Is this the time to take home the boys from Afghanistan and Iraq?

[GEORGE ORWELL]

IS THIS THE TIME TO WORK FOR PEACE --- NOT WAR? Now when Haiti is in the midst of a gigantic Holocaust is this not the time to take the boys from Afghanistan and Iraq home and lend a hand for peace? That would solve the image of USA more than anything? For aid not war!

 

[California Girl]

Why? Because we finally have the end in reach? Yea, good plan. Then we can chalk up another failure instead of finishing the job properly. If we're really lucky, Afghanistan will go to hell, like Iraq did after we left in '91... then we can go back and do it again! Brilliant strategy. Not. Idiot.

 

[namvet]

with a strong R prez i would say stay and fight. but with Osama NO. get em out

 

[myloem]

Send the troops home. There is no well defined mission in either country. "Winning" all depends on who you ask. I would rather have troops inside our country guarding us than outside roaming around in other countries. I think more troops at home will strengthen homeland security.

 

[CMike]

Sure, let Al Qaida take over the governments or put in puppet regimes.

That will really decrease terrorist attacks in America

 

[SFC Ollie]

Send the troops home. There is no well defined mission in either country. "Winning" all depends on who you ask. I would rather have troops inside our country guarding us than outside roaming around in other countries. I think more troops at home will strengthen homeland security.

Our troops at home have no power to provide security, they have no civil authority outside of a federal reservation.

No it is not time to bring our troops out of Afghanistan, Not as long as Al Qaeda or the Taliban has any chance of capturing a Pakistani Nuke. And they have come very close to doing so. We must be in the area and prepared for this situation. Besides that Al Qaeda is still our enemy and they are still out there. We have little choice but to take the fight to them in whatever means we have wherever they pop up.

And Iraq? God only knows if that frail democracy can survive without our troops close at hand.

 

[Toronado3800]

with a strong R prez i would say stay and fight. but with Osama NO. get em out

What's this Republican thing gotta do with it? I can find failure with large military operations under Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, and Bush W. The first Bush did that odd hit and run attack I'm split on. Ford, was he really President?

Maybe strong Democrats like FDR, Truman, a gambler like Kennedy, or Clinton would be best?

Really what is Obama doing different than "W" with the terrorism war? We're winding down Iraq operations and winding up Afgahn ops. Any ideas what McCain would be doing differently?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

It's well past time to bring them home.

 

[namvet]

with a strong R prez i would say stay and fight. but with Osama NO. get em out

What's this Republican thing gotta do with it? I can find failure with large military operations under Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, and Bush W. The first Bush did that odd hit and run attack I'm split on. Ford, was he really President?

Maybe strong Democrats like FDR, Truman, a gambler like Kennedy, or Clinton would be best?

Really what is Obama doing different than "W" with the terrorism war? We're winding down Iraq operations and winding up Afgahn ops. Any ideas what McCain would be doing differently?

how convenient for you to forget a liberal faliure named LBJ. the murderer of vietnam vets. forced outta office by the DNC. that's why I want an R running it. instead of a D who cuts and runs because of a few liberal protesters. yep. bring em home.
Clinton??? Halarious
Carter who brought terrorism to our shore. oh my yes we must forget this
Iraq was over before the election
FDR, Truman were Americans

The first Bush did that odd hit and run attack I'm split on

are you really this stupid?????

 

[Big Black Dog]

I think we should do everything in our power to find Bin Ladin. We should use our troops to go everywhere and turn over every rock until we find him. That should be our utmost primary reason for being there. We shouldn't screw with anybody unless they get in our way from finding Bin Ladin. When we find him, he should be brought back to the US either dead or alive. Once we have him in the country, we should immediately bring our troops home from both Iraq and Afghanistan. I would then consider our mission there completed. Anything other than that I would consider a good old fashioned boondoggle.

 

[Toronado3800]

By being split on the 1st Bush's hit and run in Iraq overly simply I mean:
+ we did not end up occupying the darned country for a decade
- we had to go back to finish his job and not because the Iraqi ppl called for us

how convenient for you to forget a liberal faliure named LBJ. the murderer of vietnam vets. forced outta office by the DNC. that's why I want an R running it. instead of a D who cuts and runs because of a few liberal protesters. yep. bring em home.
Clinton??? Halarious
Carter who brought terrorism to our shore. oh my yes we must forget this
Iraq was over before the election
FDR, Truman were Americans

Clinton was fine. He enforced that no fly zone, didn't put any dictators in power we needed to go retrieve. The Balkan thing went ok....Somalia could have been better, then again the next fella gave up on it.

LBJ was an idiot who got drawn into that domino red fear of our father's generation, agreed.

Carter and terrorism....we talking about Iran or the Camp David accords? He really could have seen the future and aided the Soviets in their taking of Afghanistan but hey, Reagan also supported the future terrorists there.

 

[namvet]

I think we should do everything in our power to find Bin Ladin. We should use our troops to go everywhere and turn over every rock until we find him. That should be our utmost primary reason for being there. We shouldn't screw with anybody unless they get in our way from finding Bin Ladin. When we find him, he should be brought back to the US either dead or alive. Once we have him in the country, we should immediately bring our troops home from both Iraq and Afghanistan. I would then consider our mission there completed. Anything other than that I would consider a good old fashioned boondoggle.

bin ladens gone. there is no bin laden. he disappeared long before 9-11. and protected by the villagers he bribed to protect his ass. we can't fart without him hearing it.
an Osama is NOT going to waste a penney looking for him.

 

[namvet]

By being split on the 1st Bush's hit and run in Iraq overly simply I mean:
+ we did not end up occupying the darned country for a decade
- we had to go back to finish his job and not because the Iraqi ppl called for us

how convenient for you to forget a liberal faliure named LBJ. the murderer of vietnam vets. forced outta office by the DNC. that's why I want an R running it. instead of a D who cuts and runs because of a few liberal protesters. yep. bring em home.
Clinton??? Halarious
Carter who brought terrorism to our shore. oh my yes we must forget this
Iraq was over before the election
FDR, Truman were Americans

Clinton was fine. He enforced that no fly zone, didn't put any dictators in power we needed to go retrieve. The Balkan thing went ok....Somalia could have been better, then again the next fella gave up on it.

LBJ was an idiot who got drawn into that domino red fear of our father's generation, agreed.

Carter and terrorism....we talking about Iran or the Camp David accords? He really could have seen the future and aided the Soviets in their taking of Afghanistan but hey, Reagan also supported the future terrorists there.

By being split on the 1st Bush's hit and run in Iraq overly simply I mean:
+ we did not end up occupying the darned country for a decade
- we had to go back to finish his job and not because the Iraqi ppl called for us

Bush sr was not allowed to go into Iraq because of a UN resolution that called for the liberation of Kuwait ONLY.

 

[Toome]

Nothing makes a person mature quicker than having bullets fly past his/her head or surviving an IED blast. I find the term "boys" pretty condescending. Take the time to speak with a combat veteran, and you'll discover that the individual probably has a much more direct approach to life than someone who's greatest "stress" would be fearing what the boss would think of their job performance.

The purpose of the military is to hunt down the nation's enemies and kill them. Period. While I don't have any problem with using the military to provide humanitarian assistance/disaster relief aid, this should not be at the expense of a warfighting mission.

If you've never taken a walk in the dark of night with the devil at your side, you'd never understand.

Just an opinion.

rltw