Romney wants to stay in Afganistan

[California Girl]

After 10 years, its time to get out of that place - the current situation could go on for 100 years. And the place isn't worth it.

It's hardly about "the place", and whether "the place" is worth it. It's about fighting them in THEIR backyard, and NOT ours. Ten years, or not... You don't really believe that makes any difference? I hate to say it, but when you are fighting people that fight in the name of a Religion, and YOU are viewed as an Infidel... The fight is probably going to last our lifetimes, and beyond. The idea that withdrawing our troops is going to make everything better is simply absurd.

That's because many people prefer hysteria to calm, rational thought.

 

[Sallow]

Leave us not forget the "Bravery" of the good Bishop Vampire..Romney. Stealer of Jewish souls.

Mitt Romney, 19, demonstrated in favour of Vietnam War draft | Mail Online

 

[uscitizen]

Romney wants to stay in Afganistan


If only he would. And Obama too.

 

[Valerie]

Romney position on Afghanistan

The Objectives

Romney believes that our continued presence should be decided by the military’s top brass, cautions that we should not be making similar commitments in the future. He also stressed that the bulk of the responsibility lies with the Afghanis.

“I want those troops to come home based upon not politics, not based upon economics, but instead based upon the conditions on the ground determined by the generals … But I also think we have learned that our troops should not go off and try to fight a war of independence for another nation. Only the Afghanis can win Afghanistan’s independence from the Taliban.”
13 June 2011, Republican Presidential Debate in New Hampshire.


Cost

Romney believes our policy in Afghanistan should not be based on the economic costs alone.

“There will be some who argue it’s too expensive now, we’ve got to bring the troops home right now, or others will say, politically we need to make one decision or another … You don’t make a decision about our involvement in a conflict based on dollars and cents alone or certainly not with regards to politics.”
14 June 2011, New York Times


Pakistan

AFP reported that Romney made a private visit to Afghanistan in January 2010, and had a closed door meeting with President Hamid Karzai. Karzai’s office subsequently released a statement on January 10 that quoted Romney as saying, “ … the US is well aware of terrorists' presence in Pakistan and its border regions and this is a threat to Pakistan and Afghanistan … The situation in Pakistan is an indicator that terrorists are not only attacking Afghanistan but are causing lots of troubles for Pakistan too”.

Romney on Afghanistan

 

[Valerie]

Afghanistan & Pakistan
What’s at Stake

Enjoying the sanctuary of the Taliban government in Afghanistan, al Qaeda set in motion the conspiracy that killed so many Americans on September 11, 2001. We learned many bitter lessons that day, including that we are not safe from enemies who plot freely against us from the other side of the world. That is why so many of our best and bravest young men and women are risking their lives in Afghanistan. Our mission in Afghanistan is to eliminate al Qaeda from the region and degrade the Taliban and other insurgent groups to the point where they are not existential threats to the Afghan government and do not destabilize Pakistan, with its stock of nuclear weapons. Our objective is to ensure that Afghanistan will never again become a launching pad for terror and to send a message to any other nation that would harbor terrorists with designs on the American homeland.

Obama’s Failure

Much of the mission has been accomplished through the courage and dedication of our troops. The killing of Osama bin Laden was a landmark in the struggle for which President Obama deserves credit. Much more, however, remains to be done. Unfortunately, President Obama has repeatedly frustrated and imperiled the American mission through a series of unwise decisions. After a protracted deliberation process, President Obama in December 2009 announced he would support a “surge” that would entail introducing an additional 30,000 troops into Afghanistan. But in the very same speech announcing the surge, he put forward a timetable for withdrawal. The mixed message left our Afghan allies in doubt about our resolve and encouraged the Taliban to believe that they could wait us out. This past June, President Obama disregarded the counsel of his top military commanders, including General David Petraeus, and announced a full withdrawal of those 30,000 surge troops by September 2012. That date falls short of the commanders’ reported recommendation that the troops remain through the end of 2012 and the Afghan “fighting season” to solidify our gains. That date also happens to be just weeks before a U.S. presidential election. There is no military rationale for it. It raises questions about whether the timing is politically inspired. Whatever the motivation behind the decision, it means that our military will be compelled to begin moving troops and equipment out of Afghanistan in the middle of the fighting season, taking away forces and resources it needs to combat the enemy.

Mitt’s Plan

Mitt Romney will never make national-security decisions based upon electoral politics. Upon taking office, he will review our transition to the Afghan military by holding discussions with our commanders in the field. He will order a full interagency assessment of our military and assistance presence in Afghanistan to determine the level required to secure our gains and to train Afghan forces to the point where they can protect the sovereignty of Afghanistan from the tyranny of the Taliban. Withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan under a Romney administration will be based on conditions on the ground as assessed by our military commanders.

Ensure Buy-In from Afghan and Pakistani Governments

To defeat the insurgency in Afghanistan, the United States will need the cooperation of both the Afghan and Pakistani governments. It is in the interests of all three nations to see that Afghanistan and the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region are rid of the Taliban and other insurgent groups. Mitt Romney will work with both the Afghan government and Pakistan to ensure that those nations are fully contributing to success in Afghanistan. But we will only persuade Afghanistan and Pakistan to be resolute if they are convinced that the United States will itself be resolute. Only an America that appears fully committed to success will eliminate the incentives for them to hedge their bets by aligning with opposing forces.

The United States must be clear in what we require of both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Afghan President Hamid Karzai should understand that our commitment must be met with reciprocal efforts to crack down on corruption in his government, respect free and fair elections as required by the Afghan constitution, and coordinate with the United States on fighting the narcotics trade that fuels the insurgency. Pakistan should understand that any connection between insurgent forces and Pakistan’s security and intelligence forces must be severed. The United States enjoys significant leverage over both of these nations. We should not be shy about using it.

 

[Sallow]

Romney position on Afghanistan

The Objectives

Romney believes that our continued presence should be decided by the military’s top brass, cautions that we should not be making similar commitments in the future. He also stressed that the bulk of the responsibility lies with the Afghanis.

“I want those troops to come home based upon not politics, not based upon economics, but instead based upon the conditions on the ground determined by the generals … But I also think we have learned that our troops should not go off and try to fight a war of independence for another nation. Only the Afghanis can win Afghanistan’s independence from the Taliban.”
13 June 2011, Republican Presidential Debate in New Hampshire.

Interesting. Romney believes that the Generals are in control of the military.

Section 2 - Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

Bit different from the Constitution..but what the heck.

You guys trash that document every chance you get.

 

[tjvh]

After 10 years, its time to get out of that place - the current situation could go on for 100 years. And the place isn't worth it.

It's hardly about "the place", and whether "the place" is worth it. It's about fighting them in THEIR backyard, and NOT ours. Ten years, or not... You don't really believe that makes any difference? I hate to say it, but when you are fighting people that fight in the name of a Religion, and YOU are viewed as an Infidel... The fight is probably going to last our lifetimes, and beyond. The idea that withdrawing our troops is going to make everything better is simply absurd.

It was the Reagan/Bush crowd that hatched the crazy idea that religious fanatics were great "warriors" against the "vast soviet empire".

How'd that fucking work out?

You Liberal kooks ALWAYS "conveniently" forget your history. You do remember that thing we used to call the Cold War? Trying to make a Reagan connection to our current situation with regards to Afghanistan, is both disingenuous, and moronic. As for how that "f-in" worked out? Just fine THEN. The Soviets withdrew with their tails between their legs...which is exactly what you wingnuts are proposing WE do now. Our peaceful Muslim brothers will view it the same way they did the Soviets then... WEAKNESS. And the next time a bunch of suicide bombers kill people in a Subway, or Airport, it wont be Moscow... It will be Des Moines, or Miami.

 

[uscitizen]

Who has benefitted?
Umm Contractors? The Military Industrial Complex?
Oil companys?

 

[tjvh]

Who has benefitted?
Umm Contractors? The Military Industrial Complex?
Oil companys?

When exactly did you sacrifice your own free will, and decide the Kool-Aid was what your life was missing? Do you have any "real" positions to bring to the table, other than those same old, worn out Liberal talking points you pass off as your own?

 

[Sallow]

It's hardly about "the place", and whether "the place" is worth it. It's about fighting them in THEIR backyard, and NOT ours. Ten years, or not... You don't really believe that makes any difference? I hate to say it, but when you are fighting people that fight in the name of a Religion, and YOU are viewed as an Infidel... The fight is probably going to last our lifetimes, and beyond. The idea that withdrawing our troops is going to make everything better is simply absurd.

It was the Reagan/Bush crowd that hatched the crazy idea that religious fanatics were great "warriors" against the "vast soviet empire".

How'd that fucking work out?

You Liberal kooks ALWAYS "conveniently" forget your history. You do remember that thing we used to call the Cold War? Trying to make a Reagan connection to our current situation with regards to Afghanistan, is both disingenuous, and moronic. As for how that "f-in" worked out? Just fine THEN. The Soviets withdrew with their tails between their legs...which is exactly what you wingnuts are proposing WE do now. Our peaceful Muslim brothers will view it the same way they did the Soviets then... WEAKNESS. And the next time a bunch of suicide bombers kill people in a Subway, or Airport, it wont be Moscow... It will be Des Moines, or Miami.

It's the history pal.

And Reagan/Bush knew how crazy these folks were. CIA had to intervene because the Soviet pilots were offing themselves rather then be taken prisoner to be tortured by the nuts.

Afghanistan, under the commies, were modernizing. Left alone..you'd probably have seen them oust the Russians without the crazy fanatics.

The Soviet Union was on it's way out. The only thing that the Reagan administration did was to hasten that trajectory. Carter's wheat embargo did more to cripple that nation then Afghanistan.

 

[Sallow]

It's hardly about "the place", and whether "the place" is worth it. It's about fighting them in THEIR backyard, and NOT ours. Ten years, or not... You don't really believe that makes any difference? I hate to say it, but when you are fighting people that fight in the name of a Religion, and YOU are viewed as an Infidel... The fight is probably going to last our lifetimes, and beyond. The idea that withdrawing our troops is going to make everything better is simply absurd.

It was the Reagan/Bush crowd that hatched the crazy idea that religious fanatics were great "warriors" against the "vast soviet empire".

How'd that fucking work out?

You Liberal kooks ALWAYS "conveniently" forget your history. You do remember that thing we used to call the Cold War? Trying to make a Reagan connection to our current situation with regards to Afghanistan, is both disingenuous, and moronic. As for how that "f-in" worked out? Just fine THEN. The Soviets withdrew with their tails between their legs...which is exactly what you wingnuts are proposing WE do now. Our peaceful Muslim brothers will view it the same way they did the Soviets then... WEAKNESS. And the next time a bunch of suicide bombers kill people in a Subway, or Airport, it wont be Moscow... It will be Des Moines, or Miami.

Subways? In Des Moines? Or Miami?



The only people under the threat of real live terrorism are people living in NYC, LA, San Francisco, Chicago and Washington DC.

No one wants to bother with Des Moines or Miami.

 

[ima]

The US army can't even take a shit hole like Afghanistan. If this was a sports team with all the big superstars who can't beat the last place team, ever, the coaching staff would be fired.
Time to get some real tacticians in there.

 

[High_Gravity]

Fuck that, its time to leave that shit hole, how long does Mitt want us to stay there?

And you have how many years of experience in running a war? Just wondering.... because, as our military leaders (you know - the guys who actually know about this shit) say it's important that we handle the withdrawal wisely rather than running away. Here's an idea for you... how about you defer to the experts on things you know jack shit about?

Well excuse the fuck out of me, I have spent 7 years in the Military myself so I think I know a little bit about what is going on over there. We have been in thats shit hole for over 10 years and our men and women are being shot at by the same Afghans we are training and paying for on an almost daily basis now, I am allowed to have an opinion that staying there is not doing a damn thing but getting more or our men and women killed.

 

[tjvh]

It was the Reagan/Bush crowd that hatched the crazy idea that religious fanatics were great "warriors" against the "vast soviet empire".

How'd that fucking work out?

You Liberal kooks ALWAYS "conveniently" forget your history. You do remember that thing we used to call the Cold War? Trying to make a Reagan connection to our current situation with regards to Afghanistan, is both disingenuous, and moronic. As for how that "f-in" worked out? Just fine THEN. The Soviets withdrew with their tails between their legs...which is exactly what you wingnuts are proposing WE do now. Our peaceful Muslim brothers will view it the same way they did the Soviets then... WEAKNESS. And the next time a bunch of suicide bombers kill people in a Subway, or Airport, it wont be Moscow... It will be Des Moines, or Miami.

Subways? In Des Moines? Or Miami?



The only people under the threat of real live terrorism are people living in NYC, LA, San Francisco, Chicago and Washington DC.

No one wants to bother with Des Moines or Miami.

You get the idea, and no it isn't just NYC, etc.... If you believe that Terrorism is only directed there, you are living in your own little fantasy world. Which seems to be the case.

 

[tjvh]

The US army can't even take a shit hole like Afghanistan. If this was a sports team with all the big superstars who can't beat the last place team, ever, the coaching staff would be fired.
Time to get some real tacticians in there.

If you think our Military is "trying to take Afghanistan" then your lack of intelligence is ASTOUNDING, and to be quite honest... VERY disturbing.

 

[Valerie]

Romney position on Afghanistan

The Objectives

Romney believes that our continued presence should be decided by the military’s top brass, cautions that we should not be making similar commitments in the future. He also stressed that the bulk of the responsibility lies with the Afghanis.

“I want those troops to come home based upon not politics, not based upon economics, but instead based upon the conditions on the ground determined by the generals … But I also think we have learned that our troops should not go off and try to fight a war of independence for another nation. Only the Afghanis can win Afghanistan’s independence from the Taliban.”
13 June 2011, Republican Presidential Debate in New Hampshire.

Interesting. Romney believes that the Generals are in control of the military.

Section 2 - Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

Bit different from the Constitution..but what the heck.

You guys trash that document every chance you get.

Interesting that's what YOU got out of all that...

 

[ima]

The US army can't even take a shit hole like Afghanistan. If this was a sports team with all the big superstars who can't beat the last place team, ever, the coaching staff would be fired.
Time to get some real tacticians in there.

If you think our Military is "trying to take Afghanistan" then your lack of intelligence is ASTOUNDING, and to be quite honest... VERY disturbing.

So what are they doing there, trying NOT to take Afghanistan?

 

[ima]

Fuck that, its time to leave that shit hole, how long does Mitt want us to stay there?

And you have how many years of experience in running a war? Just wondering.... because, as our military leaders (you know - the guys who actually know about this shit) say it's important that we handle the withdrawal wisely rather than running away. Here's an idea for you... how about you defer to the experts on things you know jack shit about?

Well excuse the fuck out of me, I have spent 7 years in the Military myself so I think I know a little bit about what is going on over there. We have been in thats shit hole for over 10 years and our men and women are being shot at by the same Afghans we are training and paying for on an almost daily basis now, I am allowed to have an opinion that staying there is not doing a damn thing but getting more or our men and women killed.

Why did you leave the army, was it because they repealed the "don't ask, don't tell" policy?

 

[tjvh]

The US army can't even take a shit hole like Afghanistan. If this was a sports team with all the big superstars who can't beat the last place team, ever, the coaching staff would be fired.
Time to get some real tacticians in there.

If you think our Military is "trying to take Afghanistan" then your lack of intelligence is ASTOUNDING, and to be quite honest... VERY disturbing.

So what are they doing there, trying NOT to take Afghanistan?

We are not trying to "take Afghanistan", we are trying to eradicate Terrorists who are "operating IN Afghanistan". Are IQ's in tailspins around here, or what?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Regardless who is president, the USA will maintain an armed presence in Afghanistan.