• 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!

Cheney: Stop ‘dithering’ on Afghanistan troops

reefedjib said:
What would he go for then? What crime did he supposedly commit?
Click to expand...

I'm not a U.S. Atty but I can think of a number of crimes he could be charged with & probably convicted in federal court....Then...If we can make Scooter Libby testify....I think we could probably get him for the lindbergh baby kidnapping & starting The Great Chicago Fire!:lol:
 
Last edited:
Devil505 said:
I'm not a U.S. Atty but I can think of a number of crimes he could be charged with & probably convicted in federal court....Then...If we can make Scooter Libby testify....I think we could probably get him for the lindbergh baby kidnapping & start The Great Chicago Fire!:lol:
Click to expand...

Whatever! You ain't got jack ****. Quit yer bitchin about it.
 
goldendog said:
Cheney: Stop ?dithering? on Afghanistan - White House- msnbc.com

WASHINGTON - Former Vice President Dick Cheney on Wednesday night accused the White House of dithering over the strategy for the war in Afghanistan and urged President Barack Obama to "do what it takes to win."

__________________________________________________________

This guy is really getting more looney by the day. His record of making the right decisions as far a war policies go stinks. As he was engaging in his Iraq war policy and the lead up to the war. Generals and advisors were strongly recommening that up too 600,000 troops would be need there in order to "do what it takes to win". Cheney fired the General and ignored the advise of all of the military advisors that took the wrong stance in every area. Deciding on a much smaller force and Rumsfeld then promised those soldiers that they would soon have flowers rained upon them by liberated Iraqies? Cheney and Bush DITHERED on a troop surge for over 5 YEARS before finally deciding on the "surge". They virtually took a hands off policy reguarding Afghanistan for 6 years and let the situation deteriorated into what we see today. He and Bush took a stance of failure from day one and ignored all logical recommendations that involved "doing the right thing" by his Generals. in fact they fired a large majority of them.

President Obama has already added 17,000 more troops to Afghanistan. Instead of firing generals for speaking their minds he is weighing our nations options and rightfully so. The next step we make reguarding Afghanistan could be very costly and needs to be done properly. Mr Cheney rushed to judgement and rushed our country to war..all for the wrong reasons in the wrong place in every circumstance.

With his record Cheney AGAIN looks like a complete and utter fool when he makes statments such as these.
Click to expand...
seems to me we SHOULD take some time to figure this out. no solution is a good solution, only a less bad solution. of course, the "bring it on" cabal is used to reckless action.
 
reefedjib said:
Me also. Afghanistan doesn't have the tribal capacity to be a democracy.
Click to expand...

I don't know if that was tongue in cheek or not but I agree.......Afghanistan will never be anything but a lawless, mountainous area ruled by local warlords. We have nothing to gain by keeping masses of troops there like siting ducks.
 
Devil505 said:
I don't know if that was tongue in cheek or not but I agree.......Afghanistan will never be anything but a lawless, mountainous area ruled by local warlords. We have nothing to gain by keeping masses of troops there like siting ducks.
Click to expand...

Not tongue in cheek. We agree! :)

Not only do they not have the tribal capacity (too many warring tribes) but the don't have the educational depth for liberty. Plus the Taliban are ingraciated with the Pashtuns, and they have Sanctuaries across the border in Pakistan. Pakistan has their work cut out for them if they think they can disrupt these sancuaries - they aren't even in the right locale right now.

The problem is this hands over the existing government to the Taliban, who will retake the country. Al Qaeda will have a safe haven.
 
reefedjib said:
The problem is this hands over the existing government to the Taliban, who will retake the country. Al Qaeda will have a safe haven.
Click to expand...

We both know that Al Qauda could be holding strategy meetings at a posh hotel in Boca Raton right now if they wanted to....They are Nomads who can & do go anywhere in the world they choose.....at any time. They don't need Afghanistan as a safe haven...so bring our troops home!

As far as Cheney's military decision making.....He was against invading Iraq......b4 he was for it!

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I&feature=PlayList&p=BF63A08AB684F4E0&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=21"]YouTube - Cheney '94: Invading Baghdad Would Create Quagmire[/ame]
 
Last edited:
Devil505 said:
We both know that Al Qauda could be holding strategy meetings at a posh hotel in Boca Raton right now if they wanted to....They are Nomads who can & do go anywhere in the world they choose.....at any time. They don't need Afghanistan as a safe haven...so bring our troops home!
Click to expand...

Ok, I'll disagree with you on this bit. I agree they could be in Boca, but 2 reasons:

1) they need a place where they can let their guard drop a bit and not be "on the road".

2) place to train recruits

Gaining Afghanistan back would be a significant advantage.
 
reefedjib said:
Ok, I'll disagree with you on this bit. I agree they could be in Boca, but 2 reasons:

1) they need a place where they can let their guard drop a bit and not be "on the road".

2) place to train recruits

Gaining Afghanistan back would be a significant advantage.
Click to expand...


I'd argue with all the vacant areas on this planet to train in.....Why not go someplace easy?.......They could even easily trian in South America.....Central America...Java....you name it.

I see keeping troops in Afghanistan as a political trap Obama has fallen into & he needs to cut the cord & take his lumps from the far right.
They'll attack him no matter what he does anyway, right?......Why not do the right thing & just bring them home.
 
Last edited:
Devil505 said:
I'd argue with all the vacant areas on this planet to train in.....Why not go someplace easy?.......They could even easily trian in South America.....Central America...Java....you name it.
Click to expand...

They would be hunted down.
 
goldendog said:
With his record Cheney AGAIN looks like a complete and utter fool when he makes statments such as these.
Click to expand...
THE question that I'm sure you'll avoid:
Is Cheney wrong?
 
Devil505 said:
As far as Cheney's military decision making.....He was against invading Iraq......b4 he was for it!
Click to expand...

So what? What's your point, that the world changes and a thinking man (or woman!) can reevaluate his (or her!) position? I totally agree with that.
 
StandUpChuck said:
I agree. However I don't like it when former presidents and vice presidents make negative public comments about a sitting president.
Click to expand...
Including WJBC and Jimmy Carter?
 
Devil505 said:
With all the UAV's (armed with "Hellfires") we have patrolling the ME...I think they'd be safer in Bolivia! :lol:
Click to expand...

Yes, or in the tri-border region. Just wait til we go invade down there! :D
 
reefedjib said:
So what? What's your point, that the world changes and a thinking man (or woman!) can reevaluate his (or her!) position? I totally agree with that.
Click to expand...

My point is what we agreed on....We have nothing to gain by keeping thousands of troops pinned down in Afghanistan......It benefits no one but our enemies by giving them an easy target.
 
Devil505 said:
My point is what we agreed on....We have nothing to gain by keeping thousands of troops pinned down in Afghanistan......It benefits no one but our enemies by giving them an easy target.
Click to expand...

Oh! I thought you were making a comment about how Cheney changed his mind from 1994 to 2003 about Iraq.
 
If there's anyone who should critique Obama's lack of performance with Afghanistan, it is certainly not Cheney, who, time-and-time again, made horrible decisions regarding war strategies when he was Vice President.
 
Middleground said:
If there's anyone who should critique Obama's lack of performance with Afghanistan, it is certainly not Cheney, who, time-and-time again, made horrible decisions regarding war strategies when he was Vice President.
Click to expand...
THE question:

"Make no mistake. Signals of indecision out of Washington hurt our allies and embolden our adversaries," Cheney said while accepting an award from a conservative national security group, the Center for Security Policy.

"The White House must stop dithering while America's armed forces are in danger," the former vice president said. "It's time for President Obama to do what it takes to win a war he has repeatedly and rightly called a war of necessity."

Is Cheney wrong?
 
Last edited:
reefedjib said:
Oh! I thought you were making a comment about how Cheney changed his mind from 1994 to 2003 about Iraq.
Click to expand...

I tossed that video in because the topic is about Cheney & the value of his military recommendations which contradict themselves depending on who's in power at the time.
Cheney is a politician & does things for political reasons....period. (my opinion...of course);)

I think Cheney is wrong now for wanting to send more troops to Afghanistan. (he was right about Iraq....back in 1994)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom