- Home
- Business & Marketing (829)
- Editorials (658)
- Entertainment (2032)
- Fashion (1030)
- Highbrid (189)
- Honeys (2873)
- Humor (946)
- Music (5215)
- Need to Know (2207)
- News (2048)
- Podcasts (4)
- ARCHIVE
Tuesday, December 1, 2009 | 1:59pm
SOUND OFF: Is President Obama Making Afghanastan His Vietnam?
As Obama plans to send more troops to Afghanstan vowing to end the war in 3 years, has he forgotten the mistakes of the past?
As our good friend Malcolm put it, tonight quietly has become “D-Day” for President Obama far too early in his presidency. Tonight at 8pm our President, that man we all voted for and proclaimed as the next coming will make the most telling decision of OUR lives. He is slated to speak in front of the cadets of West Point, where he will announce that he is increasing the number of troops in Afghanistan by up to 50%.
While I certainly don’t go back as far as the 60′s, the failures of Vietnam were well documented in my history textbooks and it is Obama’s scheduled action tonight that has some drawing parallels to the similar decree for increased troops made by the otherwise forgettable Lyndon B. Johnson. Is America about to once again sacrifice thousands of its young service men and women in a war that can’t be won? Has Obama been soned by his military advisers into destroying his still very young administration?
And even if we were to identify targets, apprehend the enemy…when is it over? What are we fighting for? What is the objective? The afghan war was sparked as a war on terrorism. However terror groups only flourish when world powers flex their muscles. The more we mistakenly destroy villages and kill innocent civilians we’re providing the perfect marketing platform for these terrorist recruitment efforts. Where is our end zone, our basket…hell which direction are we going in? Without a clear target and an inevitable objective how can victory be won?
But even if Obama and the US Armed forces are somehow able to escape the ghosts of Vietnam what then happens to our political messiah? Didn’t he run on a platform of ENDING war? Did he not just win the Nobel Peace Prize? Tonight he will most certainly say goodbye to the support of those independents that helped swing the election in his favor and clearly will piss off those left wing supporters who well feel betrayed by his promise. Enter FOX. They’re chomping at the bit right now to use every war time failure against him not only in the mid-term elections but any possible re-election bid in 2012.
Now I know I’m late with this blog. But if were able to “mobilize” to get this guy in office? Why don’t we care as much about now holding him accountable or have we fallen into the very pattern that the Right Wing extremist accused us of, following the Pied Piper blindly without questioning his actions?
Do I still believe in B.O. Yes I DO! He’s very intelligent and I’m sure has a defined plan however I fear he’s listened to some bad advice and has let some wolves into his close knit camp.
FILED IN Editorials, News
This is, in my opinion, a horrible mistake, and will (more than likely) cost him nearly everything he hoped to accomplish with his presidency.
.
First… as soon as he sends more troops, he will ‘own’ the war. Whereas in the past the democrats could blame the Bush administration for a lot of out problems, as of tonight it will no longer be Bush’s fault, It will be Obama’s.
.
Then there is the cost, estimated to be roughly $3.6 billion per MONTH. With the addition of these new troops, it’s estimated that the war will cost $1 million PER SOLDIER per year. You read that right. Now I’m not saying that our troops aren’t worth our full support, they are. But common sense tells me that you can fight a war for a lot less than $1 million per person. Heck, we could outsource it to Blackwater for ½ the cost.
.
The real damage is going to be political. As Juan rightly says, this action is going to suck middle America right out of Obama’s pocket. It will cost the democrats the 2010 congressional election, and that loss will doom EVERY policy initiative right up to the 2012 presidental elections; which, then, will be nothing more than a cry of broken promises and do-nothing administrations.
.
There’s a reason why the United States was founded on the belief in the civilian control of the military. Generals ALWAYS call for more troops. They NEVER admit to the possibility that a fight cannot be won. Right now, the President has allowed himself to be bullied into making a decision which he knows in his heart is wrong.
.
It’s like the car wreck you see in slow motion, unable to avoid the damage no matter how hard you push on the breaks. I can see the 2010 congressional elections as clearly as if they were being broadcast on my TV. When history is written, tonight will justly be called the beginning of the end of the Obama administration.
And one side note. Lyndon Johnson is a good example. Without Vietnam he would have been remembered as one of the greatest presidents of the 20th century. His actions on civil rights, for example, would have cemented his legacy as one of the great ones.
.
But no, he got mired in the mud of a foreign nation, and it was his downfall.
SCREW IT!!! He already pissed me off wasting all that dag on money on the so called stimulus package that nobody’s seen yet. He has cost us more money than any other president and he aint even been in office full term.
Last week, you posted on this subject and asked us what we thought. My answer then, “Get out.” You and Malcolm stated your points well. As did Shakes, actually. That stimulus package has helped whom, exactly? This is getting worse by the day for the president (and, as a result, for us).
I’m going not be as loquacious as the other members of the nation. I think of this as a street fight but on a grander scale.
A withdrawl would be like running from the fight. After running you have to live with being mocked and challenged by every single punk ass half wit on the block. (Remember we have North Korea and Iran already talking shit and throwing jabs.)
To stay and fight, you just may get your ass whipped, badly. (Like in Vietnam)Then you have to live with being mocked and challenged by every single punk ass half wit on the block.(Remember we have North Korea and Iran already talking shit and throwing jabs.)
Or you can come the fight with all your siblings, cousins, and distant relatives and show that you are force to be reckoned with. Even if you lose those who are potenially weaker or at even arms will think twice about challenging you. You would at least shown that you are able to stand your ground and fight a good fight.
Lol.. guilty as charged. I am long-winded.
There are some things that are worth a more drawn out debate however. Its that important of an issue as I’m sure every member of the Nation will have at least one member effected by it. Mike “Evorgleb” Belgrove is an active soldier in the Army. Clearly this is a debate he’s carefully paying attention to.
.
I Feel you Bad Guy but this is foreign policy we can’t treat it with the schoolyard ego mentality. My greatest fear is we’re giving Terrorist and cells the ammunition they need to once again make everyday Americans live in fear.
I find it ironic that those who had the opportunity to serve in the military but elected not to find it so easy to send the children of others off to die in war.
We don’t allow people to practice law without training and experience.
We don’t allow people to practice medicine without training or experience.
We require licenses and training for plumbers, electricians, and engineers.
How can we place a person with no military experience or training in charge of the military??????
Maybe those who aspire to lead the country at the national level should be required to have previously served in the military? Then their decisions might be a little easier to accept.
Just a couple of thoughts from an old former military veteran.
Hmmmm…I think they do. The military is lead by Generals. OUR COUNTRY is lead by a politician who is SHOULD be able to use these leaders of the armed forces as advisors. If we made military experience a requirement we’d unfortunately cancel out a very qualified crop of potential presidential candidates. War is just one protein on a president’s plate.
I applaud the service of all present and former soldiers.
.
However… Civilian control of the military is one of the reasons we broke from England. When listing the causes for the separation in the Declaration of Independence, they specifically said ‘he has affected to render the military independent of and superior to the civil power’.
.
While military service would be nice, I don’t think it should be required to serve as President.
.
In defense of the President, he’s about the same age as I am, and we never had a real war to fight in. We were too young for Vietnam, too old for Gulf War 2, and Granada and Gulf War 1 were over before we could have finished filling out the enlistment paperwork.
if you don’t increase the amount of troops you leaving the soldiers in country at risk…if bush would have did this back in 2001 instead of going after iraq we wouldn’t be in this situation …..
Juan,
If you are sick, I assume you would turn to the medical profession for help. Unless your are a medical practioner and know better then they, you kind of have to “trust” their advice. If they are wrong, you are possibly and probably screwed.
Now, no one can know everything about everything. I certainly realize that. But if you know just shy of NOTHING about a topic, you are certainly vulnerable to getting your head twisted around by a seasoned professional. You may be fortunate enough to have nothing but good and capable advisors around you. Folks who provide you with nothing short of the most sound advice. Then again you could be surrounded by advisors who are advancing their own agendas for any of a thousand different reasons. Not all of which are in the best interest of the public.
Rookies make rookie mistakes. That doesn’t make them bad people. It just makes them rookies. Innocent enough in the world of sports. Watching a seasoned veteran of the game school a rookie would probably be more fun to watch if it wasn’t so expected and predictable.
But when you are talking about life and death decisions for thousands or hundreds of thousands of people, as in the case of the Commander-In-Cheif, one can’t be as cavalier. You can only be sensitive to situations with which you have experience. And community organizing is not war!
No disrespect to Malcolm. But people died during the first Gulf War. People died in Somalia. People died in a couple of other campaigns or military situations during his lifetime. I bet their loved ones will not agree with his assertion that there were “no real wars” during his lifetime. I bet if he had lost a child or a loved one during any of the aforementioned, he would not have written what he did.
Without experience your decisions are not really your own, they are the decisions of your most convincing advisors. Bottom line.
By all means disagree with me. I live for political arguments. And advance apologies to Mr Bad Guy. I know I’m long winded, but I like to argue in complete thoughts, and these take a number of words.
.
My initial concerns are two:
.
First I think it was the wrong decision; based on flawed logic, and historically proven to be something that can never work. I heard the words, and the delivery was fine, but the game plan is entirely unworkable. Its eventual failure is written into it because it denies the true reality of the situation over there.
.
It assumes that we can prop of the people and government of Afghanistan to a point where they can be self-sustaining; that somehow the people will be able to stand up to the warlords, which they won’t. I will remind you that the government of South Vietnam, who we propped up for nearly 15 years, lasted for less than 4 hours after we finally pulled out our troops.
.
It assumes that we have the support of the people and government of Pakistan, which we do not. Pakistan gives us half-hearted support because we threatened them back in 2002. But the reason that the Taliban and Al Quada is strong in the Pakistani border region isn’t because they have taken over, it’s because they have the support of the people and government of Pakistan. I would remind you that the Taliban would never have gained power in Afghanistan in the first place if it hadn’t been for the support of Pakistan.
.
Overall, there are striking similarities between last night’s speech and Nixon’s Cambodia speech. It used the same logic, and it will have the same results.
.
My second concern is political: This speech will turn the President into a lame duck overnight. It will almost certainly cost him the congress in 2010, and that will cost him the votes he needs to pass any meaningful legislation. Since (I think) all seats in the house are up for grabs in the 2010 election, any candidate who gave luke-warm support to the president is going to run for cover in the run-up to their reelection campaigns.
.
Politically, this decision will cost him the support of the hard left (who want out of Afghanistan now) and the independents (who saw Obama as the peace candidate).
.
Finally there are the troops. They are the innocents in this whole game. We owe it to them to make decisions that are logical and serve some long-term goals. These guys and gals put their ass on the line to protect people who sit home like me (and most others). We have a moral obligation not to waste their lives; not to throw them away in some face-saving move that cannot succeed in the long run.
I respect what you say. I have been against American wars in the middle east since 1991. In my opinion, they have been shell games to mask the real reasons for INVADING other countries: money and power. The one that I could see having a good enough reason to go into was Afghanistan in 2001. With the Taliban defeated then, you’d think that the American leadership learned from past experience and threw the ENTIRE MIGHT of the U.S. armed forces and other resources into that war. Obliterate the enemy. No doubt it would be over by now. But, the mission was never one. There were always several items on the agenda. Money and power were always there. Thus, the focus of the war was never singular, “let’s go in there, take care of this and get out.” These advisers should have known that you can’t just INVADE another country half-a$$, with multiple agendas. Those people over there live to die as martyrs. And there’s always another one just waiting to take the place of one who died. This is F*up for EVERYONE.
My post was in relation to what you said, pchemgod. It posted under Malcolm’s, tho.
At the end of the day, Obama’s decision was approved by more Republicans then it was members of his own party. I think Obama is thinking in the best interest of the country unfortuantely that won’t help him get anything else passed and might eventually cost him his job. It think this is where his inexperience and everyman persona will work to his detriment.
Malcolm is right about Obama now “owning” this war with the troop increase. The question is why are the troops really there? Are we there to occupy territory and create real change or just “help”?! Right now it sounds like more half-assed planning and that’s not going to change anything. It’s going to cost American lives and possibly Obama’s second term.
Why is it a bad thing for Obama to own the war. YO! You’re the man. If you’re confident in your ish and people like I think Obama is why not. People only respect those willing to take risks. Guess what it may not work out, but at the end you and I know Obama has the country’s best interest in mind, not special interest.
There is no difference between his message and George W. Bush’s message about this war. Now with that said, it may still be a positive thing that Obama is owning this war. I felt like there was no end when Bush was in office but I think that Obama will know when it’s time to cut his loses if he has too. There is still a possiblity of success but I feel comfortable with Obama being in charge if things are not going right. I just hope he proves me right.
I just wanna say inheritance,,,regardless good or bad there are things the president has to deal with that was in place before he got there. Unfortunatley it has to be a power struggle between his predecessor and the middle east that will not be turned around in a year. I just think we all need to calm down and let the president work. This mess was here before him,,it didnt come over night nor will it leave over night. We need to stop jumping the gun, none of us know what has been said to sway his decision..