Third Party & Independents Archives

What the Left fails to appreciate is that Afghanistan is where our enemies in Pakistan will go if we withdraw from Afghanistan, and focus our efforts on Pakistan.

Wasn’t this the same defense the Right used for still being in Iraq?

Oh wait, we’re still there too…

How does this ‘resolve the Afghanistan drain’? And when will we have ‘won’ in Afghanistan? What will that goal look like? What are we still there to achieve?

I frankly don’t see any appealing scenario or outcome in Afghanistan. But, then, I have not been privy to the 9 comprehensive intelligence meetings over the Afghanistan situation, which Obama has been part of. I therefore, acknowledging our presidents having taken all the steps necessary to completely inform himself of all options, defer to his judgment and assessment based on everyone’s input

To be honest, David, this paragraph explains everything.

Simply amazing…

I too give great defference to any President, Republican or Democrat, who has to make a decision with regards to war. The Commander and Chief role is one of his most important and most difficult duties and I’m not going to question his decision.

I’m not sure that’s as amazing a postion as you think it is Rhinehold.

What the Left fails to appreciate is that Afghanistan is where our enemies in Pakistan will go if we withdraw from Afghanistan, and focus our efforts on Pakistan.

Wasn’t this the same defense the Right used for still being in Iraq?

When the Right used a similar argument regarding Iraq, they failed to gain credibility because:

1) Al Qaeda & friends have never traditionally had any significant connection to Iraq or that region. They’ve spent most of their time in the Arabian Peninsula, Sudan and Pashtun regions of Central Asia/South Asia.

2) Geographic separation between Afghanistan and Iraq meant it would practically impossible for Al Qaeda’s leadership to escape from the Pashtun regions to Iraq. The US Navy has extensive control over the Persian Gulf and Iran (the Shi’ite dominated Islamic Republic is no friend of the Sunni dominated Al Qaeda) has control of all overland routes.

3) Iraq has had a history of secular government that would make it difficult for any sort of Islamist movement to gain control.

Afghanistan differs from Iraq on all of these issues, that is why David’s argument holds when we talk about Afghanistan and failed when the Right used it to talk about Iraq.

Warped,

Doesn’t history speak against that argument though? al Qaeda moved into Iraq almost immediately and while they weren’t ‘welcome’, that didn’t stop them from being the main force behind the insurgency from nearly day one…

As for the ‘no al Qaeda and Iraq’ nonsense, tell Clarke that, he’s the one who still stands behind his linking of the two groups together at al Shifa.

Rhinehold-
I think the best way to put it is that an Afghanistan that doesn’t grab us by the ankle and pull us back into the hole is what we’re looking for. The Obama plan relies less on the Karzai government, more on the local leaders.

What amazes me is that people haven’t yet learn their lesson about setting policy by ideology.

I would much prefer a simple answer, but some people fail to realize that when you get into a war, and neglect it this long, simple answers are rarely an option.

More than simply it’s bluff and bluster, what I disliked the Bush Administration for was it’s oversimplification of matters and their solutions. They were systematically wrong on a regular basis because of their approach, because they’d rarely examine things for what they were, but rather, they would cherrypick the facts and the news in search of support for what they already assumed was right.

I’m not sure that’s as amazing a postion as you think it is Rhinehold.

It is from people who ripped Bush and all of his supporters a new one while the right was saying the exact same thing as you are now saying…

Rhinehold, Saddam Hussein had no intention of allowing anyone, including al-Queda, to establish military bases in his country.

That was the folly of the Iraq invasion. Iraq was not a threat to the U.S. with Hussein in power, evil as he was. We invaded, THEN al-Queda took up residence in Iraq, alongside the U.S.

But, you and the rest of the world already know this. Which means your comment selectively ignores the history in order to foster a false argument that the Left’s approach in Afghanistan is the same as the Right’s in Iraq. Which is an entirely absurd argument a priori.

The Left isn’t in control of Afghan policy and are very divided on what the Afghan policy should be. Not so, with the Republicans on Iraq who lock and goosestepped behind war unquestioningly of their Republican president.

Saddam was a monster but he did keep the lid shut tight on the extremist element, A few bombs would have shut his pie hole up for another six years, His sons were too dumb to run anything chances are he would have hung himself and a more moderate faction would have taken over. Bush opened up a big can of worms.

Rhinehold,

From what I know, most of the Iraq insurgency was initiated in the Ba’athist/Arab Nationalist sphere and not the Al Qaeda/Islamists sphere. Later on Zarqawi and AQI claimed responsibility for most of their attacks, but the appeal of Zarqawi and AQI in the minds of most Iraqi’s was the idea of driving away an occupying power and not any of the ideas of the Islamist movement. Also, as far as I know there has been no documentation/report of any significant member of Al Qaeda leaving the Pashtun areas and arriving in Afghanistan during the Iraq War; Zarqawi had already established himself in Iraq before the US invasion. Later, the Mahdi Army battled with the Sunni elements, and the insurgency spun into a civil war, but there was no prolonged intimate connections between events in Iraq and Al Qaeda leadership in the Pashtun region.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091203/ap_on_re_as/as_afghan_karzai Flash, Karzai willing to talk to Taliban..

When I read the book ‘Ike An American Hero’ by Michael Korda their was a chapter on General Patton and his exploits, Well in a nutshell many of the higher ups wanted him fired immediately , General Eisenhower took it upon himself to have a meeting with General Patton as the author explained their was only two things Patton was afraid of his wife and Ike, Ike read him the riot act like their was no tomorrow , Ike went into detail that Patton about broke down and promised if giving another chance he would not ever betray Ike and the military, Ike relented and said Patton gave him a hug and how much he disliked getting hugs from Patton because that helmet he wore always hit him on the head, Ike was a very unselfish human being.

Iraq was not a threat to the U.S. with Hussein in power, evil as he was. We invaded, THEN al-Queda took up residence in Iraq, alongside the U.S.

This assumes that al-Qaeda was the only threat that the US had. Saddam was shooting at Americans on a daily basis, funding international terrorism, making threat after treat about attacking the US (even Russian intelligence warned us of plans for Iraq to attack the US for not lifting sanctions).

The notion that Iraq was not a threat to the US because Al Qaeda was not in the country is myopic at best.

Rodney,

That view flies in contrast to the actual knowledge of what was going on in Iraq at the time. Simplistic and cowboyish, but very much not backed by facts.

Remember, when we attacked Iraq they were, even with sanctions that were killing millions of Iraqis each year, one of the top 3 financial and strategic supporters of international terrorism in the world. Just because they weren’t, at that time, funding al Qaeda does not mean they weren’t dangerous.

Rine, When bush and company went to the UN and basically lied about WMD using fabricated evidence to warrant going to war and being bullies do you remember that, I know it’s been a long war but it wasn’t that long ago, like i said he was a monster no doubt the rest of the world knew that it’s a big world out their and we have the approach it with that in mind, If he had waited the rest of the world I’m sure would have come aboard it was sure looking that way..

Rhinehold, we kill 10’s of thousands of Americans here in the U.S. for profit through our broken health care system. Does that justify China invading the U.S. on humanitarian grounds?

We had no extant justification for invading Iraq and causing an equal number of deaths as Saddam was effecting on an annual basis. The U.S. Does NOT exist to DICTATE internal domestic policy of other nations for the obvious reciprocating reason.

Your defense of invading Iraq is illogical on every basis. As was Bush/Cheney’s et. al.