Win or Come Home

Assigned Reading: Pentagon Worried About Obama’s Commitment to Afghanistan
(FROM: McClatchy News)

Just a little bit of housecleaning here, as only a week or so ago I had already written about the attitude of the political left toward the Iraqi “surge” as a way to express my curiosity surrounding how they will manage the same sort of decision which will need to be made regarding Afghanistan.

That being said, I think it is beyond important to understand that, just like in Iraq on the eve of the “surge,” in Afghanistan we should either give our military the green light to fight for victory, or we should remove them from the theater. Pussyfooting around, fighting under ridiculous rules of engagement, mandating Miranda rights to be read to terrorists, and enforcing asinine detainee processes only serve to further endanger American lives.

Do it right, or don’t do it at all. That’s all.

Share

Comments

  1. sharon says:

    I agree… my nephew is there… shit or get off the pot. The president's quote that he is not " comfortable with the word victory" pretty much tells us what we need to know about him.

  2. Anonymous says:

    I want my America back!

  3. Ian Thorpe says:

    Forget surges, get the boys and girls home now.

    Let me remind you of the scorecard so far:

    Mighty Britsh Empire 0
    Bearded Afghan Ragheads 3

    We're fighting shadows. If there is a surge the Taliban will just melt away, wait and reform in two or three years. Those who do not learn history's lessons are condemned to repeat its mistakes.

  4. Anonymous says:

    81% of Americans want to see the birth certificate: good video

    http://www.proof-positive.com/

  5. MANHATTAN PROJECT says:

    If we brought the troops home we could turn all that sand into glass.

  6. Rix says:

    The only surge I want to see in Afghanistan is a temperature surging to 15,000,000 degrees. There is nothing wrong in that region that a a couple of warheads wouldn't fix.

  7. MISSILES AWAY says:

    Nukes, use em, or lose em

  8. momathome says:

    A military that isn't allowed to fight…commanded by a President who doesn't want to win! Haven't we been down this road before?

    I miss Ronald Reagan!

  9. Anonymous says:

    OK, so I am donning my conspiracy theorist's hat for this comment…

    Assuming the Squatter-in-Chief IS a radical communist as it appears he may well be, then sooner or later there will be a grab for power. The military is the one thing that might prevent it from happening.

    But if half (or more!) of our military is overseas in far off places (that happen to be half a world away), along with a sizable chunk of our national guard, well, it might be a touch difficult for our military to actual defend us.

    Food for thought.

  10. Claudia says:

    well, according to Obama, our troops aren't even allowed to fire at someone who is armed, because they might be "friendlies" and good workers out working in their poppy fields so that they can harvest the plant and ship it to our youth to further rip our country apart by them using all that Opium and then needing it in the future, afterall, it is simply "free trade"…..

    I think Rix, Manhattan Pro and Missliles Away all have exactly the right idea, or else: they should let our soldiers fight the war that they are there to WIN and give them permission to do just that.

  11. Gail B says:

    The "War on Terror" started with the goal of finding Osama bin Ladin, didn't it? –I mean, after we did away with that mean ol' man who threatened W's daddy?

    So, why are we in Afghanistan, if we aren't going to go "Gung Ho?" There are a lot of parents and just plain ol' American citizens who would feel a LOT safer with the guys home instead of scattered across the world.

    I don't like war, but I like what's happening here a lot less.

    verify: piedendi (Is that like pee-peed out? or pee-peed off?)

  12. Anonymous says:

    If you really want to know what is going on over there, read Michael Yon's dispatches at michaelyon-online.com

    He's the best there is at telling the real stories in Afghanistan and Iraq

  13. Still a Patriot says:

    Hi Jeff -

    "Do it right, or don't do it at all" – that was one of my father's favorite expressions, word for word.

    Anonymous, 9:52 P.M. -
    "But if half (or more!) of our military is overseas in far off places (that happen to be half a world away), along with a sizable chunk of our national guard, well, it might be a touch difficult for our military to actual defend us."

    I have often wondered if that were the exact reason for Obama's involvement in Afghanistan. You are the first person to put my thoughts into words. It never made sense for him to be so against our efforts in Iraq & then so ready to go to another conflict with essentially the same enemy.

    Actually, nothing that he does makes any sense to me.

    Susan

  14. Still a Patriot says:

    Hi Jeff -

    I just found this statement on my Senator feingold's website:

    “I am saddened by reports that for the second consecutive month, we’ve seen a record number of deaths of U.S. troops in Afghanistan. This grim milestone comes ahead of a potential request for even more troops to be sent to Afghanistan. The current troop increase in Afghanistan could push members of the Taliban and other militants into Pakistan, further destabilizing a nuclear power. After nearly eight years in Afghanistan, we continue to risk further loss of American lives and increased resentment among the Afghan people – all without a clearly focused mission. It is time we discuss a flexible timetable for withdrawing our forces from Afghanistan, along with a clear public strategy for achieving our counterterrorism and regional stability goals.”

    Even though I don't always agree with him, I think he is right on in this case.

    Susan

  15. Anonymous says:

    Dear Taliban,

    For every GI killed, or injured, 10,000 acres of poppies will be napalmed, then sprayed with plutonium.

Speak Your Mind

*