Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Santorum: Commit to winning Afghanistan or get out (Joins Newt's call)
Boston Globe ^ | March 18, 2012 | AP

Posted on 03/18/2012 7:47:55 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife

WASHINGTON—Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum says the United States should either commit to winning the war in Afghanistan or "get out."

Santorum tells ABC's "This Week" that he agrees with rival Newt Gingrich that a commitment to "winning" means recognizing the U.S. will stay in Afghanistan "to finish the job."

(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Foreign Affairs; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: gingrich2012; gopprimary; middleeast
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 last
To: Cincinatus' Wife

He’s voting “present” on that for now.


41 posted on 03/18/2012 10:27:46 AM PDT by Right Wing Assault (Dick Obama is more inexperienced now than he was before he was elected.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

We won Afghanistan. It took longer than Iraq, but we won it. What we are doing now is not a war. Kill the enemy and either make it a colony, or leave.


42 posted on 03/18/2012 10:37:09 AM PDT by Raider Sam (They're on our left, right, front, and back. They aint gettin away this time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Probably the same states Santorum would win. Just because he won the Minnesota primary, doesnt mean he will win their EV’s.


43 posted on 03/18/2012 10:40:43 AM PDT by Raider Sam (They're on our left, right, front, and back. They aint gettin away this time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Conquest always dies of indigestion.

Would winning mean exterminating the world’s source of 90% of its heroin?


44 posted on 03/18/2012 10:56:19 AM PDT by gandalftb (11th MEU, 2/4 Echo, TRAP Force)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; All

“FWIW, the Conquistadors did it in South America.”

They didn’t “convert” anybody. They conquered and destroyed a culture looking for gold. Also, many of those killed were by the Smallpox disease they brought with them.

Later, some probably genuienly believed. Like I said, you cannot make someone a “Christian” at the point of the sword. To be a genuine Christian you must have faith which cannot be forced.

What one can do is topple the Islamic monopoly held in those countries and create an environment where people are free and secure to believe (or not) what they chose to believe. In that kind of environment, I “believe”, Christianity will eventually fluorish and pacify the area.


45 posted on 03/18/2012 11:03:52 AM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
And yet, 4 years ago Rick extolled Mitt's conservatism.
46 posted on 03/18/2012 11:06:13 AM PDT by sand lake bar (You have not converted a man because you have silenced him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: VinL
Even when using Newt's cue cards Rick and Mitt can't cut it.

....."Santorum, interviewed on ABC's "This Week," said that he agrees "in some respects" with Gingrich. "If the game plan is, we’re leaving, irrespective of whether we’re going to succeed or not, then why are we still there? Let’s either commit to winning or let’s get out," he said. But Santorum wouldn’t say which of those options he would pick.

"If you commit to winning, you change the entire dynamic in the region," the former senator said. "That may not mean the heavy footprint that we have in Afghanistan right now." Santorum said he would "work with our experts in that area to see what troop complement we would need, and work with the Afghan government to make sure that we commit to them to be successful, at whatever, whatever that means, whatever that’s necessary to accomplish."

....SNIP....

Romney used the word "failure" in describing the situation in Afghanistan, but the former Massachusetts governor gave a rambling response to host Bret Baier's repeated efforts to pin him down on whether he would speed up the U.S. pullout.

"The timing of withdrawal is going to be dependent upon what you hear from the conditions on the ground -- that you understand by speaking with commanders there, as well as, of course, the people in Afghanistan and their ability to maintain their sovereignty and to have the capacity, to have a military that can stand up to the challenges they face. The timetable, the guidelines, that continue to be into effect, unless, of course, there are changes in conditions that suggest a faster withdrawal. But recognize, that ultimately, the independence and the security of Afghanistan is going to have to be secured and maintained by the Afghans themselves. We’re not going to stay there forever," Romney said."..... Romney, Santorum hedge on future U.S. role in Afghanistan

47 posted on 03/18/2012 11:18:14 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: sand lake bar
And yet, 4 years ago Rick extolled Mitt's conservatism.

A good thing to remember.

48 posted on 03/18/2012 11:18:57 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross

:)


49 posted on 03/18/2012 11:27:10 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
This so called "war" is no more "winnable" than VIetnam was ever "winnable", since we are now trying to go way beyond the original objectives that Bush laid out in 2001 for the reasons why we went to war in Afghanistan in the first place. All of these objectives were met, but then, as is usually the case with our political leaders who can't seem to draw the line unless the country rises up against their stupid policies, then they tried to sell us a continuation of this mess by saying they needed to "train the Afghan forces to defend themselves". Which has turned out to be a farce and a "mission impossible".

Consider what Bush said on Sep 20, 2001....

Sep 20, 2001- BUSH:...
"tonight, the United States of America makes the following demands on the Taliban:
- Deliver all the leaders of Al Qaida who hide in your land.
- Release all foreign nationals you have unjustly imprisoned.
- Protect foreigners in your country.
- Close every terrorist training camp in Afghanistan
- Give the United States full access to terrorist training camps
- The Taliban must act and act immediately.
- They will hand over the terrorists, or they will share in their fate.

June 15, 2004 - BUSH:
"Afghanistan is no longer a terrorist factory sending thousands of killers into the world."

At that point, we should have armed them to the teeth and provided them with strategic air support for their ground troops, and given them complete ownership of their ground war so that they could have negotiated their own settlement with Pakistan to contain the Taliban from Pakistan.

50 posted on 03/18/2012 11:39:03 AM PDT by LibFreeUSA (Pick Your Poison)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Riodacat

Exactly! I say get the hell out now! Don’t waste one more American life for those idiots over there. Let them fight their own battle.


51 posted on 03/18/2012 11:42:35 AM PDT by LibFreeUSA (Pick Your Poison)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LibFreeUSA
At that point, we should have armed them to the teeth and provided them with strategic air support for their ground troops, and given them complete ownership of their ground war so that they could have negotiated their own settlement with Pakistan to contain the Taliban from Pakistan.

Pakistan has the bomb (and kindly hosted bin Laden) and India has the bomb and there's tension there and then China and Russia side with Iran who is supplying Syria and ................it's a big impossible tangled up mess and Obama has left us looking like a bunch of indecisive nuts, whereby no one in their right mind would fear or trust us.

52 posted on 03/18/2012 12:05:30 PM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: duffee

I certainly agree 100-%

We have the man who can beta Obama, but we cannot get the progressive members of the Republican party to vote for him.

Making Romney or Santorum our Candidate pretty much guarantees an Obama return, even though I would vote for Anyone but Obama.


53 posted on 03/18/2012 12:19:42 PM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: mel

If you haven’t read Timmerman’s “Shadow Warriors”, don’t wait another minute and get your hands on it. It proves that Bush was in charge of nothing concerning the WOT nor is Obama. If Bush had been allowed to do what he wanted, we would have not been “nation-building” - who wants America so entrenched in something that will never succeed and is clearly bankrupting us for generations to come.

Alas, this was the only point I agreed with Obama on — get our troops home. He didn’t do it any faster than W planned...just suckered a lot of people one more time.

Yup, I am ready to join Code Pink, but where are those wily commie girls any how??? Fomenting WW3 revolutions everywhere, but our MSM goons won’t cover it. Follow the money and the Power, and you will find the stench that tries to end America.


54 posted on 03/18/2012 2:54:09 PM PDT by Sioux-san
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson