Coming soon to Afghanistan

It's hard to say which war will prove more destructive to America's long term strategic interests, Vietnam or Iraq. And unfortunately, Obama's "surge" in Afghanistan is coming on fast as a new contender for biggest blunder. The end state is clear as a bell, and no amount of political happy talk from U.S. generals will make one bit of difference in the long run.


All you "surge" fans

It'll be interesting to see who crawls out of the woodwork to defend the wisdom of America's long-forgotten and obviously failed "surge" strategy in Iraq.

The withering two-hour assault in 13 towns and cities, from southernmost Basra to restive Mosul in the north, was as symbolic as it was deadly, coming a week before the United States declares the end of combat operations here. Wednesday was seemingly the insurgents’ reply: Despite suggestions otherwise, they proved their ability to launch coordinated attacks virtually anywhere in Iraq, capitalizing on the government’s dysfunction and perceptions of American vulnerability.

Perceptions of vulnerability? Bullshit. Iraq was a loser's game from the get-go, courtesy of chicken-shit-in-chief George W. Bush. Unless we're prepared to obliterate the country and kill every human being living there, no amount of US might will be sufficient to pacify the place.

I should probably not respond to this but;

I was just so elated at the news that we are withdrawing a very large contingent of our fighting men and women in Iraq. I really don't care if it is because of the surge that Patraeus and Bush put in place. It is more important to me that we are able to bring home our troops and keep them safe outside of the terrible situations they have had to face in Iraq. I have never been so proud of a president than when I read about this Iraq withdrawal. I don't want to be seen as constantly against what you are saying here but this one seems important to me.

I also am elated that Obama is wanting to be on the same track in Afghanistan. Our involvement in both Iraq and Afghanistan has been suspect to me and I am hopeful that we can lessen our military involvement in both of these needless "wars" as well as such endeavors in the future. Your depiction of the surge being "failed" just seems to be more politics than reality and I hope you don't take that in the wrong way. What, other than that surge, put us in a position to get our troops out of harms way in Iraq. I don't know much about military strategy but I do know what I see and read and we can't afford to risk the lives of the troops by degrading what is working and has been working in Iraq and to me it seems we have developed a strategy there that will and could work very well in Afghanistan. Admittedly, these two countries and these two wars are different, but similar in many ways. This should not be about what will be seen as good for one political party or philosophy but what is good for our country and our military troops.

It is just my opinion. I wonder what the opinion of the country is on this.

There will be car bombs and there will be innocents killed in Iraq and Afghanistan after we are no longer involved in the front line military activity. There were those things WHEN we were involved. Now, it is the people of Iraq and the military in Iraq and the police in Iraq to deal with that. This is where we put our emphasis and training. Now, this is their country and we must rely on them to deal with this. If they don't deal with it effectively, then that is what must be accepted. I know that sounds harsh, but that is what it is.

We are agreed about pulling out

I echo all your sentiments on that front.

But I can't for the life of me connect our ability to withdraw from Iraq to the surge having happened or not happened. It was an irrelevant stunt.

The theory behind the surge was to give us time to stabilize the country so that it could stand on it's own two feet without us there with a permanent occupation force. The point of the article referenced above is that those two feet simply don't exist in Iraq. That is true today, just as it has been true ever since we invaded and destroyed the country on the basis of Bush's lies.

Of course we should get out. We should never have gotten in. Why do you think Afghanistan will be any different? The people we are fighting LIVE in those countries and have lived in those countries for thousands of years. There is no amount of time or money we can spend against a permanent guerrilla insurgency that would be enough to do whatever job anyone thinks we should be doing there.

Good thing then

I didn't expect my sentiments on the "surge" to be something anyone here felt was a good thing or the cause of what is happening now with regard to the withdrawal.

We can argue this "surge" thing all day long but the important thing to me is that we agree that the withdrawal in Iraq is a good thing and I sincerely hope we agree that needs to happen in Afghanistan soon, very soon.

I am not in the mood to argue anything else on this to be honest.