2003 saying mission Afghan anarchy accomplished? As we won the GWB war on terrorism by creating more terrorists than we had before.
Oh Magoo Fern, we did it again.
Are you now trying to argue that we shouldn't have invaded Afghanistan to go after AQ and the Taliban after it was determined they were behind 911?
In recent developments, Karzai is really taking rhetoric off the deep end, and sadly, IMHO, Obama now greatly over estimates our military position in Afghanistan. As Obama remains seeming clueless, not only on the Afghan side of the border, but on the Pakistani side as well.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/w...reasingly-hostile-karzai.html?ref=global-home
I would not be surprised to see Karazai take his case to the UN and demand an immediate exit of Nato troops. I can't believe Obama pretends recent Afghan incidents will not force the USA out much sooner than he plans.
As Karzai points out these incidents are not new, and its more like the 500'th incident, and a few more such incidents are surly going to be forthcoming to really guild the lily. Because, IMHO, the USA may soon suffer a foreign policy disaster without a better job of damage control.
I agree! Pack up and leave and cut off all funding. Dont leave anything behind for them to steal. Afghanistan is the war that the democrats wanted to fight. It is all O'Bammah's war.
Is you stupid? O-Bammah didn't send our troops there in the first place. O'Bammah didn't lose site of the original mission there and focus instead on Iraq...a country that, while it wasn't complying 100% with the UN mandates, was still in 1000% better shape than it is now...
Nope, If GWB would have stayed focused on Afghanistan...gone in, gotten Osama Bin Forgotten, mopped up the Taliban resistance that was fairly minor at the time...and left without trying to rebuild the country into a democratic nation, (something that doesn't seem to work well in that region) then none of the bullshit that's gone on in the past several years would have happened.
While O'Bammah is to blame for us remaining in Afghanistan, the REAL blame for our failure there rests solely and firmly on the shoulders of George W. Bush...the president who fucked that mission in the ass.
Is you stupid? O-Bammah didn't send our troops there in the first place. O'Bammah didn't lose site of the original mission there and focus instead on Iraq...a country that, while it wasn't complying 100% with the UN mandates, was still in 1000% better shape than it is now...
Nope, If GWB would have stayed focused on Afghanistan...gone in, gotten Osama Bin Forgotten, mopped up the Taliban resistance that was fairly minor at the time...and left without trying to rebuild the country into a democratic nation, (something that doesn't seem to work well in that region) then none of the bullshit that's gone on in the past several years would have happened.
While O'Bammah is to blame for us remaining in Afghanistan, the REAL blame for our failure there rests solely and firmly on the shoulders of George W. Bush...the president who fucked that mission in the ass.
Thats completely true, but we need to get off the pot and should have long ago.
"Afghanistan, the place where nations go to die.... "
There does seem to be some truth to that statement.