Afghanistan is NOT "Obama's Vietnam."

[jenmito]

If Vietnam can be compared to anything, it's Bush's war in Iraq. Both were based on lies. Afghanistan is where those who attacked us on 9/11 planned their attacks and had "safe haven." Obama is following through with his campaign promise to refocus on the "right war" as he called it-the one in RESPONSE to an attack on us.

[tekisui]

1. It can be likened to Vietnam in that an escalation could bog us down there

for more than a decade. We've been there for almost 8 years. Enough is enough. Vietnam was escalated by subsequent president's and got us stuck there for far longer than we should have been. There is no clear definition of success or of who the enemy is or what they look like. It is an unwinnable war being escalated.

That is the similarity.

[jenmito]

4. We may have BEEN there for almost 8 years, but we haven't been doing anything there

except letting al Qaeda members roam free. We're JUST NOW starting to concentrate on getting those responsible for 9/11. Bush turned to Iraq immediately after sending some token troops into Afghanistan. Obama is sending TRAINERS into Afghanistan now while also using diplomacy so we won't have to stay there forever. And he's not trying to form a democracy there or anything, either. Just some stability.

[AZ Criminal JD]

10. Exactly what JFK and Johnson said

When they sent in "advisers". "We want a stable South Vietnam".

[jenmito]

21. That doesn't mean Obama's lying or wrong.

And again, our war in Afghanistan wasn't based on a lie.

[AZ Criminal JD]

24. Doesn't matter what it was based on

Asian land wars are unwinnable. That is the lesson of Korea and Vietnam.

[jenmito]

39. I doubt he's staying in Afghanistan because he thinks it's "winnable."

We were attacked by those al Qaeda leaders in Afghanistan. The lesson of Vietnam should've been learned by Bush-don't start a war based on lies. But he didn't care-he was going into Iraq no matter what.

[AZ Criminal JD]

40. So you are saying he wants to stay to lose?

History only records wins and losses in war, particulary when they involve great powers. Obama knows this and I don't think he wants the loser label.

[stillcool]

30. I think there is a very clear

definition of success. A country stable enough to build pipelines and not have them blown up, as well as a government which selects the correct corporations to build and maintain those pipelines for the correct price...and of course, have a bunch of military bases protecting American interests in the region.

[dipsydoodle]

2. Is that fact, well

[pnorman]

34. That's a SAVER!

THANKS!

pnorman

[dipsydoodle]

35. You may also like this one too

:hi:

[liberalhistorian]

3. I just simply couldn't believe it when I saw that

headline on CNN a few days ago, just couldn't. The man has barely been in office two months and they're already hanging this shit on him, while doing NOTHING in regards to Bush's follies for SIX YEARS. I almost never heard this kind of shit against Bush with them, even though there was far greater reason. CNN knows the psychological power behind the word "Vietnam" for this nation and they know exactly what they're doing. They and the other MSM presstitutes are still smarting over the fact that their man and his dipshit dolt of a running mate that they and their corporate masters so heavily favored LOST and LOST BIGTIME and they still can't believe it. They are doing everything they can to smear, obstruct and propagandize against Obama and will continue to do so. Hopefully, people are getting tired of that shit and are seeing through it.

[jenmito]

5. Thank you...

and was it Newsweek that had the same title, "Obama's Vietnam"? The media makes me sick with how hard they're working at trying to bring him down.

[lostnotforgotten]

9. Obama Controls Whether Bush, Cheney, And Rumsfeld Go Down

It is on his watch.

[sandnsea]

6. They're trying to split the left again

It's the only way the right can get back into power.

[jenmito]

8. Judging by the DU, it may be working...

sadly.

[sandnsea]

14. It always does

I don't know why they can never figure out how to organize a campaign FOR a policy instead of always trashing the Democrats to oblivion.

[Posteritatis]

31. DU's split with itself as a matter of course anyway

You could say kittens are good here and someone, somewhere, would take that to mean delicious and flip out. ;)

[JVS]

7. What are his objectives and where is the exit strategy?

[jenmito]

11. For his objectives, read this:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/09/03/27/A-New-Strategy-for-Afghanistan-and-Pakistan/
No exit strategy announced yet, but he's aware he'll need one and they will have one.

[Posteritatis]

32. Thanks! I was looking for that (nt)

[MadHound]

12. Give it time, if he continues down this path of militarism, it will be his Vietnam

Yes, Bush started it, but Obama is looking to expand it, when the fact of the matter is that we should be pulling out of Afghanistan as well.

We can't win an insurgency based war, our experience in Vietnam, Iraq, hell even our own Revolution should prove that one out. All that can happen is that we're slowly but surely bled dry.

Furthermore, this is a battle of ideas, US democratic ideals vs radical Islam. Bringing a military force to a battle of ideas almost de facto means that you will lose. Al Qaeda wasn't in Iraq until we fired up the war there, expanding one in Afghanistan will only give more recruits to Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Rather, we should be working diplomatically and using humanitarian aid to show the people in that area which ideas are better.

Instead, we're getting further and deeper into a war we can't win, and sure enough, soon enough, this will be Obama's war too, much like Vietnam was Kennedy's and especially LBJ's.

Obama needs to do the smart thing, the right thing, and pull the troops out of Afghanistan and send in the diplomats and humanitarian agencies.

[cwcwmack]

16. yup

you're right...

no one remembers that JFK got Nam rolling... and if US blood is still being spilled in Afghanistan in 4 years... it will be Barack's war.

It's ironic how much support THIS war gets when it's the "right guy" puling the levers...

[jenmito]

18. I don't know about you, but I was always for the war in Afghanistan...

even under Bush. The thing Bush did wrong was take his eye OFF Afghanistan to invade a country that had nothing to do with 9/11-Iraq.

[jenmito]

17. Obama's not trying to push our ideals onto the Afghans...

and he was against the war in Iraq. He just wants to try to minimize al Qaeda and allow the Afghans to live more or less peacefully.

[MadHound]

27. Well, as I've stated before,

Trying to minimize an ideology by using military force is a piss poor way of doing things. Hell, there was no al Qaeda in Iraq before we invaded, now look at them. Similar thing in Afghanistan, our military presence there has been their best recruiting tool.

This is a Vietnam scenario, and hopefully Obama has learned that lesson. Judging from his actions though, he hasn't

[kiva]

13. It isn't yet, but it can easily become exactly that.

We saw the French defeated, but we thought we could succeed in Vietnam, that our technology would ensure success. We watched the Soviet Union withdraw in defeat from Afghanistan, but we somehow think that we can succeed.

Obama didn't send our troops into Afghanistan, but it's his decision whether or not to allow this to be another Vietnam.

[jenmito]

38. His goal is to get those who attacked us and in the process try to

make Afghanistan a liveable place. He's not trying to turn it into a flourishing democracy or anything, and again, unlike Vietnam (and Iraq), this wasn't based on a lie.

[Fire1]

15. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, FUCKIN THANKYOU!!

[jenmito]

19. YOU'RE WELCOME, YOU'RE WELCOME, YOU'RE WELOME!!

[Peacetrain]

20. Yep... that is just about it!! Could not have said it better myself

:thumbsup:

[jenmito]

22. Thanks, Peacetrain!

:hi:

[rug]

23. It sure as hell isn't his Grenada.

[spoony]

25. No no he's calling it "America's war" now

And it was not then, nor is it now, the "right war."

[geek tragedy]

26. We had ONE MILLION troops in Vietnam.

Obama will have 1/16th that number in Afghanistan.

Perspective is in order.

[rug]

28. It peaked at 542,000 in 1969.

Facts are in order.

[geek tragedy]

29. I stand corrected--Afghanistan would be 1/9th

as big.

[Sebastian Doyle]

33. It's not Vietnam. Just another oil company scam

I hope you're having fun.
Where's your uniform?
Where's your gun?
Better rub up that suntan oil
'cause you'll be fighting in the hot sun.

It's not..Vietnam,
just another oil company scam.
Salute that flag of Uncle Sam.
Get your money out, place your bets...
it's Afghanistan!

Fix bayonets, check grenades.
Got enough bullets,
got enough rounds to wipe out this place?
Where the infantry & the cavalry
parachutes fill the sky,
bodies burn and people die.

It's not..Vietnam,
just another oil company scam.
Salute that flag of Uncle Sam.
Get your money out, place your bets...
it's Afghanistan!



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sft8yl44Kq8

[jenmito]

36. I don't buy it. Obama is not an "oil man." Neither is Biden.

Obama is a smart guy and is doing what he thinks is right and what he campaigned on. He's not doing it for oil.

[cliffordu]

37. Tell the class where all that Afghani oil is located, will ya, sport???

[Hanse]

41. Not yet, no, he still has a chance to get out.

But it's still an unwinnable quagmire which will do nothing for this country except take our money and lives.