• 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!

Do you support Obama in continuing the Afghanistan war?

Do you support Obama's continuation of the war in Afghanistan?


  • Total voters
    38
The war was horribly mismanaged for nearly a decade, things don't seem to be improving much, and I'm not really convinced it's salvageable. At what point do you just cut your losses and pull out?
 
I understand that our troops deal with wonderful people every day, people they have become fond of, people they wish to help. But dispite the insistance that Karzai's corrupt government will be dealt with, the reality is that the rigged election will allow him to stay in office, siphoning USA money into his own pocket, for years to come.

Meanwhile, his government, which has insisted that it will restore rights to the women in the country, is systematically removing those rights which were so painfully restored.

Women who have fled from abusive husbands and families that would kill them have found some protection at women's shelters in Kabul. Karzai's government is now passing a law that would put onerous burdens on these women, and have the authority to send them back to face certain death.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/11/world/asia/11shelter.html



The 2-page article is bone-chilling to me, and a horrific step backwards for the rights of Aghan women. Karzai's government is not to bring democracy to his people. It's to solidify his own power by any means necessary.

The USA should not support this man or his government any longer. We should withdraw our money and our troops. Afghanistan will remain a tribal culture until Afghans decide they want something more. Until then, there is nothing more we can do there.

Yeah - I read that. It's really disturbing.

But I think that points to more of a reason why we should change our approach - not withdraw altogether. When a country throws a woman in jail because she doesn't want to marry tehre's a serious problem (this isn't directly detailed in the article but it is implied - since that's one of the 3 things that could happen to the women in focus)

A decade ago, shelters for abused women did not even exist in Afghanistan, where even now many of the worst practices associated with the Taliban era, like arranged marriages for child brides, public flogging and mutilation of women, continue in rural areas.
Today, about 14 women’s shelters exist, financed by a mix of international organizations, private donors and Western governments. The new rules, drafted by the Women’s Affairs Ministry, would place those shelters under direct government control.

Moreover - on this particular issue - they need to get over *their selves* and start to address their issues for the fact that htey're *actually a problem*

Some conservative members of Parliament would like to have the shelters closed altogether. Hajji Neyaz Mohammed, a lawmaker from Ghazni Province, bluntly condemned shelters as “the official places for increasing perversion in our country.”
“These shelters create problems in families and homes, and they motivate girls to flee from their houses,” he said.
In 90 percent of cases when girls return from the shelters to their villages, they will not be accepted by the community and will be suspected of having committed adultery, he said.

^^^ What this guy says against the Women's Shelters sounds like some dribble from the Conservative *far* right against Birth Control Clinics and gay marriage.
 
Last edited:
In reviewing the thread responses so far, I found it interesting to note that while there is a majority here not in favor of Obama's continuation of the war in Afghanistan, conservatives support the so called liberal president's continuation of the war by two to one margin over the liberals.
 
In reviewing the thread responses so far, I found it interesting to note that while there is a majority here not in favor of Obama's continuation of the war in Afghanistan, conservatives support the so called liberal president's continuation of the war by two to one margin over the liberals.

That's becuase for some people war isn't about political ****ology.
 
That's becuase for some people war isn't about political ****ology.

Of course, I oppose Obama's foreign policy, but I voted for him knowing he was just the lesser of two evils. But many still seem to be under the illusion that Obama is a liberal, when he fact he is right of center on many issues such as our war in Afghanistan.
 
Of course, I oppose Obama's foreign policy, but I voted for him knowing he was just the lesser of two evils. But many still seem to be under the illusion that Obama is a liberal, when he fact he is right of center on many issues such as our war in Afghanistan.

He's only been forced to take stands away from his liberal views because he is president and tries to appease an entire country.
 
He's only been forced to take stands away from his liberal views because he is president and tries to appease an entire country.

We knew before he was president what his views were on Afghanistan, they were just as hawkish then as they are now. If he were trying to appease the country, he would end the war as that is what the majority of Americans want now.
 
We knew before he was president what his views were on Afghanistan, they were just as hawkish then as they are now. If he were trying to appease the country, he would end the war as that is what the majority of Americans want now.

There isn't a single poll which I'd claim as accurate.

I've seen everything from 30% supporting to 70% supporting - talk about a wide margin of error
 
There isn't a single poll which I'd claim as accurate.

I've seen everything from 30% supporting to 70% supporting - talk about a wide margin of error

This year? All that I've seen show a majority opposed:

CNN Poll: U.S. opposition to Afghanistan war remains high

"More than six in ten Americans oppose the U.S. war in Afghanistan, according to a new national poll. And a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Thursday also indicates that 56 percent of the public believes that things are going badly for the U.S. in Afghanistan."

US view of Pakistan, Afghanistan at new low

"Some 14 per cent of Americans have a favorable view of Afghanistan and 82 per cent hold a negative review, the Gallup poll said. For Pakistan, 18 per cent saw the country favorably and 76 per cent viewed it unfavorably."
 
From a pragmatic point of view, a stable, pro-west democracy would be very beneficial in a resource rich country such as Afghanistan, and could help stabilise the region, and my personal point of view is that the Afghan people deserve a stable democracy.

If it's a democracy it's definitely not going to be pro-west.
 
9 years is long enough, time to go home.
 
This year? All that I've seen show a majority opposed:

CNN Poll: U.S. opposition to Afghanistan war remains high

"More than six in ten Americans oppose the U.S. war in Afghanistan, according to a new national poll. And a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Thursday also indicates that 56 percent of the public believes that things are going badly for the U.S. in Afghanistan."

US view of Pakistan, Afghanistan at new low

"Some 14 per cent of Americans have a favorable view of Afghanistan and 82 per cent hold a negative review, the Gallup poll said. For Pakistan, 18 per cent saw the country favorably and 76 per cent viewed it unfavorably."

Great examples of why I don't follow polls at all - they're too limited and can be easily skewed. To me they are interesting but meaningless.

The first one (CNN) is based on phone-surveys taken from 1,008 adults - Do you *think* that 1000 out of several million is an accurate sampling?
Gallup (the 2nd) also based it's findings from a pool of close to 1,000, as well. Again - do you *think* that it is an accurate showing of the entire country?

No - it is not. I don't believe that a miniscule sampling of the population via phone can remotely come close to accurately defining a country's overall view.
 
Great examples of why I don't follow polls at all - they're too limited and can be easily skewed. To me they are interesting but meaningless.

The first one (CNN) is based on phone-surveys taken from 1,008 adults - Do you *think* that 1000 out of several million is an accurate sampling?
Gallup (the 2nd) also based it's findings from a pool of close to 1,000, as well. Again - do you *think* that it is an accurate showing of the entire country?

No - it is not. I don't believe that a miniscule sampling of the population via phone can remotely come close to accurately defining a country's overall view.

You intimated that Obama's continuation of the war in Afghanistan was to appease the country, rather than being the very same hawkish position he had on Afghanistan during the run up to his election. Your statement would assume there was a majority who supported our continuation of the war. If you do not believe the polls, what do you base your assumption on that a majority of the country supports the continuation of the war?
 
You intimated that Obama's continuation of the war in Afghanistan was to appease the country, rather than being the very same hawkish position he had on Afghanistan during the run up to his election. Your statement would assume there was a majority who supported our continuation of the war. If you do not believe the polls, what do you base your assumption on that a majority of the country supports the continuation of the war?

He held his views on Afghanistan long before he was committed to running for office - so certainly long before he was elected.
I don't believe his Afghanistan views *makes* him a centrist, moderate or anything else - He *is* a liberal on a deep, fundamental level.

And polls that you value - or the occasional compromise - is not changing that.

Perhaps if I used the term 'compromise' or 'flex' instead of 'appease' it would have been more accurate?
 
He held his views on Afghanistan long before he was committed to running for office - so certainly long before he was elected.

Exactly my point. He did not change his position on Afghanistan to appease, compromise, or flex.

I don't believe his Afghanistan views *makes* him a centrist, moderate or anything else -

What I have observed is that Obama's Afghanistan war policy has been to the right of most liberals, and even to the right of some conservatives who think it is time to leave Afghanistan.

He *is* a liberal on a deep, fundamental level.

I would disagree. From the liberal perspective, he is only slightly less conservative than Bush. He continued the bailout to the banks, He continued the wars, He extended tax cuts for rich, he chose the GOP's public mandate rather than a public option for health insurance. And, at least on the war in Afghanistan, his policy is more conservative than some other conservatives who think it is time to leave.
 
His view on Afghanistan is actually taking into consideration the weight of the issues and long term future implications.

Much alike a lot of people who just are "tired of hearing about it"

But that doesn't make *him* an overall centrist.
 
His view on Afghanistan is actually taking into consideration the weight of the issues and long term future implications.

Much alike a lot of people who just are "tired of hearing about it"

But that doesn't make *him* an overall centrist.


I don't doubt that he thinks he is doing the right thing, but he is no liberal.
 
I don't doubt that he thinks he is doing the right thing, but he is no liberal.

Ok - other than his long-held view on Afghanistan just what would you consider to make him Centrist (this might even be good for another thread).

I see nothing that spans over time - only after a while *in* the presidency have there been any bits that sway away from his Liberalism - everything from his view on taxation, abortion, religion, family values, economics and on and on - liberal liberal liberal.

I guess some people see the term 'liberal' as being 'negative' when it's not - it's just a label for a collection of beliefs.
 
Ok - other than his long-held view on Afghanistan just what would you consider to make him Centrist (this might even be good for another thread).

I see nothing that spans over time - only after a while *in* the presidency have there been any bits that sway away from his Liberalism - everything from his view on taxation, abortion, religion, family values, economics and on and on - liberal liberal liberal.

I guess some people see the term 'liberal' as being 'negative' when it's not - it's just a label for a collection of beliefs.

I see Obama's continuation of these conservative policies: bank bailouts, the war on terrorism, military spending, the Patriot Act, the tax cuts for the rich, CIA Renditions, proposed budget cuts for social programs, and gun laws. Those are just few examples off the top of my head.
 
Great examples of why I don't follow polls at all - they're too limited and can be easily skewed. To me they are interesting but meaningless.

The first one (CNN) is based on phone-surveys taken from 1,008 adults - Do you *think* that 1000 out of several million is an accurate sampling?
Gallup (the 2nd) also based it's findings from a pool of close to 1,000, as well. Again - do you *think* that it is an accurate showing of the entire country?

No - it is not. I don't believe that a miniscule sampling of the population via phone can remotely come close to accurately defining a country's overall view.

This is statistically false. A sample of 1,000 is indeed sufficient to represent the entire nation, presuming that their other polling fundamentals are OK.
 
This is statistically false. A sample of 1,000 is indeed sufficient to represent the entire nation, presuming that their other polling fundamentals are OK.

Yeah - a lot of people think that way about it.

Fortunately, the government doesn't depend so much on poll as 'intel'
 
Yeah - a lot of people think that way about it.

Fortunately, the government doesn't depend so much on poll as 'intel'


Not sure how that equates to an internet debate about popular opinion in the country, but okay.
 
Back
Top Bottom