Having just watched President Obama's speech the second time, I've changed my opinion.

[Electric Monk]

After having seen it only once, I kind of agreed with William Pitt's take on it http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7131530&mesg_id=7131530 but now I feel differently. President Obama was sincere when he said he was reluctant to commit more resources, but sees it as the only real viable option, looking at the big picture and thinking of the future. I'm a fairly smart guy, but I'm honest enough to admit that Barack Obama is smarter than I am, and has access to information sources that I don't, as well.

I don't support wars, on principle, but I hope to God that President Obama is making the right choice here, and this war is winnable. At least now we have more clearly defined exit conditions.


This'll probably go over like a lead balloon here, given some of the other posts I've seen on the subject tonight, but oh well :dunce:

[Cha]

1. Not over like lead balloon with me.

I strongly disagreed with the OP you're refering to.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

46. Lead ballons can actually fly, fyi. n/t

[HipChick]

2. That's how I felt about it the first time around..its take 8yrs of rethug mis-mangement to create

this pile of shit that Obama has to clear up

[Go2Peace]

13. I would have more confidence Obama will follow through if his other policies

were more consistant with the wishes of the people.

It would go a long way to say, announce that we are pairing our military budget in non "theater" areas, if he was more strongly advocating serious financial reform and regulation, if he was not making moves to continue government secrecy and cutting and reforming the CIA.

If his policies were more consistant with true "reform" it would be easier to believe he really is doing this for the right reasons and not just listening to war rhetoric and corporate oil concerns.

But given that he is surrounded by 20th century thinkers from the last decade and is pretty much only listening to centrist voices it is hard to be confident he will do this right, and that it is really "the only option"

[sendero]

42. Why does everyone..

.... assume there is a military answer to every problem?

Just because you don't like something does not mean you can just send in the troops and fix it. Both Iraq and Afghanistan are the way they are as a result of centuries of cultural environment. They are not going to change in an instant, regardless of any amount of pressure applied.

The folks who are claiming Obama is doing the right thing are just like the morons who said Iraq would greet us as liberators and we'd be out in 6 months.

Meet the new fools, same as the old fools.

[FrenchieCat]

3. I didn't agree on Pitt's take either.......

I just listened for the 2nd time, and I got a bit more out of it than the first time.

What I heard that stood out, and has nothing to do with what Bush would ever say....

The people of Afghanistan have endured violence for decades. They have been confronted with occupation - by the Soviet Union, and then by foreign al Qaeda fighters who used Afghan land for their own purposes. So tonight, I want the Afghan people to understand - America seeks an end to this era of war and suffering. We have no interest in occupying your country.

First, there are those who suggest that Afghanistan is another Vietnam. They argue that it cannot be stabilized, and we are better off cutting our losses and rapidly withdrawing. Yet this argument depends upon a false reading of history. Unlike Vietnam, we are joined by a broad coalition of 43 nations that recognizes the legitimacy of our action. Unlike Vietnam, we are not facing a broad-based popular insurgency. And most importantly, unlike Vietnam, the American people were viciously attacked from Afghanistan, and remain a target for those same extremists who are plotting along its border. To abandon this area now - and to rely only on efforts against al Qaeda from a distance - would significantly hamper our ability to keep the pressure on al Qaeda, and create an unacceptable risk of additional attacks on our homeland and our allies.

Second, there are those who acknowledge that we cannot leave Afghanistan in its current state, but suggest that we go forward with the troops that we have. But this would simply maintain a status quo in which we muddle through, and permit a slow deterioration of conditions there. It would ultimately prove more costly and prolong our stay in Afghanistan, because we would never be able to generate the conditions needed to train Afghan Security Forces and give them the space to take over.


Finally, there are those who oppose identifying a timeframe for our transition to Afghan responsibility. Indeed, some call for a more dramatic and open-ended escalation of our war effort - one that would commit us to a nation building project of up to a decade. I reject this course because it sets goals that are beyond what we can achieve at a reasonable cost, and what we need to achieve to secure our interests. Furthermore, the absence of a timeframe for transition would deny us any sense of urgency in working with the Afghan government. It must be clear that Afghans will have to take responsibility for their security, and that America has no interest in fighting an endless war in Afghanistan.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/01/obama-afghanistan-speech-text-excerpts_n_376088.htm

[bamacrat]

7. Agreed, I wish we could just pull out but I feel that may create the perfect scenario for genocide.

A power vacuum that may not mean Al-qeida or the Taliban but a weak government that has to assert its will with corrupt people in charge. Staying there sucks real bad and I wish we werent and I do believe we will be out by 2012 and once we are completely gone Im sure Sharia will take over but we owe it to the tens of millions of people we have terrorized all these years to try to leave them with some sort of a decent life not just an existence.

[Cha]

16. And, that is why they need more troops in Afghanistan..

to help those soldiers out who are there and to wrap this responsibility up.

"Second, there are those who acknowledge that we cannot leave Afghanistan in its current state, but suggest that we go forward with the troops that we have. But this would simply maintain a status quo in which we muddle through, and permit a slow deterioration of conditions there. It would ultimately prove more costly and prolong our stay in Afghanistan, because we would never be able to generate the conditions needed to train Afghan Security Forces and give them the space to take over."

[WilmywoodNCparalegal]

39. Thanks for your reasoned argument, Frenchie

There are those who are so incapable of seeing issues in shades of gray who are making DU a very toxic place right now. War is never easy, should be a last resort and should never be pursued or continued lightly. This is not Obama's war; it started in 2001 and, due to incompetent and criminal handling by the previous administration, the resources that should have gone to Afghanistan instead went to Iraq, a useless conflict.

While Al Qaeda may have regrouped in Pakistan, it is quite possible that it is still using Afghanistan to scheme and plan its next attack. Since I don't believe the U.S. government caused 9/11 or the Madrid bombings or the London bombings or the other countless AQ attacks throughout the world since 9/11 (we tend to think that since something didn't happen in the U.S. then everything is fine, whereas instead plenty has happened throughout the world caused by AQ), I think it's important that the U.S. at least have a strategy to deal with AQ and the Taleban, who clearly have aided AQ and will continue to do so as long as they share a common idea to 'kill the infidels.'

Obama was stuck between a rock and a hard place on Afghanistan; he said during his campaign that his intentions were to support the effort and he is doing precisely that, albeit with an exit strategy, something the previous administration never even approached for either Afghanistan or Iraq.

[Bolo Boffin]

4. The big thing for me is Pakistan.

The number one place for these extremists to get their hands on nukes is Pakistan. We have to stay and keep a lid on that mess.

[bleever]

5. Hey, I rec'd it, and it went from +6 to +5.

But I also like to think I'm keeping up, and to me it seems that agonizing over what *will* happen because of this has gotten further ahead of the game than I would dare to at this point.

Don't get me wrong: I'm fully prepared, still, to duck and cover, and be disappointed. But the fact that this president knows history with the kind of incisive and exhaustive knowledge you see in your favorite DUers make me inclined to your sentiment.

[Skittles]

6. I do want whatever strategy is taking to succeed

I'll leave it at that

[tblue]

8. I am SO against this war, but my heart goes out to our president

and I, too, hope he's right. There are no guarantees. But I felt for the first time in years that we have a president who hates like hell putting those young people in harm's way. Just the fact that the human cost so heavily weighs on him gives me some reassurance. I'm not at all sure if he's right about this escalation, but I deeply respect Pres. Obama as a man of honor. Man, am I glad I'm not president.

[maglatinavi]

30. obama

I too am against this war, but a comment by some one sobered me, he is trying to keep the enemy from taking over Pakistan and the nuclear facility there ... it is really scary... My heart bleeds for all the soldiers past and present in Iraq and Afghanistan ... One of my grandnephews is a Marine and did time in Iraq ...
It also bothers me to know that women will be victims of the backwards beliefs and practices of those brutal people... Just for show, I heard that the pres. Kurzai signed a law that allows a man to jail a wife if she refuses to have sex with him ... Did you ever!!! That is the most irrational thing I have ever heard...Too bad that Bush didn't "smoke" Bin Laden as he promised and finished the whole problem, that is Bin Laden....of course, without going to Iraq... The world would be so much better...Sigh!!!
:dilemma: :dilemma: :dilemma: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot:

[tblue]

57. Karzai/The Taliban would've jailed me (or worse) a long time ago

for many reasons, including not being an obedient wife. How awful. I did not know that our good "friend" Karzai was that backward. Corrupt as helll, yes. A bonafide mysogynist a-hole/Neanderthal? :puke: Thank you for informing me about this. You and I will just have to hold hands and pray, I suppose. This is making me so mad. The whole damned thing.

[jobycom]

9. Not going to bash you for an honest, reasoned opinion, but the excuses always sound reasonable.

LBJ was smarter than me and you combined, and he got us into Viet Nam. It's easy to be swayed by those who have made a career at swaying people. But boiling away the rhetoric to the simple facts leaves us with the same speech Bush gave to start this thing, and the same speech every nation gives in similar circumstances. I'm sure the Soviets used the same ideas when they invaded. We are there, we are killing people, and nothing will change until we leave. The change will be ugly, but it will be the same whether we leave now or in ten years. Killing more people to salve our national conscience for killing so many people in vain just heaps atrocity on atrocity. We can't slaughter our way into virtue here.

[TicketyBoo]

48. LBJ

was facing the political pressure of a Presidential election a few months after he escalated the war in Vietnam. Obama doesn't have that political pressure on him, at least.

I didn't want this escalation, but I think Obama made a persuasive statement for his reasons for this action.

It's a complicated situation.

[lumpy]

53. I echo your sentiments. 8 years US occupation in Afghanistan

has proved that the best, or call it the worst, of ideas for solving the problem of Afhganistan has not born anything one could call fruit. Our presence there amounts to only adding to the confusion Afghanistis must feel regarding who to trust. Now US citizens are finding out the same thing; who can we trust to do the right thing for this country.

[HuckleB]

10. Well, I think you're spot on...

Kick and Rec.

[backscatter712]

11. I'm hoping Obama has some good hole cards...

If I were Obama or his military strategist, I wouldn't be telling the public everything about the war strategy, but just enough to sell it to the public. After all, the Taliban leaders will be watching this speech as well, and planning their strategy accordingly.

So my guess is that assuming Obama's not pulling a Bush and pulling this war plan out of his ass (and I think Obama knows better), there are some parts of the strategy he's not telling us about that he thinks will turn the tide.

I hope this war actually is winnable and Obama's got a plan to win this one. If it isn't, we're gonna be in for many more rough years...

Something to bear in mind: The majority of the public is against the war, but don't think that's out of altruism. While some of us might be against the war because of all the death & suffering that comes with war, most of the public is against the war because we're not winning. Mark my words, if we start winning and dominating, just watch public support go through the roof. We're bloodthirsty bastards...

And I'll say it... Ideally, we'd just get out entirely, but if we manage to find a way to curbstomp the Taliban, I won't shed tears when they get slaughtered. The Taliban are a bunch of insane, misogynistic fundie bastards, and I have no love for them. The world's a better place without them.

[AllyCat]

12. OK, and maybe this is exactly the right thing. Then can we stop already in Iraq?

I almost could have supported this insanity if he'd said, "Troops are no longer necessary in Iraq, nor are embassies". Instead, we'll pull more money out of our asses and send more brave troops off in harm's way for another lie.

[backscatter712]

15. The troops are on the verge of leaving Iraq. Yes, it's really happening!

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120968941

The tanks, trucks and other heavy equipment are about to be shipped either home or to Afghanistan. The troops are chilling out in barracks for the most part instead of going out on patrols. Violence in Iraq's at an all-time low (well, since the invasion began in 2003.)

We don't hear this story much in the news, most likely because the media's bored with Iraq, but our troops indeed are working on leaving. There's gonna be some delays because of the pissing contest over Iraq's upcoming January (or later) elections. Hopefully that won't derail things...

Now if only we'd accomplish that in Afghanistan...

[AllyCat]

18. I hope you are right. I'm at the point that I don't believe anything politicians tell me

Including those for whom I voted.

[backscatter712]

19. Things can still get clusterfucked in Iraq, so don't declare the war over yet...

but the recent news from Iraq is very encouraging.

[AllyCat]

58. And that's what has always happened in the past.

* would say "we are winning the war" or some other such nonsense and then here we are, 6 years later, still stuck messing up their country.

[bridgit]

14. Let's run William's offering through a tag cloud and see if the day gets any brighter...

:dunce:

[Cha]

17. You are the monk!

I hope so too!

[lapfog_1]

20. You know what will shock DU folks.

Is the announcement, maybe in 2 years, that both India and Pakistan are giving up all of their nuclear warheads, to be turned over to the UN, and to have IAEA inspectors permanently resident in both countries.

And that the deal is the direct result of the diplomacy of President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton.

And that the conditions for such a deal were created by fighting the Taliban to the point where they are no longer a major factor in either Afghanistan and Pakistan and forcing them to renounce violence.

That's what our President is hoping for.

I hope it happens.

Because only that will make this "worth it".

It's a long shot. But it's the best we can hope for.

[ShamelessHussy]

21. i'm sure the key pieces will be repeated often tomorrow, so as to help it sink in

repetition is key

[dysfunctional press]

22. i'd rather have healthcare.

and about a million other things.

there's no way i can support an escalation- and it isn't going to go the way he's calling for, in regard to when the troops will be coming home...but you already know that. i hope.

[Boudica the Lyoness]

24. So would I but.....

I think there's a cheaper way to go after Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. I also think there are people who only see war to make more money. I just hope Obama is not listening to them.

[Boudica the Lyoness]

23. I trust Obama's judgment.

Bush wanted to invade Iraq before 9/11. Remember the navy pilot that had been shot down during the first Gulf war and the Bush admin was claiming he was still alive and being held prisoner in Iraq? I thought the 'rescue' was how they were going to go about invading Iraq. Then 9/11 happened and the rest is history.

Remember the special ops in Afghanistan, even riding horses, going after the bad guys? I believe the special op guys (not just the mounted ones) stood a chance of catching Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda. Or at least keeping them on the run. The country is so poor, I'm sure they could have bribed people, blended in and done whatever they do. Maybe it's Black Op's I'm thinking of. Anyway, history has proven that convoys of troops and all that, just doesn't work in the region. I don't see how an additional 30,000 troops will make any difference. Maybe, just maybe, they are not just regular 'walking around with a big target on them' troops. I really want to trust Obama on this one.

I do believe we have to keep after Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda because the Pakistani's have nukes also because of 9/11.

[Frank Cannon]

25. Right. Now, kick this football for me, Charlie Brown!

[Bushknew]

26. The Britney Spears defence. Bravo.

[Electric Monk]

27. Feel free to elaborate, I don't get your point from what you've written. nt

[Bushknew]

28. The Britney Spears defence is .....

Trust our president in every decision'


http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/Music/09/03/cnna.spears/

CARLSON: You're going to be on the National Mall soon performing for Pepsi and the NFL and also to support our troops. A lot of entertainers have come out against the war in Iraq. Have you?

SPEARS: Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision he makes and should just support that, you know, and be faithful in what happens.

CARLSON: Do you trust this president?

SPEARS: Yes, I do.

[Electric Monk]

31. Is that what I said? I don't think so. Go read what I wrote again. nt

[Bushknew]

32. Almost verbatim …

YOU: I'm a fairly smart guy, but I'm honest enough to admit that Barack Obama is smarter than I am, and has access to information sources that I don't, as well.
I hope to God that President Obama is making the right choice here, and this war is winnable

SPEARS: Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision he makes and should just support that, you know, and be faithful in what happens.

[Electric Monk]

33. You missed the "listening to what he said on this issue and thinking about it" part. nt

[Cha]

59. Yeah, it's not like we

haven't learned a lot of history about Obama and know where he stands.

Their britney spears smears are lazy.

[Electric Monk]

61. re: Britney Spears kicks, this is now my 5th post in this long thread, which I started.

To whom were you speaking, and was this reply satisfactory, I hope?

I hope Barack Obama is right on this issue, I really do, I'm just not super confident. And yeah, I've read a little bit of history too, here and there, fwiw.

[opihimoimoi]

29. I Trust HIS GUT FEELING better than Bushies...P Obama appears Sincere

[optimator]

34. why aren't you DEMANDING PROOF for the claims made?

I won't ever trust a politician because he appears sincere, especially in a matter of war.

[smalll]

35. Welcome to DU. And I'm with you.

I think Obama has earned enough of our trust and confidence in his intelligence and sincerity that we're willing to give him a chance.

And let me say this: despite our resident leftbagger deviationists, posts like yours are precious: no honest freeper could troll around DU tonight and continue to claim that Democrats are all America-hating defeatists.

We aren't. Thank you for being yet another voice to prove them wrong. :patriot:

[lamp_shade]

36. Good judgment... my #1 reason for voting for him. I continue to support him.

[lillypaddle]

37. K&R

I'm disappointed that that was his decision, but I believe he had to have information that made it necessary.

[uppityperson]

38. k&r

[ima_sinnic]

40. whether it's "winnable"? is it like a basketball game in indefinite overtime or something?

at what point do we say, okay we made the most points so we "win"? When every single Afghani citizen has been killed, to protect the Afhani people from the Afghani people?

The ONLY "winners" are the corporatist warmongers who are laughing all the way to the bank. If you think this war, or some other war if we "win" in Afghanistan (according to whom?), is going to really end, I have a big bank account worth millions in Nigeria looking for you, its rightful owner, and need only several thousand dollars to secure it for you.

[old mark]

41. This is one of the few intelligent posts on the subject in the last several days

of pissing and moaning.
Rec.

Thank you.

mark

[malaise]

43. I understand his dilemma but

I can never support the escalation of war. What's more Obama's continuation of Bush's doctrine of preemptive war is frightening.

[robo50]

44. I am inclined to agree with you. The speech was thorough, and Obama

has decided, for the reasons given, that this is the right thing to do.

I'm glad some people don't agree, I value debate and all opinions that are based upon reason.

Let's just keep the debate civil.

[mmonk]

45. Once you commit to escalation of a war, you cannot accurately determine

the outcome. You leave it to events. Don't let the double speak of speaking of escalation and withdrawal at the same time cloud your reasoning. That being said, you are entitled to your opinion. Just keep in mind spoken outcomes before hand are guesses or hopes.

[Warpy]

47. We need to remember one thing about Afghanistan

We're still there because STUPID AND CHENEY FUCKED UP.

That's the bottom line.

[robo50]

60. YES! and we cannot forget our buddy Rummy! nm/t

[cbdo2007]

49. I agree with you here and you explained it well.

As far as it going over like a lead balloon here...yeah, the immediate pullout people are pretty persistent that it's the only solution.

I trust in Obama and that he is a good person and is doing the right thing.

[MineralMan]

50. As you have no doubt seen, your post has substantial recs.

One of the things I noticed last evening was that, along with those who truly oppose all military actions for idealogical reasons, there were many, many low post count posters egging them on in condemning President Obama's plans and the speech.

Few were actually really listening to the speech. Instead, they were listening to some other voices, it seemed to me.

I'm not an expert in military matters, even though I served a term in the USAF. I don't have enough information or expertise to know whether this current plan will succeed or not. Neither do many of those who are absolutely certain that it will not. In fact, many of those appear to have no information at all, but are simply acting on their beliefs.

I respect those who refuse to support any military action. That is their belief. I dislike the instantaneous condemnation of President Obama without any real thought, though. That is unproductive of anything.

Some people were threatening to leave DU because of the Obama-haters who were so actively posting last night. The number of recs on this thread should tell them that the anti-Obama posters here, while very vocal, do not represent the majority of opinion on DU.

Thanks for your post. I hope, sincerely, that President Obama's plan works. The only thing that will demonstrate that is time.

[OneBlueSky]

51. um . . . define "winnable" . . . n/t

[lumpy]

52. It is amazing how artful rhetoric can influence people's thinking.

Obama has become a master of rhetoric, most of it empty.

[Tigermoose]

54. Have some helium.

K&R

[NJmaverick]

55. We have a thoughtful and intelligent President

He talks to us like intelligent adults. So it can sometimes take a couple of listens to fully appreciate the complex issues he lays out. I think it's great that we have such a man as President.

[Romulox]

56. We've all known for WEEKS that he was going to do this. This was stagecraft. Unrec. nt

[Electric Monk]

62. Are you asking where next? I wastn't electected for that

[KakistocracyHater]

63. where is the real money coming from to pay for this? I think it's China

because of how badly they've been treating the U.S. publicly. Saying we have gold-plated bars in Ft. Knox, their subs popping up into the midst of Naval exercises, telling us to shut up at the U.N. On what terms is this money being lent? How much interest? How big the payments? Why isn't this a huge worry included in considering the Afghan War?