December 3rd, 2009
07:06 PM ET

Your View: Will Obama's plan work?

Since Tuesday night, the strategy debate's been on - Reader Stanley Scott writes, "I do not agree with the President on this one because he has been misinformed. This war does not require more troops to achieve stability in Afghanistan." While Carol writes, "Yes, it will work if we ever give this President a chance. He is smart and honest and has the best interest of this country at heart."

Even before President Obama formally announced his plan for Afghanistan, the debate over whether it was the correct strategy was well under way.  Obama said the plan has three objectives: Denying al Qaeda a safe haven; reversing the Taliban's momentum; and strengthening the Afghan government.

What do you think? Will the plan work? Does the strategy have the correct objectives?

Post by:
Filed under: Decision: Afghanistan • Your View
soundoff (192 Responses)
  1. Beasterdamus

    It doesn't matter what I think or anyone except the sailors and soldiers going in to harms way...God speed...

    June 21, 2010 at 6:24 pm | Report abuse |
  2. NANI

    The life of our American soldiers just wasted their cause on what the Bush Administrators first pointed their fingers to Afghanistan and Iraq might be the fault with terrorism. Surely enough, President Bush declared war to Afghanistan, but then got involved with Iraq. This kind of burden left to President Obama's hands, thinking that there's exit strategy. What, are you kidding me? We invaded their homeland eight years ago and we haven't seen any compromise with the countries. Now, the people are being sick of our American soldiers stuck their noses into their business for no reason. And our rivalry is getting worse...
    The question is How can we solve this with the countries along their rich 2,000 history and leave our embarrassment?

    _high school student_

    January 4, 2010 at 10:34 am | Report abuse |
  3. James Hare

    The only way to bring Afghanistan back in to the modern era is with roads, schools, electricity and running water. That poor country has had the stuffing bombed out of it for nearly half a century, and destroyed what little infrastructure was present in the first half of the 20th century. The Nobel Prize should have been awarded to Greg Mortenson for building 300 schools in Afghanistan with his Central Asia Institute. The Taliban and Al-q appeal only to the ignorant, unwashed, and underfed. Reduce the numbers of those people, and you reduce the possible influence of the fundamentalists.

    December 24, 2009 at 2:58 pm | Report abuse |
  4. AfghanAmerican

    **Expert AfghanAmerican Perspecitve*** Having spent much of my life following Afghan Affairs and being immersed into it for the past 30 years, I contend that we are fighting a war that we have already lost. Whether it is 18 months or 18 years, with American policies as it stands, we will continue to suffer casualties, and further deteriorate Afghanistan and its people. The American people are grossly misinformed about the realities on the ground and our policies are very much shaped by erroneous misconceptions.

    What people don't understand is that "YOU CAN'T WIN A GUERRILLA WARFARE MILITARLY", you can only win it, if you win the political war and WE HAVE MISERABLY LOST THE POLITICAL WAR. The existing puppet government is made up of heinous criminals who have committed war crimes, and who have adopted a culture of corruption and have lost the support of the vast majority of Afghans. This is a major blow in winning the political war and there is no easy way to fix it as these people will not let go of there power and positions.

    The Afghan militants are not just the Taliban, there are three major groups fighting (whom surprisingly we never hear about, other than calling them militants), who are supported by THE AFGHAN PEOPLE, yes the people. This may be surprising to many fellow Americans but this is reality and it should give us some food for thought. Contrary to the propaganda we have been fed with, the vast majority of Afghan people have not benefited from the US invasion since 2001. In fact there situation has gotten a lot worse, and many people point the finger towards America as the root cause.

    It behoves the Average Afghan that the worlds biggest super power, who went to the moon and back over forty years ago, is not able to capture one man for over eight years. They have become sceptical if America is really after Osama and what the real purpose of the US in Afghanistan is, which had lead many to view America as another imperialistic nation occupying Afghanistan.

    December 18, 2009 at 8:11 pm | Report abuse |
  5. steve parks

    What they are not telling us,the people of the United States,is that our troops are under heavy fire and losing in many parts of Afghanistan(hence the reason why we needed more troops-not simply for victory,but to avoid embarassing defeats).How do I know this?By talking to some friends who have returned from their, on leave.
    They were told by their commanding officers not to speak about what's going on over there.How our troops many times cannot even get air support......
    Why don't we hear about that in the media?The army wants to keep it under wraps what is really going on.To a certain degree I can see why.They need public support,and they wouldn't want the enemy to think they are winning.However,do they really need a TV report to do that?
    Anyway,in answer to the question, no I do not think the new strategy will work.
    Afghanistan will not be won anytime soon,if at all.The #1 problem is we cannot make the Afghani people think we are against them,or trying to occupy their country.Why would that be?Because then it would most likely backfire on us,like when the Soviets tried to fight them.The entire country rose up against them.Perhaps that is why our troops do not receive the air support they need?Too much of a risk of hitting civilans and turning the whole cotton-picking country against us?
    Read between the lines,my fellow Americans.There is more to this war than meets the eye(no pun

    December 18, 2009 at 1:25 pm | Report abuse |

    I follow the efforts of the USA around the world and I thank the American people for their efforts.
    But regarding the Afghanistan I think it is another Viet Nam and nothing will change because those people are tribal and the mind set is very different to the West,after 15 years Russia gave up .....I feel very sad for the loss of life of young Americans on a already lost cause.
    Leave as soon as possible and perhaps fron the point of view of changing things a better wy may be negotiations and education through some oragnisation which could access to taht country.
    As well as loosing the battle the USA,i collecting more hatred and evil trough the thougts and dees of the people.
    The so called WAR ON TERROR will never ,ever end as whe one of these people die there are 100 ready to take their place.I remember after 9/11 whe Mr. Blair (then prime minister of England) in his first speech said " It is time for us as a people to have a hard look at ourselves to find out what is it that causes this great hatred from the Middle East
    and other places in the world"
    I do no believe that evil combats evil only continues it.....Thank you for this oportunity

    December 16, 2009 at 2:25 am | Report abuse |
  7. Muhammad Nasir

    yes its true let afghan people to take hold on their own government but we ca't convince them without can change any thing and everything so alott them books pens and paper

    December 11, 2009 at 7:33 am | Report abuse |
  8. daxi

    Unless we secure Pakistan and Iran, a haven for fleeing taliban: consider guerrilla warfare, the plan will fail as did the French and Russia.... Afghanistan is composed of independent tribes and is an independent country that has never been occupied. It abhors foreigners meddling in their affairs and the terrain is extreme, full of treacherous mountains, caves and deserts most hostile topography........

    December 9, 2009 at 7:17 am | Report abuse |
  9. Harrison

    So many good points. First off we should not be displaying our strategy for the world to see. Any person should know that whether it is in business or in war. Don't let the competitor/enemy see your plan. Second, there is no way in hell we will just sit in afghanistan for as long as possible. We don't have that kind of cash. And finally we need to pick up Bush's slack and deal with this problem now. We need more security for the population, Pakistan needs to be put on the edge so they stop funding the terrorists for their own pleasure along with Saudi Arabia and we need to do it right and win the hearts of the people. So many Afghans are conscripted into service for the Taliban by being threatened or promised pay that it is rediculous. if we provide the security where they dont have to worry about that then we can train them and get out. 30000 may not be enough though...

    December 7, 2009 at 3:39 pm | Report abuse |
  10. tensai13

    Unfortunately I do not see that our involvement in Afghanistan will lead to any long term benefit. We are 8 years too late! President Bush took his eye off the ball deliberately and involved America in a completely bogus war in another country – Iraq. As Americans, we will suffer the results of that disastrous decision for decades to come.
    Disengage from Iraq and Afghanistan now! Bring our troops home and let the generals go without their precious training grounds in foreign countries. As it stands, it appears we have plenty of evil religious extremists to fight against in our own country!

    December 7, 2009 at 7:09 am | Report abuse |
  11. Tilak Rishi

    Those who are criticizing President Obama's exit strategy in Afghanistan are virtually wishing the U.S. to follow the example of 18th and 19th century imperialist powers which waged war against any country, conquered it and occupied it for as long as they could. They are miserably mistaken as in the new millennium no power on earth will be allowed by the rest of the world to resort to imperialism on any pretext. As for the security of America, it cannot be equated with the war in Afghanistan. The same argument was made in Vietnam, and it clearly was not true. The stated goal is to deny any future sanctuary to al Qaida in Afghanistan – but al Qaida isn't based in Afghanistan any more and hasn't been for years. There are several other wild places where al-Qaeda might also set up shop, such as Yemen, Somalia, Eritrea, Sudan, the Philippines or Uzbekistan, besides, of course, Pakistan from where they are presently operating. The U.S. clearly cannot afford to wage protracted warfare with multiple brigades of American ground forces simply to deny al-Qaeda access to every possible safe haven. There is no wiser way for U.S. than to bring back its men in uniform as soon as possible, and utilize them to secure its borders, safeguard its airports and ever remain vigilant inside the country against any attempts to create violence by home grown terrorists of any origin.

    December 6, 2009 at 8:49 pm | Report abuse |
  12. Charlie Bissett

    SUBJECT: Network Reporting on the President’s Speech

    ISSUE #1, Logistics:
    I have, for the past week (since the President’s speech at West Point) watched CNN and the other network news anchors query guests about the plan to increase troops in Afghanistan, and then withdraw them at the end of 18 months. Networks keep on describing this as a surge, followed by an “exit strategy.” They keep asking what political process is going to determine the way we exit.
    They are missing the linchpin issue, Logistics! By the spring of 2011, President Obama will be forced by logistical realities to reduce the number of troops in Afghanistan. Such a reduction in troop strength can not be equated to being an exit strategy!
    Since the end of the Cold War, armies around the world have move away from self-sustaining army divisions because they were slow responding and inflexible (mission wise). They have been replaced by agile, multi-mission, rapid deployment brigades. The problem is that modern brigades only have an optimal combat deployment capability of one year. After that, they start experiencing severe equipment degradation problems. The maximum amount of time that a U.S. Army Combat Brigade Team (CBT) can operate in a combat theater is 18 months. After that, you would have to send out tow-trucks to retrieve them.
    It takes 12 to 18 months to re-constitute and train-up a brigade. This is the nature of what modern military logisticians call the forces generation process; ARFORGEN in the U.S. Army. After a deployment, a brigade is stripped down (all but deactivated). The old equipment is sent to depot for overhaul, and the command structure is disbanded. A brigade’s re-constitution and train-up takes a year, or two. This ARFORGEN stuff is very new, and most of the old school talking heads commenting on strategy don’t know enough about new age logistics to talk about it. They need to interview a theater level Sustainment Commander, to get the real story.
    What the President has decided to do is take units that are in the latter part of this force generation process, and send then to Afghanistan ahead of schedule (robbing Peter to pay Paul). He will then hold them in Afghanistan for 16 to 18 months (to the point of exhaustion). This will leave the U.S. with diminished reserve forces for the next two to three years. The 18 month timeline is not a political or strategic timetable for withdrawal; it is a logistical issue. President Obama is only saying that he is not willing to plan on going outside our financial and logistic means to prosecute this war.
    Though we might be the preeminent military power in the world, Congress only has so much money to spend. The President will not, for logistical reasons, be able to extend or enhance the surge (unless nine months before hand, Congress raises money to expand the size of the Army; and, we all know that’s not going to happen). This means that the surge is not sustainable beyond the 18 months, and that withdrawn troops will not be replaceable for almost a year afterward. At the end of the surge, the total troop level will be (I estimate) 65% of today’s size. However, it could be years before we actually “exit” Afghanistan.

    I know this because I am one of the co-authors for the U.S. Army’s Modular Force Logistics Concept.

    ISSUE #2, Training the Afghanistan Army & Police:
    It might be possible for the Afghanistan government to conscript an additional fifty or sixty thousand young men into uniform. But wearing a uniform doesn’t make a person into a soldier. Two months of basic training doesn’t really make a person into a soldier. As a retired infantry sergeant, I know that it takes two years to train and mentor a person to be a competent soldier. It takes three to four years to develop proficient sergeants and junior officers. It takes five to eight years to develop skilled commanders.
    More bodies without good leadership does not make an army; it makes a gang with guns. If we throw the Afghan Army into the four front of this fight before they are ready, they will panic and desert. So, if our experienced soldiers say that the Afghan Army is not ready, why are reporters asking politicians for their opinions?

    December 6, 2009 at 6:13 pm | Report abuse |
  13. Pauline Hartwig

    The best strategy may not be the one being presented, but there is not any doubt that the worse strategy is the one being presented by the Congress – their partisan finger pointing, their lack of knowledge as to what really sends the wrong image to the enemy. A divided nation – as we have been and continue to be is the wrong image my friends and very likely to prolong and lose the battle. I personally am very sorry for that.

    December 6, 2009 at 4:07 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Peggy Molloy

    If we demonize the Republicans for going to bed with the oil lords, why can't we even mention that the Democrats may well be in the sack with the poppy lords. No one has even breathed the words "illicit drug supplies for the United States" does exist you know.
    Is it a surprise our young people return from war in the Middle East addicted to drugs?
    Obama said nothing about the drug trade that is ongoing, perhaps in the very family of the new President we are supporting. This brings me great sorrow, isn't it bad enough that we as a society put our heads in the sand, literally, about drug use, legal and illegal in our own country, and now it gets swept under the proverbial rug in Afganistan. Are we so afraid of the truth,... we cannot win if we cannot face the truth of the situation.

    December 5, 2009 at 10:49 pm | Report abuse |
  15. Joe Matulic

    Why does'nt the army disguise some of their soldiers as afganis or iraqis and let them wander the areas as sheep herders and then they can gather intel on the terrorists

    December 5, 2009 at 5:51 pm | Report abuse |
  16. Donna Manna

    My son is a Marine that redeployed from Iraq to Afghanistan on Tuesday. I support the 30,000 going in to Afghanistan. Let's kick ass and bring our son's and daughter's home.

    December 5, 2009 at 4:16 pm | Report abuse |
  17. robert waite

    read James Perloff's SHADOWS OF POWER and you will und\erstand why there is no possible way "OBAMA's" "plan" will "work"!!!

    December 5, 2009 at 12:24 pm | Report abuse |
  18. Bryan

    My Grandfather was a commander of the British Garrison in the Kyber Pass in what was then the North West Frontier of India, in the early part of the 1900's and was reported to have said upon returning to England that the region was unrulable as it was controlled by lawless warlords and criminal seems not very much has changes and the powers that be prefer to ignore the pass failures over more than 100's bull, just a moneymaker for the bigs boys while our boys get killed.

    It's big business fueled by our tax dollars....

    Vancouver Canada

    December 5, 2009 at 11:45 am | Report abuse |
  19. Edith Suero

    I feel that Obama should think of another strategy on how to get Osama and other main leaders. They should get someone who is trustworthy enough to get close to where Osama is believed to be. In this case, they could avoid all the manslaughter that is happening. This exit strategy is not going to work good. They need to win the TRUST of the Afghans and by this the TRANSITION should be able to go smoother. They will need more than just troops to get to Osama and others. Obama should not be saying the how's, the what's, and the where's of the troops because this will make it more easierr and dangerous for the troops to get hurt, As well as for the enemies to know everything that they have to know in order for them to have the bigger hand. Osama is probably laughing at the U.S because after so many years, he still has the upper hand.

    December 5, 2009 at 11:31 am | Report abuse |
  20. SPC. Cordle, Christopher

    This plan that Obama has is an undecided factor by all! There is no telling how it will happen or even if it will be effective enough to stop the ongoing fight against terror.. the only difference is that instead of Iraq, It is Afghanistan that we will implace our selves for how ever more years that this war will last.

    December 5, 2009 at 11:18 am | Report abuse |
  21. elizabeth


    December 5, 2009 at 10:35 am | Report abuse |
  22. joann burbano

    i honestly dont think this is the solution to the problem, unless there is something the general public doesnt know reqarding the plan and is it going to the root of the problem for
    the end result to be the outcome desired. I would like to see more funding for the capture of bin laden and if indeed some other technique of narrowing down money sources funding the terrorist cells .

    December 5, 2009 at 1:24 am | Report abuse |
  23. Jerry Telle Lakewood CO USA

    Obama's plan will work because it is an open ended optioned plan. As the hard reality of fundamentalist psychosis settles into the rest of the world - the way will be obvious.

    December 4, 2009 at 10:19 pm | Report abuse |
  24. Jerry Telle Lakewood CO USA

    There is no 2 ways about it - the Taliban are an extremely cohesive terrorist faction. The ONLY in Afghanistan. They WILL overrun the country just like the Nazis and Stalin's red communists - if left alone to their archaic, amputation/death defined, insanity.

    December 4, 2009 at 6:11 pm | Report abuse |
  25. Andrew

    People who are saying that the Soviets did not invest in Afghanistan's infrastructure, and this is the reason why the lost the war, should educate themselves on the subject. They actually invested more than we did as part of their propaganda campaign, and the remains of this infrastructure can still be seen today. Of course, this is not the point. Just like the Soviets, we will not win hearts and minds in Afghanistan. We are even more foreign to Afghanis than the Russians. We will always be occupiers, and they will always shoot us in the back. With the latest surge we are going to surpass the number of troops the Soviet Union had in Afghanistan. I pray that we will not reach or surpass their death toll. It is simply not worth it. Taliban did not come to power to challenge the US. They actually came with our help, although we don't like to be reminded of that. None of the terrorists of 9/11 were Afghanis. The people who organized the attack are long gone. What are we still doing there? I wish out eloquent president had the courage to end it NOW.

    December 4, 2009 at 4:58 pm | Report abuse |
  26. pablo

    The Afghans are a lot like the Iraqi's. The sunnis and shittes hate each other and in Afghanistan the tribes are so divided that they only care about their own suvival not the countries government survival. If our stategy is to back the governemnt then we will fail if we don't go to each tribe and convince them that a central government is in their best interest. I don't see the US doing the tribal convincing.

    December 4, 2009 at 4:16 pm | Report abuse |
  27. Contumacious

    Exit strategy?


    The US foreign policy is " Once we invade you we love you long time"


    December 4, 2009 at 4:10 pm | Report abuse |
  28. Miles Monroe

    At least this president has a plan and an exit stragey. I think President Obama is on point with his speech and actions towards Afghan. I like the leadership he has shown. With that said, no matter how how hard you study, research and analyze the situation, there is still a chance of failure. Ithink President Obama has prepared for the best and worst case scenarios. All in all, this is no where nor can every get close to being as horrible as George W. Bush presidential term.

    December 4, 2009 at 3:01 pm | Report abuse |
  29. Nick

    Jack you are dead on reminds me when the Seals arrived in Mogadishu with all the bright lights from the media etc... shhhh were sneaking up on you but wait if you tune into the news you can watch us sneaking up!

    December 4, 2009 at 3:01 pm | Report abuse |
  30. Jack

    Having served in Viet Nam in 67/68 I don't understand why we tell the world how many troops we are sending in the surge,where they are going to be, when they will get there, and how long they are staying. Isn't this telling the enemy where not to be and for how long not to be there? So far I haven't heard where we are setting up camp but that may come. America seems to have difficulty keeping our mouth shut and that cost lives to our brave men and women.

    December 4, 2009 at 2:46 pm | Report abuse |
  31. Contumacious

    Whether or not it will "work" depends on whom you ask.

    Halliburton. KBR, and other war profiteers will say the the surge is a good idea. So will war mongers, jingoists and neo-conservatives. So will the naive and gullible.


    December 4, 2009 at 1:19 pm | Report abuse |
  32. Dodie

    I find it saddening the reasons we are asking for the spilling of bloodshed and sacrifice from our young men and women who are fighting in Afghanistan. The Afghanistan War is now becoming the Afghanistan-Pakistan War. Afghanistan and Pakistani are angered at the civilian casualties resulting from the US combat tactics. The war in Afghanistan is becoming atrocious for both our troops and for the Afghan civilian population. The strategic benefits are non-existent and the risks of expanding the war are alarming. The humanitarian consequences are appalling

    To be forthcoming, our stated strategy of securing Afghanistan to prevent Al-Qaeda resurgence or regrouping should have been conducted 8 years ago in 2001. Now it would require us to additionally invade and occupy western Pakistan, Somalia and Sudan.

    Meanwhile our infrastructure is a mess. Our highways, bridges and dams all need work. Yet we continue to drain this country with war based on “fear” in a country that has been established Al-Qaeda is no longer there.

    If you want Bin Laden, the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, look for the money trail. Look for the 'hawala' money in Saudi, Russia and India which is directly linked to terrorist financing. Has anyone thought that we are playing into Bin Laden, Al-Qaeda's hand by continuing to drain America of its resources?

    December 4, 2009 at 1:15 pm | Report abuse |
  33. Alexander Castagno

    Being a veteran of the Iraq war in which I was in Iraq durning the troop build up in 2006-07. I didn't see many changes while I was there the first time around but I did go back over in 2008-09 and I saw a dramatic change from the first time over. I believe that this was because of the troop build up. Now for the Afghanistan war I believe that a troop build up can bring change to the country but I don't believe that 30,000 is enough. The battlefield is much bigger than it was in Iraq, but I do believe that there will be come positive things come out of this. I hope that this build up will help to complete our mission over there as it did in Iraq.

    December 4, 2009 at 12:50 pm | Report abuse |
  34. Doug

    It won't work. How arrogant is it of us to think that we can solve ancient rivalries and disputes with a short anti-terrorism campaign. Afganistan is called the graveyard of empires for a reason. Thousands of years of history in the region should have taught us that by now. The thought that this time is any different is naive.

    We need to find a way to maintain some pride, but still get out fast. With what we have spent in lives and money, the Taliban has already won. Let's not make it worse, wreck our economy more, by sending good people and money into an unwinable situation..

    December 4, 2009 at 12:08 pm | Report abuse |
  35. ace wonder

    i dont know why people think that going to war is bad you should know that sometimes it is the one and only solution you have to resort to somtimes have to lose something to recive something in return even if it takes time and suffering to acomplish it

    December 4, 2009 at 11:57 am | Report abuse |
  36. ace wonder

    i think taht we should be in afghanistan today because not only of the 911 incident but because if no one tries to stop them no one will and then they will think they are in power so then they will start taking over other little countries right after they are done with this one once they have consumed alot of countries then it would be to late and then you will crying to the goverment why we couldnt stop something from happenig overseas like genocide or tortuter of other people or when we get attacked again the terrorist might be our next break into ww3 if we dont stop them and let them think that they are in power over there it would all start like all the other times like befor

    December 4, 2009 at 11:52 am | Report abuse |
  37. Nick

    I am a former US Marine and Sere /Advanced Sere school survivor! I participated in what I would consider a US Military disaster, known as Operation United Shield which was the evacuation of all UN/US troops in Somalia shortly after blackhawk down incident! It was then 1995 publicized as one of the largest US Military "FLOPS" (losses) in history. How does the US think by being involved in all these different international operations that we can resolve everyone elses problems? 1st things 1st we cant afford to get involved with our debt problems, next we need to consider what the gains are from this if any? and lastly why lose one American life over there, for what? If you can show me what the gains are then I would support it but no one is telling us what we gain from it. And telling me it keeps us safe from terrorism is a poor excuse when we cant even keep party crashers away from the WHite House in our own backyard! ALTHOUGH I SUPPORT THE MEN AND WOMEN IN THE ARMED FORCES 100%!!! WANT FURTHER COMMENT CALL ME ANYTIME (914)737-2008 or (914) 755-4695 SEMPER FIDELIS!!!!!

    December 4, 2009 at 11:33 am | Report abuse |
  38. Fred Mitchel

    President Obama has one he'll of a mess to deal with. Among the many things done poorly by the last administration was Afghanistan war/nation building. President Obama deserves, and needs, every American's support, instead of the constant drum beat if "NO!" coming from the very people who created these problems. With support, and patience, Obama's plan can work, but he needs us to pull together.

    December 4, 2009 at 11:31 am | Report abuse |
  39. Chris Klemos

    The mistke made was not staying in Afganistan after 1989, but, rather going into Afganistan in the first place. We were never there for humanitarian purposes – we began there as a covert military operation to counter activity of the Solviet Union. We are there now – in limited occupation, essentially assisting them in the growing and harvesting of heroine.

    The Generals in the Pentagon want to keep their jobs and keep military expansion funded -so they create the illusion that military presence is serving a purpose in Iraq and Afganistan. However, as in Vietnam – no matter how sophisticated your weaponry is or how advanced your technology – you cannot conduct a war or win a war – when the soldier on the ground cannot distinguish the enemy from the general populous. The only time a soldier knows the enemy is present is when they are blown up by a roadside bomb or EAD or sniped – it which case they are dead or wounded and the enemy long gone. We are placing our youth in an impossible situation that we will pay for is ways that are incomprehensible. Perhaps, we should form a battalion of soldiers consisting of current and former congressmen – as well as generals – and have they serve a rotation in Afganistan as front line troops. That would be sufficient to change their attitudes about the war.

    Not to mention the cost of all this nonsense to an already failed economy.

    December 4, 2009 at 11:26 am | Report abuse |
  40. Lisa

    This war is very real to those of us who have a loved one over there. I for one am tired of all the politics. Whether it is ours or not, may be debated, but the fact remains that this war was started years ago and it is impossible to simply just pull out the troops as that process takes months. Without support, it's guaranteed that more will die. I for one am tired of getting emails letting me know that more of my loved one’s friends are dead. Whether you agree with it or not, they need more support over there. Never in your life could you understand what it's like to hear your loved one say that his platoon was wiped out by a massive IED or what it's like to your loved one say that he’s tired of seeing his friends get blown up–unless you've got someone over there. Think what you will about the war, but keep in mind that it’s easy to gamble with the lives of people who are strangers to you. It isn’t so easy when you know their names and faces. Give them what they need to simply survive and then get them out.

    December 4, 2009 at 11:05 am | Report abuse |
  41. Contumacious

    We should have NEVER invaded Afghanistan. We have NO reason to be there. The Taliban is NOT the problem. The problem is the warmongers, jingoists and interventionists in Washington DC who love meddling in the internal affairs of other nations. As long as they exist there will be an Al Qaeda and a Taliban.

    December 4, 2009 at 10:39 am | Report abuse |
  42. Victor Rolanti

    People will say they hate war. I believe most of us do, but when evil deeds break the law of humanity, we all lose. Murdering people in the name of God is warped and without a dobut as evil and vile as it can get.Allowing this to happen makes us as guilty as the perpertrators.My answer to this is yes,and let's do it right this time.I'm a veteran and grew up in Brooklyn. If you couldn't fight in the neighborhood that I I lived in you would not survive. At a very early age I learned if I went into a fight half-heartedly,I would lose, I also learned that if I went into the fight hard and fast with overpowering fury I always won. Let's do it right this time, and in the end game save lives. Let's rid ourselves of this cancer that is spreading throughout the world.

    December 4, 2009 at 10:36 am | Report abuse |
  43. Bonnie

    The region grows opium poppies. The violence is directly related to this crop. US forces patrol beside the crops, but cannot destroy. We are spending a fortune in an attempt to stabilize the area, as did Russia. The farmers are paid to grow poppies, so it seems reasonable to pay them to switch to a non drug related crop. However much the payment, it would still be less than the fortune we're investing. At the very least we would be eliminating the majority of poppy crops, and allowing the farmers and their families to grow food.

    December 4, 2009 at 10:00 am | Report abuse |
  44. john

    When is the united states going to stop sticking it's nose in other countries business? We need to protect our own borders. Stop wasting money overseas. Keep the money here to help Americans!

    December 4, 2009 at 9:50 am | Report abuse |
  45. Sean

    Not a prayers chance in hell! This is not a plan, its an attempt to nullify the effects of a very smart religious insurgency! Why has the world failed to recognize this? We are so politically afraid of radical muslims screaming CRUSADE, that we stand on the sidelines and ignore what they are screaming, JIHAD! Wake up, you cannot win a religious war. They know they can't either, but unlke us, they are not afraid to tell the world that they are waging one successfully against us! This is a world war and we are treating it like its in the hills of one country..... we are doing the worlds work for what, Karzai? You have got to be kidding me!

    How are we losing this war? By curtailing the very freedoms we founded our country on in the name of security. Are we more secure today than on 9-10? NO! We are less secure because we fail to fight the war that should be fought! Why hold back?

    As long as Karzai is in power and he's playing backdoor politics with warlords and crooked tribal leaders we are putting our soldiers in harms way to protect a people that historically, DON'T NEED PROTECTION! They do this just fine on their own and unless this country is willing to make Afganistan the 51st state, we should pack up and get out and fight the terrorists clandestinely!

    December 4, 2009 at 9:49 am | Report abuse |
  46. john

    Why do we announce our war plans to the enemy? I don't think ike told Hitler that D-Day was coming!

    December 4, 2009 at 9:46 am | Report abuse |
  47. ERBydon

    Ref # 134: Outstanding, Mr. Crosby! Simply outstanding! ‘That’s a wrap’ on this subject. Readers, this man knows whereof he speaks.

    December 4, 2009 at 9:11 am | Report abuse |
  48. SFM

    As long as the Talaban can hide in Pakastan with a high degree of safety, we are wasting our soilders lives and actually pouring billions and billions of dollars into the enemies hands Corruption in Pakistan and Afganistan makes it impossible to achieve our goals working with the armies and officials of these countries. We are so stupid. Since Viet Nam, we do not know how to fight these kind of wars. Having our troops patrol streets just to get road bombed is so wrong.

    If we are not prepared to go to where the enemy is, get out of there.

    December 4, 2009 at 9:03 am | Report abuse |
  49. Geoff Maguire

    The president is in a damned if you do damned if you don't situation. I don't think we ultimately have the willingness to put the kind of terrible hurt on the bad guys (and teh women and children they hide with) that will be required to get this ended. "Kinder gentler wars, winning hearts and minds, training".... .Good Morning Vietnam!

    Even if we had the testicular fortitude to bomb them back into the stone age it wouldn't work We are dealinjg with a group of people who already live in the 11th century and love it that way. They know we value life more than they do and sooner or later we will give up.

    Isolating Afghanistan is quite doable. We should find a way to do it then leave them be. Pakistan will be harder but someone must put the screws to the Pakistani elite who live sin both worlds and are playing the US (and the British even more so) for suckers... ie tight sanctions, restrictions on travel, no more easy immigration to the UK. Make them stay home and deal with the problem. Take thier nukes while were at it.

    I ahve no delusions that any of this will happenn but..

    December 4, 2009 at 8:45 am | Report abuse |
  50. Winona

    People will always complain. They complain about his plan being to vague, they complain about him being too detailed on the exit strategy. I am going to trust his judgment. He took the time needed to think this through. As Jim R posted, he has the intelligence information needed to make this decision.

    December 4, 2009 at 8:28 am | Report abuse |
  51. Jim R

    I trust in the Presidents ability to do what is right in Afganistan. He, not the general public, has the intelligence information needed to make these life or death decisions. He will do what is best for the United States.

    December 4, 2009 at 8:17 am | Report abuse |
  52. Ron

    Remember Charlie Wilson, lil ole Congressman from Texas.
    We are not in the business of nation building, however, we do need to bring this war to an end with a country that can stand up its own military and police force. Osama Bin Ladin still lurks between PAK and AFGHAN borders.

    December 4, 2009 at 8:13 am | Report abuse |
  53. mike adams

    Of course it won't work. No war strategy based on political objectives has ever been successfully achieved.

    December 4, 2009 at 8:12 am | Report abuse |
  54. Gil Dachler

    Anyway if he's not successful we shoult start to tell young women to stop getting children. If islamic fundamentalists have access to the bomb it would be irresponsible to create life, I guess.

    I'm not sure whether the critics of Obama really see the abyss in front of them. And to say "We made them what they are today" might be true, but is not really a reason to let them grasp at the bomb.

    December 4, 2009 at 5:11 am | Report abuse |
  55. Naim

    Afghanistan is known for not accepting foreign occupations. the matter for fact is that all those who have invaded this land had one thing in common. Either they have not cared to build this country or those who cared to build this country, have taken so long to proof themselves to the people of Afghanistan. I think U.S. is one of those invader who have taken it's sweet time to build this country. Though, it's not too late! The increase in the number of troops in Afghanistan is a smart move from President Obama. They way I understood the new strategy is: That half of these troops will be primarily working in training Afghan National Police and Afghan National Army. And the other half will be working on building roads, schools and working with keeping the Karzai's government clean from corruption, and making sure that the farmers are not using their land to produce the world number one killer.

    I hope I am right and I hope this strategy goes well.


    December 4, 2009 at 3:33 am | Report abuse |
  56. Fred Bain

    Here we go again. I am a mitlitary veteran and am both ranger and special forces qualified. I spent part of my career serving George Bush Sr. and then Bill Clinton. The one thing I learned is it's easy for someone to send soldiers to die if they've never been in those shoes. Clinton did it and he was actually a draft dodger. George Jr. did it and he bought his way out of the military (or daddy did it for him). Now we have Obama. The generals are nothing more than politicians in uniform and if they speak out they suddenly decide to retire. When are we going to make it a requirement that the president has had to serve in our armed forces? I don't care what branch or in what job, nor do I care if it's in a war time era. It should be mandatory. Clinton, Bush Jr., and Obama have never known what it's like to lose a friend or see one die. Maybe if they had they would not be so complacent as to sending our friends and family off to fight in a war the politicians control. Will the troop escalation work? Easy answer, hell no. It may in the short run but that's it. Iraq and Afghanistan governments are corrupt as are our reasons for being there. When are we going to learn that trying to force our will on other countries is fruitless. These people have been living and fighting long before we as a country came about and always will. Does Vietnam ring a bell? Look at the Russian fiasco in Afghanistan. Our nation is not the police force of the world and what we think is right and just should not be pushed on other nations. For all those who disagree with what I write that's fine. You have that right and it's been protected by those of us that have served. Why do you think 911 happened? That's easy as well. A group of people got tired of being bullied by the U.S. and acted. What would happen if we were on the receiving end of a country telling us what to do? We'd do the same thing. Remember, we're the only country to ever use a weapon of mass destruction (Hiroshima & Nagasaki) so what makes us so special.

    December 3, 2009 at 11:25 pm | Report abuse |
  57. Sabrina

    Right on Farmergreg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    December 3, 2009 at 10:23 pm | Report abuse |
  58. Jerry

    TO Farmergreg:

    If you would like to talk more about this, please email me at . I look forward to talking to you. By the way, I'm ex-military and was involved in the Iranian hostage rescue attempt while stationed at Diego Garcia (Indian Ocean).

    Sincerely, Jerry

    December 3, 2009 at 8:54 pm | Report abuse |
  59. Andrej K.

    I was very happy when Obama was elected the new US president and really believed that he CAN change some things. He started healthcare reform, a brave move in a country like US but than he announced a 30.000 additional soldiers will be sent to Iraq and this tiny spec of light for a new and more humane America dissppeared in a second for me. it appears that the US is still a wild west lead by people who believe war is the solution to everything and that "American democracy" is the true world democracy. Well, here's the truth, it's not. Obama needs to understand that sending thoussands of young men and women into a far muslim country and capturing Osama will not bring democracy to Afghanistan. Afghans are not thought an do not understand the modern worls the way America does. In my opinion the best solution for the US is to say we tried we did not succeed. We will now pull out of the country and continue to support it financially. Same goes for Iraq. It's the same story reapiting with Afghanistan. No, Obama's plan will NOT work out and he will suffer greatly for his decision to send additional troops. i believe he will loose a lot of support at home. America has to understand that nobody will sit an dwatch while they occupie their country and kill innocent people. As soon as the US pulls out of Afghanistan I am certian that Talliban will stop bathering Americans with all kinds of threats and terrorist actions.

    December 3, 2009 at 7:19 pm | Report abuse |
  60. Hunsby

    My question, 10, 20, or 30 years down the road. Will we see a difference in Afghanistan? If not, then why do more Americans need to die?

    December 3, 2009 at 6:51 pm | Report abuse |
  61. Andrew Crosby

    I read quite a few comments on this subject and stay up to date on this subject as a former Infantry squad leader with the 10th MTN Division. Lets get serious for a moment. If I had been captured during a tour in Afghanistan and told my captors troop strengths, sizes, and locations and especially strategy I would have been a traitor to my country. Why is it ok for the Commanderin Chief or any military officer or employee of the country able to do so with know repricussion. What this has done is help the enemy regardless of how many troops we send. We just gave a big boost to the enemy recruiting effort because by giving an end date we are showing our leaders are faultering and losing faith. Furthermore, the strategy is full of holes and created as always by officers who aren't serving on the ground. Get some of your NCO's in their to advise. They see face to face what works.
    In my opinion, it is impossible to win this type of war without the support of the people in the host country. We have not the support in Afghanistan of the locals. They honestly do not care and are not a united country. There is no real self of country there and where these terrorist dwell. We need to draw down the number of troops to just enough to sustain CIA and Special ops missions. Target individuals and collect intelligence and cut the heads off the snakes as they pop up. A decisive victory cannot be one by an outside force, only limiting the threat to us. Afghanistsn needs to takeresponsibility for itself and where it wants to go. If we send most of the conventional forces home, the enemy will show itself again and we can eliminate them. Right now they can outlast us because they are home with their families and in their country.

    December 3, 2009 at 6:22 pm | Report abuse |
  62. Norah Fox

    I have a question that may you answer for me because I can not find the answer

    Why is the 2009 nobel peace prize winner incresing the war? sending 34K soldiers to Iraq..(killing the budget spending more money that we do not have) ( Killing more people) ( sad Xmas for soldiers families) Does not he supposed to promote peace... or why is the real meaning of the nobel PEACE prize? his promises were lies!

    December 3, 2009 at 6:21 pm | Report abuse |
  63. Dannnnnnnnnna

    I think it will work well. I think Obama is doing a great job in the white house! OBAMA!

    December 3, 2009 at 6:08 pm | Report abuse |
  64. Jaspreet Gill

    Dear Alvi, You shouldn't blame India for Pakistan and Afghanistan's mistakes. Afghanistan made the mistake of accepting Osama into their country, Pakistan made the mistake of supporting him. India made the mistake of not storming Pakistan to catch Osama.
    Dear Treetop007, If I were old enough, i would be over there in Afghanistan fighting for our country. I am not. Thank you

    December 3, 2009 at 6:08 pm | Report abuse |
  65. Dana

    I do.

    December 3, 2009 at 6:07 pm | Report abuse |
  66. Jaspreet Gill

    pulling out our troops will be supporting Osama. The next 9/11 will be worse if we don't stop him. Stop the lies, support our troops, stop Osama.

    Jaspreet Gill, the seventh grader.

    December 3, 2009 at 6:01 pm | Report abuse |
  67. carolyn

    It is wonderful to finally see President Obama take charge and make decisions based on his consultation with his defense cabinet and his interactions with world leaders. which may not be pleasing to all. I believe his plan will work and I fully support Obama's efforts to end America's involvement by using a timeline. I believe he is making the best decision possible for the well-being of the whole United States and the world at large.

    A true leader is not intimated by uninformed citizens, bias news media persons and political enemies who sit yelling out their OPINIONS. History has shown that unpopular decisions have turned the couse of American history for the better...Obama realizes you can't please everyone.

    December 3, 2009 at 5:32 pm | Report abuse |
  68. grrace

    Dear Roy. I don't see any questions from you. However I have one more.

    You said "we are getting attacked without foundation..." I beg to differ. Have you ever asked yourself or researched WHY?

    Then you said, "it's because we supported Isreal since 1949..." So, for you, you just answered your own question. Then, perhaps we ARE being attacked with foundation?

    However, if "our national decisions are made by what business needs to keep our economy going" INCLUDE trying be PIRATES, being a pirate of Iraqi oil, a PIRATE of Afghani oil, YOU sir, can count me OUT.

    Last question. Do YOU sit around your kitchen table everyday, "plotting ways to kill" Afghani and Pakastani families?"

    December 3, 2009 at 4:17 pm | Report abuse |
  69. juan

    this is gonna be hard

    December 3, 2009 at 4:14 pm | Report abuse |
  70. grrace

    Dear Carlos. Thank you for your post. If it's natural gas, owned by the PEOPLE of Afghanistan...homegrown...for their energy uses, I could support that. NO oil, NO nuclear power. Period. I have to agree on the link with industry and jobs to energy.

    However, I saw that "tip of the spear" documentary. And there was a small segment where the soldiers walked into a "Taliban" village. Everything was clean, beautiful, built of stone by hand. It appeared extremely quiet and religious...but I don't see the need for 'oil' there.

    December 3, 2009 at 3:37 pm | Report abuse |
  71. Roy Badstuebner

    Grrace, I don't see you asking questions only making bold statemants. Apparently you are privy to info that I have never heard of. All I'm saying is that I feel as though we are getting attacked without foundation. I believe the US acts according to international law. I know our national decisions are made by what business needs to keep our economy going. The issue at hand is that there are people in Afghanistan and Pakistan plotting ways to kill you and your family. Why? When did it start? Is it because we have supported Isreal since 1949?

    December 3, 2009 at 3:35 pm | Report abuse |
  72. grrace

    I sure hope Obama's plan includes arming the women. Maybe the NRA could help out with that?

    December 3, 2009 at 2:59 pm | Report abuse |
  73. Ron

    In answer to the And not for anymore reason than that.

    December 3, 2009 at 2:44 pm | Report abuse |
  74. Roy Badstuebner

    Carlos, I do agree with you again. It is about nation building. It is about an economy and security. See comment 7 earlier in this string.

    December 3, 2009 at 2:42 pm | Report abuse |
  75. farmergreg

    Carlos you state that you would like us to build a pipeline? Why do I owe the people of Afghanistan anything explain that to me. I owe them nothing. I owe my troops and will support them, Grace you asked how many lives make it square, for me the answer is simple the life of everyone of the people involved or that celebrated it happening when they are all dead I will call it square.

    December 3, 2009 at 2:40 pm | Report abuse |
  76. grrace

    Roy, your "messed up in the head" comment is out of line. I have debated my side with more dignity and I feel I have asked important questions. I guess you have no answers for important questions. Please to tell me that we are in Afghanistan to improve the rights of women. You will be laughed off this page. The "mission" of "American interests" to bring "properity" is for an OIL pipeline for Unocal, Exxon, or whatever name they are going under at the moment. It has NOTHING to do with women being beaten. AS as MATTER of FACT, Karzi and his government were raping the little boys in the villages, which is WHY Afghans turned to the Taliban for help. This is WHY Afghans and Taliban are against the Karzi corrupt government.

    Actually, I also believe that there are very very low taxes in Afghanistan. I hope that will be a magnet to draw over all the Americans who don't want to pay taxes.

    Again, Please don't tell me that we are there to improve the rights and lives of the women. Then why are none in the Karzi government? You are laughed at when you say that.

    December 3, 2009 at 2:27 pm | Report abuse |
  77. Roy Badstuebner

    Grace, you are messed up in the head. This is not about retaliation. This is about a group of murderers that march into weak and defensless countries and force people to live in a way that they don't want. How would you feel if you could not vote, had to walk 3 paces back of your man, could be beaten to near death by any man because you went out in public without your face covered, had your genitals cut off, could be killed for disgracing your family? If the Afghan people wanted this and the taliban did not allow people to train so that they could learn how to attack then fine go ahead and live anyway you want. Nobody invited Taliban and Alquaeda people into this area and they attacked us because we stand for human rights. I'm not stupid either if this area was unstable and oil stopped flowing and your house was cold and you had no gas for your car what would you do?

    December 3, 2009 at 1:59 pm | Report abuse |
  78. carlos

    Everyone's comments are quite interesting and very American. For a moment ask yourself why are the conditions in Afghanistan so primitive compared the the western world. Grace makes a point about the Solders of Big Oil. The addition of a Natural Gas pipeline across the country would go a long way to help end the fighting in the country. Without energy you cannot have industry, without industry you cannot have jobs, its a simple equation. The Poppy grows because its the only domestic cash crop that feeds families and pays wages.
    The introduction of cheap and accessible natural gas would help to spur industrial growth and create jobs in Afghanistan. The Russians had no interest in growing the country and made no investments in infrastructure to help the Afghan people, hence they lost. If we can help to create and infrastructure and help spur industrial growth the conflict will one day come to an end. In a country with few laws, little government support and a 80% illiteracy rate is a perfect place to grow a terrorist organization nad create a never ending cycle of despair. Set in motion a framework that grows the country and creates a future, people will put down the guns, get to work and go about their lives. You can put 100,000 more troops on the ground, with the same results as the Russians, The mission is nation building and to grow the future for the Afghan people.

    December 3, 2009 at 1:57 pm | Report abuse |
  79. grrace

    rOY. Our troops in where? In Lebanon, someone else's country. Uss Cole was where? Yemen, in someone else's waters. If you don't want to get shot at, stop sending military forces into other nations, stop 'occupying', stop being the aggressor. Americans are so ignorant, they think they can go anywhere and take anything they want, ANYTIME they want it. Well, when you're a bully, sometimes you're going to get slapped. I think Americans are so ignorant as to the military harm and ecological harm we do on other nations, it took two planes rammed up our butts to get the message. The message is "this is not YOUR country or waters to control."

    Do you know why there are Somali pirates? Do you? Because we and other nations are dumping, DUMPING garbage and toxic waste into the waters where they fish for food...poisoning there families. So, maybe they don't like us very much.

    December 3, 2009 at 1:56 pm | Report abuse |
  80. Roy Badstuebner

    Grace, What do you mean for no good reason. You call 3000 dead in NY no good reason. We were not attacking Taliban or Alqueada forces in 1993 when the tried to blow up the 1 of the trade buidings that I can think of. What about in 1983 when they killed 250 Marines in a truck bomb blast in Lebanon. They were there acting as a peace contingency. What about the attack on the USS Cole were 17 sailors died. Who is dropping bombs on who. That is why we are there.

    December 3, 2009 at 1:25 pm | Report abuse |
  81. grrace

    HELLO aSHleigh, 9/11 was years ago. We lost 3,000 people in a "terrorist" attack. We have now killed over 4,000 American troops in Iraq, one million Iraqi's, and I don't know the body count for Afghanistan, but I will bet dollars it's more than 3,000. HOW MANY PEOPLE DO WE HAVE TO KILL in RETALIATION? What's the NUMBER that will satisfy YOU? wHEN are we 'SQUARE?"

    December 3, 2009 at 1:18 pm | Report abuse |
  82. farmergreg

    Grace, I live in Oklahoma and yes Grace my forefathers where your Cowboys and yes Grace I have the mentality of a Cowboy. But maybe you better look at the true belief Grace the Cowboy accepted any man that worked hard red, black what ever color; work caring his load was his task. You have watched to many television shows. Grace the cowboys mentality wasn't the shoot out but if you picked a fight he would fight it and fight it to win. Some of you forget we are still here and we are a very independent lot. Republican, Democrat doesn't make any difference to me what are you doing that is what I value and I can't see obama doing anything that I can support. Yes Grace we are still here I don't put my nose in other peoples affairs but on 9/11 the Muslim world picked a fight with us now if they want a fight I am to Old to serve but I support those who do. Do I support our country yes, Do I support obama NO. He is the President and I accept that but I think it was a poor choice. Don't ask me to sit and be quiet when a fight is coming Grace, I still struggle with the idea of going over there and fighting but I like it better than the idea of fighting here.

    December 3, 2009 at 1:00 pm | Report abuse |
  83. grrace

    If we continue to try and "stop them there" they WILL come here. You think we can just go around the world and drop bombs on other countries for no good reason, and not have those people come after us? You think we can attack attack attack, and not receive attacks? You think we are immune? Roy?

    December 3, 2009 at 12:49 pm | Report abuse |
  84. Roy Badstuebner

    It is not about spending money or sending young men to fight or supporting a President. It is about defending our homeland. We don't have to worry about a conventional war but that is the problem, its not conventional. Don't think for a minute the attack on Fort Hood was not done by a terrorist. There have been other attacks stopped that you will never hear about. I know, my son a U S Marine was texting a MP buddy of his on guard duty at a camp here in the US that stopped a truck at the entrance gate full of explosives. Understand that if we don't stop them there they will be here.

    December 3, 2009 at 12:29 pm | Report abuse |
  85. grrace

    Oh MY Gid, I was watching the CNN coverage last night and some other stations. Suddenly, I had a flashback. We are killing "indians" all over again. Who got us here? A cowboy. We are playing cowboys and indians all over again. Except the cowboys are still "christians" and damn anyone else's faith...kill them. And the only difference today is they have a "nuke 'em" mantra. What ignorant losers.

    I support the President. I support our "christian cowboy soldiers of EXXON" coming home.

    December 3, 2009 at 12:07 pm | Report abuse |
  86. Ashleigh

    HELLO?! Does anyone remember 9/11? I was in NY and I remember EVERYTHING. In the days and weeks after the tragedy, few questioned our decision to be in Afghanistan. Then we got sidetracked because of poor leadership and misinformation. Now, we finally have a president who is bringing the fight to the people who are ultimately responsible for 9/11 and people want OUT? Are you crazy? You must be from some town that will never be attacked or targeted by extremists, like in the middle of nowhere in America. Some of us are still afraid for our friends and family for good reason.

    December 3, 2009 at 11:54 am | Report abuse |
  87. grrace

    farmergreg. You don't know of any "christian groups that bombed towers and killed innocents?" wHAT do you think they've been doing in Iraq and Afghanistan for the the last eight years? Clipping their toenails?

    December 3, 2009 at 11:38 am | Report abuse |
  88. kevin

    Why haven't We nuked these idiots yet? Only thing that'll stop em.
    Dont give me that human rights bull. All people have rights until they hurt another human being, then they are worthless. These terrorists have no respesct for human life and therefore we should have no respect for theirs. Remove all the noncombatants and then nuke the place.

    December 3, 2009 at 11:31 am | Report abuse |
  89. Chris Fox

    Change We Can Believe In? Powered Up...Ready to Go where? Inflation, Unemployment, Markets, Social Programs, Health Insurance, Diminshed world opinion, what the heck happened? He was supposed to "Change" that. It just goes to show Democrats are as stupid if not more so than Republicans. The late Senator Ted Kennedy said, "I smell change in the air." I don't smell anything. Oh add Pakistan to the list. I love the way he pronounces the name of that country.. What is needed is not a conventional army, but more Advisors, and Training Programs. The look on the faces of those West Point cadets was heartbreaking. He wants to make both Parties happy and will do neither. I believed and lost. After re-election time comes up....I will do one of two things: Not vote, or vote Republican. At least you know what they will do. I'm heartsick for our poor men and women in uniform...sons, daughters who will grow up w/o Fathers/Mothers/Aunts/Uncles/Cousins....and for what? To test success after a set timeline of a year? Give me a break.

    December 3, 2009 at 10:36 am | Report abuse |
  90. farmergreg

    Jerry, definitely would like to have a conversation with you but I have a history with the Muslim people also and yes I know the majority of the 9//11 attackers where from Saudi Arabia. Personally cant think of any Radical Christian groups that have bombed towers and killed three thousand innocents.

    December 3, 2009 at 9:54 am | Report abuse |
  91. John Del Rosario

    We do not need more dead bodies; send iour troops home. Let Afganistanm and Iraq protect their own countrygh enough is enough ! Protect the USA from the inside; make harder immigration laws to keep Afgans and Iraquis out ! John del Rosario

    December 3, 2009 at 9:42 am | Report abuse |
  92. Prudence A. Metz

    As a Military former military dependent and have lived thru WWII and the
    occupation of Japan 1950. My husband was a M/Sgt in the Air Force. His
    job was to make sure the Fighter Jets wwre in top shape.

    At one time he worked on Radar Towers. Retired after 20 years plus.

    After World War II, and a Navy tour, there were no jobs for the Military
    men coming home. Now, the United States should say enough, we
    have helped almost every country in the world. End this war, enough
    men killed for what reason. The Military can stay and protect our




    December 3, 2009 at 7:55 am | Report abuse |
1 2