I think US involvement in Afghanistan is a day late and a dollar short. (4.00 / 3)

I am tired of paying the cost to be the world's cop, and I think we need to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan now.

They're asking for another four years -- in a just world, they'd get 10 to 20. ~~ Dennis Kucinich

---

by: dkmich @ Thu Apr 09, 2009 at 04:59:32 AM CDT

Pirates higher priority (0.00 / 0)

What immediate threat is Iraq?  Not too much.

For the first time, the Somali pirates have attacked a US flag vessel.  They have already successfully seized a Saudi oil tanker and are capturing a vessel a day.  We stopped these folks when we were a weak nation in the early 1800s (Barbary Pirates, like 1803-05  more or less IIRC).  Now we have the world's largest navy and the international sea trade is being held hostage by 1,000 guys in rowboats with high tech outboard motors.

Do we have the ships?  Yes, in a  huge flotilla or armada but ... not many of them.  Does it seem strange that we are sending a destroyer after three guys in a rowboat?  JFK had his PT boat and John Kerry his swift boat.  We have boats like this now but not many.  Apparently about 14 that carry a crew of 30 plus 9 Navy SEALS and travel at 25 knots.  Plus around 20 more that are similar boats meant to land a small ground force.

The guys on CNN were talking about buying these people off.  No can do.  The attacks have doubled each year.  The international fleet of 15 vessels is top heavy.  The new threat, whether on the seas or in ports needs small ships/boats to blast them to smithereens.  Would fifty of the little guys do it?  Probably.

Yesterday we were talking about landing 20 Marines to occupy a tax shelter building in the Caymans (12,728 headquarters in one 5 story building).  Today it is Pirates.  The common denominator is small and flexible.  The behemoths are outdated and over-priced.  Mr. Gates, you are asleep on your watch.  For shame.  This was all over the TV last fall.  

My gut says invade the village.  Recapture the ships and crews and hang the pirates like the Brits did in the 1700s.  Make it clear that this will not be a nice safe high pay business.  Geez. $149.3 billion and we can't defeat three guys in a friggin rowboat?    

---

by: David Kowalski @ Thu Apr 09, 2009 at 09:16:55 AM CDT

Get Out Now (4.00 / 1)

The ball is in YOUR court Mr. "Anti-War" President.


"I woke up on the roadside, daydreaming about the way things sometime are"

---

by: SpitBall @ Thu Apr 09, 2009 at 09:36:48 AM CDT

No military solution (4.00 / 2)

The escalation of military troops in Afghanistan looks like just an expansion of the failed Bush war. There is no military solution. Rather, militarily occupying a country is a good way to make a lot of enemies. The US-led military occupation of Afghanistan is the best recruiting tool that al Qaeda has.

A recent Rand study (How Terrorist Groups End: Lessons for Countering al Qa'ida) found that only 7% of terrorist organizations are defeated by the use of military force. To stop al Qaeda terrorism, we must address valid Muslim concerns: the American military and civilian presence in the Arab Peninsula which they consider holy, the unqualified US support for Israel even when Israel acts very badly, US support for states which oppress Muslims (China, India, Russia), US exploitation of Muslim oil and suppression of its price, the large US military presence in the Islamic world, and US support and protection of Arab police states.

Eight years into what will soon be the longest war the US has ever fought, there is still no exit plan for Afghanistan. Until we know what the exit strategy is, Congress should not continue to fund this mess.

---

by: RandomNonviolence @ Thu Apr 09, 2009 at 13:01:28 PM CDT

India's efforts in Afghanistan (0.00 / 0)

Whatever the real motive behind India's effort is - and I'm pretty sure that the suspicion that India is doing this to find an ally in the region that will act as a buffer against Pakistan has a lot of merit - I think if there is one way to fight off the extremist threat that certain sections of Pakistan poses to India this is probably the best there is. Helping people in need in an effort to build long lasting political alliance is something I strongly support - much better than terrorizing and killing people in order to get your way. The Pakistani ISI response is so predictable - what a surprise that they decided to counter India's effort to help the people of Afghanistan improve their lives by killing the Indians that provide those services!

I hope the US effort in the region will be more clear-eyed about the motives of the players in Pakistan. I don't think the majority of Pakistanis would approve of terrorist acts against Indians but many people with political power in Pakistan certainly do. Expecting India to make concessions to Pakistan despite the long history of terrorism against Indians emanating from Pakistani soil, in the name of compromise is both morally wrong and practically not viable as India won't go along with it.

Also there is an important lesson for the US efforts, a stronger civilian push - both diplomatic and developmental - is something that should become the central component of the strategy in Afghanistan. Not only is that important for moral reasons, but also practical reasons.

---

by: akriti @ Thu Apr 09, 2009 at 14:31:23 PM CDT