Let's all cheer for The Unsurge

[Stinky The Clown]

So ..... word from the Gray Lady is that we're gunna yank 10,000 troops from Afghanistan this year and the other 20,000 next year.

That gets us back, more or less, to where we were when Obama took office.

And for this we're supposed to be cheering?

Gimme a break.





The same questions still stand:

What are we doing there?
Why are we spending money we DESPERATELY need for other reasons?
Why are we propping up Karzai?
Osama is dead. Who are we hunting now?
Al Queda (or however it is spelled these days) is in other countries. Their leadership is in Pakistan.
What does a "win" look like?
When will be fully disengaged?
Why have we not raised taxes to pay for the debacle?






http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/23/world/asia/23prexy.html?_r=1&hp

[Doctor Hurt]

1. Cheer or don't cheer.

It's movement in the right direction.

[Hissyspit]

41. It's inertia.

[Dept of Beer]

2. Look at it like this.

A department store usually raises the price of an article a few weeks before placing it on sale for a few pennies off.

This is like the Obama Admin having an Afghanistan draw down on sale.

Everybody wins...except for those few brave American Heros that have to stay and protect our interests.

[Doctor Hurt]

3. That evil devious bastard Obama

I think he likes killing American soldiers. He probably has a dart board with a GI's face on it.

[Dept of Beer]

5. Osama's photo is no longer relevant so I'm not sure

what is on Obama's dart board or even if he has one.

[Doctor Hurt]

9. I wonder if he makes communion wafers from the blood of infants

[JoePhilly]

6. He also hates the poor and the middle class too .... or so I hear.

Do I need the sarcasm thing?

[arbusto_baboso]

38. Could you tell me exactly WHICH interests our troops are protecting?

'Cuz seriously, unless you were being sarcastic, I'd like to know WTF you're talking about.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

4. Yip. Pee.

[tabasco]

7. Just can't please some people.

Funny.

[Stinky The Clown]

10. I don't there's anything funny about this.

Not one damned thing.

So, no. This does not please me.

Nearly half a trillion bux gone over the last ten years.

2500 uniformed people dead. Countless dead Afghanis.







For what?

Had we started withdrawals when the supposed liberals took the white house, we'd be pretty much done now.

So no. Not one fucking thing is funny.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tabasco]

12. Yes, it's all Obama's fault for not getting us out immediately.

Good point.

ZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzz....... . . :boring:

[fascisthunter]

13. yeah... we were expecting ponies

didn't you get the memo... lol

[Cali_Democrat]

8. Actually there will STILL be twice as many troops in Afghanistan than when Obama took office

Even when considering the removal 10,000 troops this year and 20,000 troops next year.

[madinmaryland]

14. If I recall correctly, the general consensus among democrats was that we

had taken our eye off of Afganistan and had not put the manpower there to get bin Laden and Al Quada. Seven years of incompetent management of the war is what Obama was left with.

What is there to cheer about? NOTHING. But what is the alternative? Pull-out immediate, abandon the people of Afganistan, or just lob bombs in "General Discussion" and run away??

You tell me.

[Stinky The Clown]

18. This Democrat never thought that.

This Democrat always thought our plan to "get bin Laden" was wrong from the start. This Democrat always thought it was a police matter, not a military matter. This Democrat always thought we should have put more investigators and fewer riflemen into the area. This Democrat favored drones and cameras and CIA guys.

[madinmaryland]

24. Interesting the point you make. Obama actually did get bin Laden the exact

way you suggested. Investigators, cameras, intelligence guys. An undercover operation run in a country unfriendly to us (and run very well).

As I noted in my first post, we should have been doing this 10 years ago. Unfortunately, Obama had no say in the first seven years of that MESS.

[lunatica]

15. So he shouldn't withdraw any?

What does he have to do to show he's going in the right direction? Withdraw all the troops and leave the country wide open for Al Qaeda to move back in as soon as we leave?

The withdrawal may be too slow, but it's begun. That's a step in the right direction no matter how you look at it.

[tekisui]

16. It gets us back to double where we were when Obama took office.

We are no closer to a withdrawal. We'll be there at least over 3 years. Anyone who bought this shit is an idiot.

[Puregonzo1188]

17. Weren't there two surges?

Or did I imagine something?

[MissDeeds]

19. Excellent questions

K&R

[amborin]

20. we'll have 65,000 troops still, way more than 2008:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1343988

[Dappleganger]

21. Not even back that far, my friend.

Would it be that we were so lucky.

[sudopod]

22. If we ever had a chance to "win", whatever that means,

we threw it out when we unabashedly endorsed Karzai's stolen election. There is no way in hell that government will ever have the respect of the people.

Without strong institutions and decent pay for civil servants, corruption will never cease.
Without an end to corruption, the government will never stabilize.

This speech is a joke.

[LiberalAndProud]

23. okay

yay

[Javaman]

25. I wish people would get over this fantasy that we are going to leave.

Once you stop believing that BS, you will see the landscape for what it is.

And that is: they don't give a flying fuck what we think.

[KharmaTrain]

26. It Keeps The Unemployment Figure From Going Higher...

Imagine if all the troops were pulled out from Iraq & Afghanistan along with the mercenaries. They'd be hitting the streets here looking for work. Combine that with the loss of jobs at the defense contractors and other corporate welfare jobs tied to war and I'd bet that unemployment number would soar over 10%...and this administration (or any for that matter) wouldn't want that. War has turned into a major jobs program...

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

27. You don't need war to pay soldiers.

The Defense budget isn't bloated because of salaries.

[KharmaTrain]

28. Nope...But It Sure Pays A Lot Of Other Salaries...

A couple years ago I saw a report on a munitions factory in Louisiana that couldn't fill the orders fast enough...expanding from 200 to over 750 employees working round the clock and I'll bet there are many other companies and contractors who have similar situations. Many of these contractors are in clout heavy congressional districts and the defense money is what keeps these areas going. War means money back to their districts as well as big contributions to their campaigns. Soldiers are at the bottom of this food chain...

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

33. Yep!

"It Keeps The Unemployment Figure From Going Higher..."

Imagine if all the troops were pulled out from Iraq & Afghanistan along with the mercenaries. They'd be hitting the streets here looking for work.

Why would they be hitting the streets? Withdrawal doesn't mean expulsion. + Massive Straw


Combine that with the loss of jobs at the defense contractors and other corporate welfare jobs tied to war and I'd bet that unemployment number would soar over 10%...and this administration (or any for that matter) wouldn't want that. War has turned into a major jobs program...
When you discuss, you build bridges...when you flame, you put up walls.


:think:

What side do you come down on? More "Defense" contractor's jobs or more anything else jobs?

:shrug:
:think:

[KharmaTrain]

40. Beating Swords Into Ploughshares...

While I did support an incursion into Afghanistan to go after bin Laden, I was never in favor of becoming Karzai's police force or any army of occupation. I've never supported the wholescale meat grinders that we're supporting in the Arab world and the sooner we get our troops and money out of that snakepit the better.

I'm also for a large works program supplemented with tax incentives to small businesses in rebuilding this country's infrastructure and develop green and alternative energy. There's a lot of things I'd love to see but who the hell am I? I'm also a realist in the way things have been done and how the power and the gold always trumps the smart and humane. Sadly there's little will in this government for such incentives...war is a more lucrative and established "profit center" and "works program".

Cheers...

[Autumn]

29. I agree with that. Who says we don't have

a jobs program. Political expediency. Nothing more.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

34. "...along with the mercenaries."

[alsame]

30. Last night after the speech, I watched Col. Wilkerson on Countdown

and then flipped around a bit to see what others were saying. I don't remember exactly who said what, but I came away with four main points about why we aren't withdrawing in significant numbers:

1) We have to protect 'strategic interests', i.e. the pipelines.
2) We have to stay in the region because of fear that tensions will escalate betwen Pakistan and India - we have to be there to avert a nuclear exchange.
3) Pakistan is harboring terrorists who seek to do us harm. We have to fight them there so we don't have to fight them here, etc.
4) We want to keep troops on either side of Iran.

We're not leaving in my lifetime.

[awoke_in_2003]

31. k&r. nt

[Johonny]

32. Even Obama didn't show much enthusiasm in that speech

Last night was the dullest, emptiest speech I've ever heard from him. Sounds like even he doesn't care about this war anymore, he just has to pretend to support it for the hawks in his cabinet that think we need the war to win in 2012. For a guy that usually walks you through his though pattern he gave little detail and little why last night. Seriously I've heard for 10 years we are waiting for the Afghanistan army to be trained. Basic training takes how long?

[xiamiam]

39. some of the current us soldiers were in grade school when this began

pathetic

[treestar]

35. why not?

What are we doing there? Al Qaeda? Sound familiar?
Why are we spending money we DESPERATELY need for other reasons? Al Qaeda?
Why are we propping up Karzai? the Taliban?
Osama is dead. Who are we hunting now? Al Qaeda?
Al Queda (or however it is spelled these days) is in other countries. Their leadership is in Pakistan. If you say so, tell the generals so they know what to do.
What does a "win" look like? No one knows.
When will be fully disengaged? When the time is right per the generals, not armchair ones.
Why have we not raised taxes to pay for the debacle? Republican congress?

[whatchamacallit]

36. How can progress be assessed in the absence of meaningful victory conditions?

We'll be there forever.

[xiamiam]

37. WHY are we there?

3 years ago I listened to every speech..excited that we finally had an eloquent speaker in the white house. I cannot stand to listen now...makes me physically uncomfortable and angry. It started with the Afghan surge speech when my jaw was dropped to the floor as I swear I heard Bush deliver that same speech.. its been downhill since then. I have yet to hear a legitimate reason for why we are in Afghanistan at the cost of countless lives and 2 billion dollars per week.