Kurt_and_Hunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-02-09 11:25 AM
Original message |
The promised speedy wind-down is a farce... which is fine |
|
Edited on Wed Dec-02-09 11:52 AM by Kurt_and_Hunter
If the policy is bad then the policy is bad... no further analysis needed.
If the policy is good then the speedy commencement of withdrawal is absurd.
If we have a vital national interest in play then that interest should be pursued with seriousness.
Sending a bunch of men and material to Afghanistan and bringing them right back is ridiculous and not going to happen.
Our geo-strategic and/or moral interests are not going to be served by a fly-by policy. Our presence has little weight without commitment.
The whole, We are going and pulling out in 18 months thing is thrown out there as a sop to the dumbest people on Earth because... hey, it might work on a few folks. It makes no sense if it's true and it's offensive if just a casual instance of the dreaded okey-doke.
You cannot say we are pursuing the very safety of the nation then, as a sop to the most credulous war opponents, say we aren't pursuing it very hard.
It's insulting. All that was promised was that there will be a minor troop reduction of some sort in the medium term marking the beginning of a wholly undefined withdrawal that might take 100 years. And that's all that could be promised because our claimed vital concerns are strategic, not tactical, That shit takes time and perseverance.
Tossing out the bone of a bogus and rhetorical wind-down that does not (and must not) exist in the fine print makes the speech as dignified as an infomercial.
If the policy is good then defend it without childish mid-direction. Tell the truth... that the policy is incoherent if we are not in it for the long-haul with success (permanently changing aspects of the whole nature of Afghanistan and Pakistan) as a precondition of withdrawal.
DEFEND THE REAL POLICY.
|
treestar
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-02-09 11:27 AM
Response to Original message |
1. Well we knew that was coming |
|
The one thing you could have admitted was good. Have to deny it, of course.
|
Kurt_and_Hunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-02-09 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. You have no idea what you're talking about. |
|
Why on Earth would I, or could I, have "admitted" the speedy-draw-down lie is good? You seem to have mistaken me for a categorical opponent of US action in Afghanistan despite the fact that I have never said anything of the sort.
My stance on this whole matter has been that if we have compelling security and/or moral interests then they should be pursued with seriousness.
I am an agnostic on that because I cannot know our intentions for action vis-a-vis Pakistan. If the policy is important then its important.
I can trust the president on whether it is important.
But that does not mean it is okay to play dumb-ass politics with the thing... trying to please all people in ways that will simply have the result of pissing off all people.
If I am left to trust the president on this, as we all are, then his speech and policy should be trustworthy, not some scam along the lines of the fine print on a credit card balance-transfer check.
|
treestar
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-02-09 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
Are you saying it can't be done? Or that Obama is part of the neocon cabal? Or Obama wants to do it and is mistaken that it can be done? Or Obama is just lying and saying it when he has not intention of doing it?
He said it's to ended responsibly. Obviously these wars cannot be just ended right away. Bush created a mess in both places.
|
Cha
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-02-09 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
9. I think it is you who acts like they know everything |
|
but just possibly.. doesn't know what they're talking about.
|
Oregone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-02-09 11:48 AM
Response to Original message |
3. Very good way to put it |
|
There is something very incoherent with initiating escalation because of all these dire reason, then promising a quick withdrawal when no one knows what will happen in 3 years. I tend to have thought it was only political rhetoric tossed out there to pacify, well, people like me. It didn't work.
|
MercutioATC
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-02-09 12:20 PM
Response to Original message |
4. What IS the "real policy", exactly? |
|
Wanna balk at a firm timeline because of variables? I'm ok with that...as long as I know you have an actual objective.
What IS our specific objective in Afghanistan?
|
HughMoran
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-02-09 12:40 PM
Response to Original message |
5. So suggesting we might leave after 10 YEARS there is a rhetorical device? |
|
You've created a nice straw-man argument there.
|
avaistheone1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-02-09 12:48 PM
Response to Original message |
6. It is going to be easy peasy. We are America and we got Obama. |
|
Forget about history. The Taliban is going to be throwing rose petals faster than you can say SHAZAAM.
You know we have got an exit strategy. That is going to do it. Uh huh.
:sarcasm:
|
Clio the Leo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-02-09 01:28 PM
Response to Original message |
7. What did you think of what Clinton, Mullens and Gates said during the hearing today? |
|
Edited on Wed Dec-02-09 01:29 PM by Clio the Leo
That's a serious question.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 05th 2024, 12:01 AM
Response to Original message |