Posted on 05/10/2011 1:52:30 AM PDT by UniqueViews
A bipartisan group of eight House members has penned a letter to President Obama urging a speedy withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan in the wake of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden.
Reps. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and Peter Welch (D-Vt.) spearheaded the letter, which is also signed by three other Republicans and three other Democrats: Reps. John Garamendi (D-Calif.), Walter Jones (R-N.C.), Rush Holt (D-N.J.), John Campbell (R-Calif.), John Tierney (D-Mass.) and John Duncan (R-Tenn.).
..."we urge you to withdraw all troops from Afghanistan that are not crucial to the immediate national security objective of combating al Qaeda."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The type of operation carried out by our Navy SEALs to take out UBL was far more effective and far cheaper than fighting a massive land war with no discernible direction or visible endgame anymore. The other problem of course is that Afghanistan simply isn't interested in being anything other than a country run by sharia law. Outside of killing everyone there who is making that happen and making the place a US colony (something we quite honestly should have done in the beginning), how can we change this?
The second we allowed for Afghanistan's new constitution to be based on islam was the day we allowed for this outcome to occur. Unless we want to refight this, there's no turning back now.
We killed Bin Laden, but the war on terror is NOT over. Leaving Afghanistan now would hand the country over to the Taliban and there would be an Al Qaeda resurgence.
I don’t think we should leave but these countries have been fighting for centuries. I seriously wonder how long we can possibly stay there. I mean afghanistan and Iraq are not Germany and Japan. At some point financially we are going to have to take the risk and leave. It will become necessary.
You left out one more more piece...there’s all this mineral wealth, which some now believe that China is ready to walk in...sign business deals and more or less get a free ride from US security.
If this puts pressure on him to do these things, the letter will be worthwhile.
What if they decide to "resurge" in Ethiopia? Or, Kuwait? Or, Egypt? Or, Iran? Or, Libya?
How many places do we need to occupy to stop the "resurgence"?
Can you explain exactly what are troops are doing (besides dying) to stop this so-called resurgence?
Yeah, we should also go into Yemen, the Sudan, Somalia, Egypt, Libya, Algeria.... Not a great idea? What, are you soft on terrorism? Lots of al Qaeda in those places. What the H, let’s even invade Iran and North Korea.
Out of Afghanistan, out of Iraq. Stop playing out the Fall of Roman Empire story, flailing away at barbarians in the far reaches of our decaying empire.
Which of them has the faintest clue about how many troops are "crucial"?
It's this sort of thing that scares me silly because we have the children in charge of things.
“there’s all this mineral wealth, which some now believe that China is ready to walk in...sign business deals and more or less get a free ride from US security.”
This is already happening. China got the rights to the world’s largest copper mine in Afghanistan a few years ago. Afghan elites were paid off and now the common people are angry they aren’t allowed to work at the mine. China created a compound closed off to ordinary Afghans.
Which is exactly what happened in Iraq. Our troops once again did all the fighting and dying to install the current Iraqi government and how did they repay us for our trouble? They let China come in and run their oil industry.
Gee. Thanks. For nothing.
I am just so sick of our troops having to fight and die in foreign war after foreign war with us not getting anything in return for the effort. How long before more of our troops are in Libya (some Marines are already there from items posted on this site) and dying for oil for Europe?
How many places do we need to occupy to stop the "resurgence"?
Another alternative, in addition to operations similar to the killing of UBL, would be for the CIA to do such operations similar to how the Mossad does for Israel. They are very effective in getting things done, and unlike a major war, there is very little to no collateral damage.
The nation-building approach had the benefit of the doubt in 2001 as it had not been tried, but after 10 years of fruitless progress coupled with mounting casualties on our side, there comes a point where we have to say "f-this, it doesn't work, we need to come up with a new plan." This takes on an even greater urgency when one considers the fact that we're broke.
Which of course differentiates us from liberals, who continue to pursue the same failed policies over and over and over.
Osama was just one terrorist in the War on Terror also NOT known by its real name, the War Between Islam and the World.
That war is not over and these assclowns can do what they want but the muslims will keep trying to destroy civilization and take over the world..................
It is the NeoCons in the republican party who are the most strident Nation Builders and they are supported, to a lesser degree, by the Liberal Interventionists in the dem party.
OTOH, it is the Realists, in the Republican party and the dem party, who oppose nation building.
Recall the big news last week when Sarah Palin replaced her NeoCon foreign policy advisers, Scheunemann and Goldfarb, with a Realist foreign policy adviser, Peter Schweizer.
Should their minerals belong to the U.S.?
Great questions but don’t hold your breath waiting for an answer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.