• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. Congratulates Karzai on Winning Second Term

American said:
Not if he's really a cheater and a puppet.
Click to expand...

He ran the election and the idiot opposing him was the coward who backed out.

You can't argue with these results.
 
Dr.Gonzo said:
Was he democratically elected for another term? .
Click to expand...

I can see it: run by the warlords illiterate goatherders and especially their women freely expressing their independent thoughts on who is going to be the next mayor of Kabul like it realy botheres them!
 
Gibberish said:
I took it as you providing a reason to fight the war. Which, to me, it isn't.
Click to expand...

To you it may not be, but to those who were planning to profit from it, it is a VERY good reason!
 
Elena said:
To you it may not be, but to those who were planning to profit from it, it is a VERY good reason!
Click to expand...

Of course it is to them. I personally don't' believe a countries civilian military shouldn't be used to gain advantages for corporations. That's just me though.
 
Laila said:
He ran the election and the idiot opposing him was the coward who backed out.

You can't argue with these results.
Click to expand...

Maybe he backed out because if **** went wrong 40k troops would be on him like flies. It is a little harder to keep challenging the legitimacy of things with further impending invasion hanging over your head based on your decisions.
 
American said:
Whose puppet is he now?
Click to expand...

You are talking as if the change in president means much! You need to be looking at who is BEHIND Obama, and who was running your show prior to him getting into the White House.
 
Gibberish said:
Your entire post relies on the one fact that you have failed to prove, that the current strategy is failing.
Click to expand...

What!!??:shock: Is the current strat in Afghanistan not a Petreaus type surge that takes on not al-Qaeda, but the Taliban and their control over mountainside and 'rural' Afghanistan?

The situation in Afghanistan is serious, but success is achievable and demands a revised implementation strategy, commitment and resolve, and increased unity of effort," General Stanley McChrystal said. His findings will be submitted to President Barack Obama, who faces a public increasingly restive over a war that has lasted eight years.
Click to expand...

Afghanistan strategy must change, US commander General McChrystal says | World news | guardian.co.uk

Or how about:

The top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan warns in an urgent, confidential assessment of the war that he needs more forces within the next year and bluntly states that without them, the eight-year conflict "will likely result in failure,"
Click to expand...

McChrystal: More Forces or 'Mission Failure' - washingtonpost.com

I haven't seen any evidence that our military efforts will fail if McChrystal was given the resources he requested.
Click to expand...

And if he's not given resources he requested?

Changing strategy does not equate to the current strategy failing.
Click to expand...

So when Bush decided on surging in Iraq, his strat to date wasn't failing? Oh....where were you when Bush was President, we could have used your arguments here!

IMHO, I would rather us focus on Al-Q and eliminating the group that attacked us in 2001 then liberating a country that doesn't care to try and liberate themselves.
Click to expand...

Speaking of short sighted and unrealistic.
 
disneydude said:
You are more concerned with the timing of a decision than you are with the content of such a decision. That mentality is what got us into the mess in the first place.
Click to expand...




Why don't you just claim I punch puppies and be done with it. Your point you want to attribute to me is malformed.


I wan't this president to stop fiddling while our troops are in harms way.
 
Gibberish said:
What exactly is the goal in Afghanistan with the additional troops? Are we trying to remove the Taliban from control? Are we ending corruption in the government? Are we forcing the people of Afghan to, for once in their life, fight for control of their country from?

Or are you for just throwing troops lives away into a pointless war?

I don't see the point of "liberating" people who don't care to be liberated.
Click to expand...




uhm. Again you silly liberals... Attributing positions to me that I don't hold..... :lol:




I think Obama should withdraw, he is far to indecisive and lacks the leadership skills to prosecute this war.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Why don't you just claim I punch puppies and be done with it. Your point you want to attribute to me is malformed.


I wan't this president to stop fiddling while our troops are in harms way.
Click to expand...

You just want him to put more troops in harms way?
 
Gibberish said:
You just want him to put more troops in harms way?
Click to expand...




If you are not going to read what I am actually posting, then perhaps we should find something else to entertain oneself. :shrug:



I am not for more troops.
 
I believe Gen McChrystal also wants to put more troops in harm's way. What does that make him?
 
Charles Martel said:
And if he's not given resources he requested?
Click to expand...

Then it will likely fail. That doesn't not mean the current strategy is failing. It just means that if the strategy isn't given the resources it needs it will fail.

Charles Martel said:
So when Bush decided on surging in Iraq, his strat to date wasn't failing? Oh....where were you when Bush was President, we could have used your arguments here!
Click to expand...

You need to step out of your black and white world. Bush's strategy would have worked great if he gave the proper resources and didn't underestimate the enemy. The surge wasn't a change in strategy it was a SURGE of resources to help the current failing strategy.

The difference is Bush thought we could win with the allocated resources, which was failing. Obama is deciding if the current strategy in Afghan is even worth keeping.

Charles Martel said:
Speaking of short sighted and unrealistic.
Click to expand...
Yes.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
If you are not going to read what I am actually posting, then perhaps we should find something else to entertain oneself. :shrug:



I am not for more troops.
Click to expand...

Well your against Obama "fiddling" and allowing troops to be in harms way by not making a decision. Are you for Obama making the decision to give McChrystal the troops he requested or for him denying McChrystal's request for troops?
 
Gibberish said:
Well your against Obama "fiddling" and allowing troops to be in harms way by not making a decision. Are you for Obama making the decision to give McChrystal the troops he requested or for him denying McChrystal's request for troops?
Click to expand...





I would be happier that he made a decision one way or the other. My 1st preference is withdrawal, 2nd he give mcchrystal the troops....


He said he would make a decision fter the afghan elections....


Do we still need to wait "weeks"?
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
I would be happier that he made a decision one way or the other. My 1st preference is withdrawal, 2nd he give mcchrystal the troops....


He said he would make a decision fter the afghan elections....


Do we still need to wait "weeks"?
Click to expand...

I would assume he will meet with his military advisers to go over what occurred in Afghan the past few days. Especially with the last minute drop out.

Personally I hope he changes the strategy to flush out Al-Q and leaves Afghan to the Afghanistan's.
 
Gibberish said:
I would assume he will meet with his military advisers to go over what occurred in Afghan the past few days. Especially with the last minute drop out.
Click to expand...


Right after he campaigns for corzine, goes on leno, fiddles for 70 more days, etc... He'll get around to it. :roll:


Personally I hope he changes the strategy to flush out Al-Q and leaves Afghan to the Afghanistan's.
Click to expand...


This is noble and all, but short sighted. How do you tell them apart when the failed state goes into all out shambles?
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
This is noble and all, but short sighted. How do you tell them apart when the failed state goes into all out shambles?
Click to expand...

By treating it like the man hunt it is and not a military battle. Intelligence and covert ops are key.
 
Gibberish said:
By treating it like the man hunt it is and not a military battle. Intelligence and covert ops are key.
Click to expand...




So how do you expect to get this "intelligence" and how do you spose "Covert ops" works? :lol:

There is a little more too it than what you see on "the unit"...... :doh
 
Gibberish said:
By treating it like the man hunt it is and not a military battle. Intelligence and covert ops are key.
Click to expand...

Too late for all that. Even way back I was saying we need to be sending in small assassin teams against single target terrorists at the most. Waring against another nation in an unnamed war will just make more terrorists unless we kill all of their brave.
 
liblady said:
obama's i guess. although i don't think it much matters anymore. we can't "win" there.
Click to expand...
Then I suppose it never mattered, and all the hysteria over BUSH'S puppet was just partisan hackery.
 
American said:
Then I suppose it never mattered, and all the hysteria over BUSH'S puppet was just partisan hackery.
Click to expand...
what hysteria? karzai was bush's puppet, and now obama is stuck with him and with the afghanistan war. there's really no disputing that, is there?

i just don't see a win there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom