Why I oppose the Afghan Surge - Arlen Specter

[AllentownJake]

I'm opposed to sending 30,000 more American troops to Afghanistan because I don't believe they are indispensable in our fight against al Qaeda.

If they were, I'd support such a surge because we have to do whatever it takes to defeat al Qaeda, which seeks to annihilate us.

But if al Qaeda can organize and operate out of Yemen, Somalia or elsewhere, then why fight in Afghanistan, which has made a history of resisting would-be conquerors - from Alexander the Great in the 3rd century BC, to Great Britain in the 19th and early 20th centuries, to the former Soviet Union in the 1970s and 1980s?

In order to be successful in Afghanistan, it's necessary to have a reliable ally in the Afghan government. The evidence demonstrates that President Hamid Kharzai does not have the requisite reliability.

The legitimacy of his administration is suspect because of vote fraud. There is widespread corruption at the highest levels of his government. His government has tolerated, if not encouraged, drug-trafficking.

President Obama has said, "President Kharzai's inauguration speech sent the right message about moving in a new direction." In my judgment, any such "message" amounts to a dubious and belated pledge of reform and deserves to be treated with the greatest skepticism.

http://specter2010.com/news/headlines/why_i_oppose_the_afghan_surge/

[yurbud]

1. at least when he converts, he goes all the way

[amborin]

2. good for Arlen! k & r

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. Even an ex-Republican gets it. K&R

[FiveGoodMen]

4. "have to do whatever it takes to defeat al Qaeda, which seeks to annihilate us"

But, of course, they can't annihilate us.

That should be obvious.

Unless we annihilate ourselves (our Constitution, our economy, our sense of proportion and decency) just to spite al Qaeda.

They could annihilate us that way, I guess.

[progressoid]

5. I hate it when people I don't like say things I agree with.

[mdmc]

6. Go Specter - its your Birthday - get Jiggy with it

ya bad ass self!

[JDPriestly]

7. Could it be that Obama is going into Afghanistan because it is the drug

trade out of Afghanistan that is funding the war lords and also Al Qaeda? Could it be that our government fears potential aggression or terrorism from other countries near Afghanistan?

[Forkboy]

8. We're funding many of those very same drug lords.

We're basically bribing them to work for us and turning a blind eye to the opium trade, which is helping to fund those warlords on our side.

[tom_paine]

9. The drug trade is also funding CIA Black Ops, and always has

This is anecdotal, so you can choose to disregard it, but I have it from a person I trust deeply.

In the 80s, he began the process of applying to be in the CIA. All was going well and he continued onward, feeling confident that he was going to get in.

During one of his many interviews/tests/etc., he was asked if he would deal drugs if in the end it was for the good of the nation.

He said, "no".

Shortly after this, he was informed that the CIA was no longer interested in him and the application/approval process abruptly ceased.

IF the story is true, and I cannot vouch for it other than saying I very much trust this person and the story was told to me in complete seriousness, then one must assume that the vastly increased heroin production in Afghanistan is quite beneficial to the Bush Wing of the CIA, and maybe the other factions, as well.

[Lilith Velkor]

10. They were up to the same shit during Vietnam, IIRC

Only this time, the product is being peddled in Europe and Russia instead of the US. We get ours from cartels in Colombia and Mexico, who have probably cut deals with Black Ops.

[AllentownJake]

11. Kick