Obama is fighting a war of PREEMPTION.

[thereismore]

I think that he is really trying to prevent the Taleban from winning in Pakistan and getting hold of the 60 nukes, by putting pressure on them in Afghanistan and by providing clandestine support to Pakistan in terms of CIA operations and drone attacks. For now. If Zardari gets cornered by Taleban, we would be asked to cross the border and help him out militarily. I suspect that those are the secret terms of an agreement that the President cannot publicly disclose. I suspect that that's what Sec. of State Clinton was doing there during the 3-day visit at the end of October. That's why we need more troops in Afghanistan, so we could throw them into Pakistan when the security of the world would be at risk. We are there to PREEMPT the nukes falling into hands of the Taleban.

On edit: This is precisely the Bush** fucking doctrine and I disapprove of it with all my heart and mind. I am merely stating how things seem to be.

[leftstreet]

1. He should have called on all of us to enlist

Do our parts

Help out

MY GOD THE SECURITY OF THE WORLD IS AT RISK!!!!111111

[tabatha]

4. You think nuclear weapons are a joke?

[leftstreet]

9. LOL I think they're the new "The British Are Coming" or "Communists!"

LOL so now it's back to being about nukes?

[thereismore]

14. I think it's about the nukes, but you are entitled to your LOLs. nt

[leftstreet]

17. Yes, that's why I voted for Obama. Because I was afraid of nukes

And several million other Americans joined me.

:eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

[tabatha]

16. "The British Are Coming" or "Communists"

were relatively harmless in comparison.



That is not from the govt.

[MNDemNY]

2. Preemption....huh? Isn't that the "Bush Doctrine" in a nut shell?

Let's ask Charlie!:think:

[thereismore]

13. Yep, you got it. nt

[Taverner]

3. Or...he's driving them right into Pakistan. See "Khmer Rouge" and "Ho Chi Minh Trail"

[thereismore]

8. Yes, unless he puts the troops along the border, which he isn't doing, apparently.

The escalation can actually make things much worse in Pakistan. You are right.

[Bluerthanblue]

5. not-

way to many 'if's' in your scenario. Pres. Obama is trying to wind down a poorly planned and executed war, which was in all honesty based more on revenge than anything else.

That's my opinion. No less valid than yours.

:shrug:

[thereismore]

10. I thought so too, but winding down would look differently, imo. nt

[Davis_X_Machina]

6. Afghanistan is a particular example of a general problem....

...and Afghanistan is not the last time this kind of problem will come up and eventually a workable solution must be found. The fact that we cannot be the world's policeman doesn't mean there is no 'crime'.

Afghanistan was a problem before 9/11.

As long as there are nation-states, there's going to be continuing real need for a formal international process of receiver-in-possession for failed nation-states. They're a nuisance to their neighbors and often a hellhole for the people who live there.

NATO and the US big-footing around is not the answer to the problem, but that's not the same thing as saying there is no problem. And waiting for the inevitable withering away of the state isn't a very effective solution, either

We're ad-hoc-ing something that needs to be settled permanently, multilaterally, by the world community, for the sake of the peace of our shared planet and the safety of its inhabitants. This is something the nations of the world are going to have to grasp the nettle on sooner or later, with all its problems of sovereignty, 'interference in purely internal matters', etc.

[thereismore]

12. I appreciate your logic and I agree. nt

[Sukie]

7. Another good thread driven to drivel with tasteless humor.

Thereismore, there probably is more to his decision, you are right.

[Echo In Light]

11. Maybe now more will better understand the urgency of the "Look Ahead!" meme

[Bluebear]

15. The Bush Doctrine. nt

[TexasObserver]

18. The president doesn't know what he's doing.

He's following the advice of the war party, and it is his job to pick better advisors and listen to them. When he surrounds himself with the likes of Gates and McCrystal, he shouldn't be surprised that he gets warmed over Bush policies.

He's clueless about Afghanistan. He's doing it because he's afraid he'll look weak if he doesn't.

Same as it ever was.

[blindpig]

21. Doubt that, all agree he's a smart guy..

Know them by their acts.

[TexasObserver]

22. Smart in some things doesn't mean smart in all things.

Elie Wiesel lost his foundation's entire holdings to Madoff.

He is a smart guy who got suckered into doing something stupid by listening to the wrong advisors.

Same as Obama.

Like I said, he's clueless on Afghanistan.

[Ozymanithrax]

19. Bush's preemptive war doctrine was for the U.S. military to intervene

in a massive way in areas that were a threat to the U.S.

Providing clandestine support to the Pakistan government is not preemptive war. We are not invading Pakistan.

If he requests an authorization to use force in Pakistan, we can maby talk premptive war.

[The Wielding Truth]

20. Well. Who really knew the * Doctrine! Lies are all I heard. Obama is

dealing with a group of wild fanatics who are encroaching on a country that actually has the most powerful nuclear wmds.

It's a mess, and I'm not sure if we can prevent the overthrow of the Pakistani government with mass force, but if we leave, can the Pakistani military fend them off? With the repressive and fiercely angered and AlQiada mixed militias are we assuring an armed extreme anti american nuclear threat?

Geez... Can pulling out be the easy answer? How dangerous and how many extremists are we talking about? Can we turn the drug trade in Afghanistan off or diminish it to a controllable size? The Russians went broke trying to take over Afghanistan. Now we are broke from right wing mismanagement and corruption from an ungoverned free market, and a cowboy mentality that took us into Iraq.

Honestly, we need to be mended as well as the other countries * wrecked. Let's start with the attitude of repair, not war, not right or left, but repair.

Is that why we are increasing the troop strength? I must believe so.