Iraq War troop surge of 2007 :slashingtongue

Clarification needed about “deadline”

Wednesday, December 2nd, 2009 at 6:01 pm  
Leave your comment

President Obama is going to send 30 000 more troops to Afghanistan. This is something that I support and have long stated so. However, the part about the deadline is something that confuses me. Is it the goal of the President to exit in 18 months like we did in the surge, or are we going to have to close shop within 18 months?
This is something that is rather complicating as the two scenarios have such different outcomes despite appearing to be similar. If we are going to get the hell out in 18 month regardless of the situation on the ground in Afghanistan, we are in trouble.

The President is going to allow, in his words, “ an unacceptable risk”, to be potentially around in 18 months. That would render all the blood and sacrifice of our troops in the next 18 months as fruitless.If he does that, he is failing America in a very fundamental way.

If this is the case, there is really no hope of extending the stay beyond 2012. If the troops are to draw down by July 2011; it would take 6-10 months for all of them to come home. The added incentive would be that President Obama would be viewed as the person who have brought back all the troops home, something that would go down well with his far left base.

On the other hand, if the President hopes to achieve all goals in 18 months, then that would be a good thing. We would only leave when our objectives in Afghanistan are met. That is a world away from leaving Afghanistan at a certain date by any means necessary.

As Iraq has shown us, it is very possible that we can meet our objectives in 18 months. If we could do it in Iraq, we can do it Afghanistan. This would be something very positive and something that I would support. I also like the idea of a very speedy troop surge. That is something that would be a logistical headache to the Officers and the NCOs, but I think it would boost the troop morale on the ground.

Now I do not know which one of those scenarios is right. The Republicans are claiming that the first scenario is right, while the Democrats are claiming that the second is. The President, in his speech yesterday, went both ways. Is he undecided? I wonder…

There is also the thing about the price of the war. The President has always promised that he would do everything in a deficit neutral manner. So how is he goi9ng to pay for the at least $30 billion that this war would cost? Is he going to go down the path of President Bush and leave the next generation with a $1 trillion dollar war burden? I hope he takes Governor Jesse Ventura idea seriously about a war tax.

I would also want to see do NATO her fair share of work. It is not only the United States that has suffered attacks that were being carried out by Al Qaeda which is supported by the Taliban in Afghanistan. I want to see that they contribute their very small share of 5000 men. I also hope that they go in with the desire to fight and not just be peace keepers, like they have done so many times.

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta

Lets finish our job in Afghanistan!

Tuesday, October 6th, 2009 at 6:16 pm  
Comments (1)

After the open demands of General McChrystal was made before the whole world, and his apparent “talk” with President Obama later, there are rumors the US might actually take troops our of Afghanistan. There was also talk of a plan by Vice President Joe Biden, which involved more special operations and drones rather than soldiers.

I get the fact that the President is delaying this so as weigh the options. I do not think that it shows indecision, I think that it shows intelligence. If only we had this before we entered Iraq in 2003! So, I think that we should give him the time to think. I fully support him on that.

What I do not agree with is the weak-knee Liberals’ idea this is to cut and run from Afghanistan. I think that it would be the gravest error since Vietnam should we just leave Afghanistan. Granted, there are some conservatives that are also supporting this, but this is an issue that is very much discussed by the far left in America.

This is not Vietnam. Firstly, it is a legal war. We did not go out and attack them, Al Qaeda declared war on us! Vietnam was not the same. We have an obligation to finish the terrorists that are responsible for the death of thousands of our citizens’ lives. Vietnam had nothing like that. So please stop comparing this war with that of Vietnam!

Yes, the surge worked in Iraq. Would a surge in Afghanistan work like it did in Iraq? Is it the best method or the only method? I really do not know. I was not an Officer in the army. But my Army experience tell me that, the surge is a tactic that gives us a chance that a pull out would not.

What I know is that sending in drones and special operations alone just would not work. We still need the boots to hit the ground. Ask any soldier; and they would tell you that to get Al Qaeda, you still need the infantry (Army). You cannot just use the special forces. The Vice President’s plan is just not feasible.

So far, we have Press Secretary saying moments ago that the President would not leave Afghanistan. That is something that I liked. However, he was still brushing away comments relating to the troop surge and General McChrystal.

Come on America! Lets finish this job. We have been killing lots and lots of terrorists and lets finish Al Qaeda! There were Senators that said that there were only 100 Taliban leaders in Afghanistan. Can’t we deal with that? Can’t we finish off 100 people? Can’t we secure Afghanistan? Why is it that we can work out Iraq, but not Afghanistan?

Please President Obama, lets kill the terrorists and finish the job. It is only then that we should leave. We should be incorporating the “Yes We Can” spirit that got the President elected. This is also part of the job description of President Obama : to keep our country safe.

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta