Olbermann: By prolonging the war, Afghanistan will turn into Vietnam

[VMI Dem]

Is Olbermann a wingnut lefty now?

[polichick]

1. He's a wingnut lefty hanging onto the bottom of the bus. nt

[waiting for hope]

2. He has always taken an anti-war stance -

I don't see his Special Comment as anything out of the ordinary.

[xultar]

3. Obama always promised to get Afghanistan right. He always said that we needed out of

Iraq but Afghanistan was different because a strategy had never been tried there.

I don't know why people are so shocked.

[chelsea0011]

4. Because what does "getting Afghanistan right" mean?

He always made it seem that al Queda and Osama bin Laden were the Afghanistan problem. Now that it is assumed they are in Pakistan what is the mission in Afghanistan? I think we will get some answers tonight and I hope they make sense to me but i'm not holding out hope that he caved to McCrystal by sending all these troops to a job that isn't defined and can't be won.

[xultar]

13. To try it with a strategy. Because basically BushCo just sent people over with guns

and no plan.

[tekisui]

5. Criticism of a bad decision is not necessarily shock.

I don't know why so many are shocked that a massive war escalation would be opposed on DU.

[freddie mertz]

6. Right. I am not shocked, just opposed to escalation.

I wish we could get past that kind of rhetoric to talk about this on the merits.

Maybe after the speech?

[tekisui]

7. After the speech, it will be :

GIVE THE PLAN TIME TO WORK!!!1!1!!

[QC]

14. Ah, you must have seen this before. n/t

[Better Believe It]

9. I don't recall Obama promising to escalate the war and more than double U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

Post a link to that candidate Obama campaign pledge please.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

20. He promised an increase of 2 brigades

Obama orders brigades to Afghanistan

Updated: Wednesday, February 18th, 2009 | By Angie Drobnic Holan

President Obama issued an order Feb. 17, 2009, to send two additional brigades to Afghanistan.

"This increase is necessary to stabilize a deteriorating situation in Afghanistan, which has not received the strategic attention, direction and resources it urgently requires," Obama said.

He also recognized "the extraordinary strain that this deployment places on our troops and military families. I honor their service, and will give them the support they need."

Obama often said during the campaign that Afghanistan required more troops and attention than it was receiving from the Bush administration. (Read our previous campaign coverage .) Obama said the United States "had taken our eye off the ball" by invading Iraq instead of concentrating on Afghanistan.

"Our troops have fought valiantly there, but Iraq has deprived them of the support they need — and deserve," Obama said in a speech on Aug. 1, 2007. "As a result, parts of Afghanistan are falling into the hands of the Taliban, and a mix of terrorism, drugs and corruption threatens to overwhelm the country. As president, I would deploy at least two additional brigades to Afghanistan to reinforce our counterterrorism operations and support NATO's efforts against the Taliban."

In his Feb. 17 action, Obama said he would deploy a Marine Expeditionary Brigade during the spring of 2009 and an Army Stryker Brigade with support troops by the summer. That's two, just as he said he would. Promise Kept.

Finally, we want to note that our ruling here only covers Obama's pledge to send two brigades. We'll use Promise No. 148 to rate whether he equips them properly



http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/promise/134/send-two-additional-brigades-to-afghanistan/

I was against any increase but 2 brigades is much less than what he is proposing.

[QC]

8. I think we know where Keith will end up....

[impik]

10. And Olbermann is an expert because...

[dionysus]

11. uh, no.

:shrug:

[BeyondGeography]

12. Airhead

[Whisp]

17. he's an actor

he tests the winds after sticking his finger up his ass then goes that way for his audience.

he's so full of himself it's really hard to watch him. sometimes he may have a good nugget of something to say, but man, what a fricken ego

[BeyondGeography]

18. A Sportscenter jock is how I first saw him

First impressions and all that...

[Berry Cool]

24. Yeah, and Lord knows, first impressions are ALL that count.

Besides, duh, everyone knows, ALL sportscasters are DUMB. :sarcasm:

(P.S. He's the complete opposite of a jock, and will be the first to say so. More like, the kid who had to settle for covering sports because he was too inept and clumsy to be any good at them.)

[BeyondGeography]

30. Or too lazy to do real reporting

And, yes, most sportcasters should not be looked at as foreign policy oracles.

[Berry Cool]

23. Bullshit. I have never seen him give anything but his own opinions, always.

As for ego, he never claimed not to have one. He's the one who'll argue the loudest for the size of his ego.

[Bluenorthwest]

28. So you prefer the 'fair and balanced' Fox thing

I see. Two sides arguing so 'you can decide'. Keith has a point of view, which is why I watch him. He makes no secret of his point of view, in fact, he is right out front with it.

[Bitwit1234]

15. I think we should just try to shore up the government

and the police force and then get the hell out...period. Start to leave the same time we are leaving in Iraq.

[krawhitham]

16. The man does not even VOTE

FUCK HIM

He should have no say

[MidwestRick]

19. Not sure how

he came up with this conclusion. The Viet Cong were a much different enemy than the Taliban, to compare the two situations doesn't help his cause at all imo.

[Aramchek]

21. Olbermann is a shock jock

He doesn't write his own script.

And Afghanistan is nowhere near Vietnam,
it is not a Cold War battle.
There are no Communists supporting and supplying Al Qaeda or the Taliban.

[Berry Cool]

25. Where did you get THAT information from?

"Shock jock," my ass. And he DOES write his own scripts. Not 100% of them, but when he gives a Special Comment, absolutely.

If you really think he's reading an editorial someone else wrote, you are the idiot--not him.

[EffieBlack]

22. While I appreciate many things about Olbermann, I can't imagine why a President of the United States

would take his advice about military matters. Keith Olbermann is a former sportscaster and infotainment host. He is not an expert about the military or foreign policy.

I really like Olbermann. I love his take on politics. I think he is funny, smart and insightful. But he is hardly the person a President and his advisers should be listening to on matters such as these. It's one thing for him to offer his opinion about Afghanistan - we all have an opinion and have every right to express it. But I think it's pretty presumptuous of Olbermann to lecture the President about what he should do, as if the President is clueless and Olbermann is all-knowing about how this extremely complicated issue should be handled.

[Cha]

26. Precisely.

[Berry Cool]

27. You're setting up a straw man to knock down.

Olbermann never said Obama was clueless, nor did he claim to be all-knowing himself. Nor did he claim to be an expert on the military or foreign policy.

All he did was give his opinion...just like all the non-experts on this forum. The only difference is, he has a TV pulpit to do it from, and we don't.

I really don't think Olbermann expects Obama to "take his advice" any more than any of the rest of us do. But he does want to be heard, so he's using his forum as a means of being heard. So are the people here on DU.

I fail to see what makes him presumptuous and us not.

Oh, and the next person to call him a "former sportscaster"? I'd like to see a list of all your jobs and how each and every one is proof positive of your superior intelligence.

I'm sure there are plenty of people who have had jobs in the past that would make others sneer at you and say "Oh, how DUMB do you have to be to do THAT job?"

The snobbery on DU...just amazing.

As for "infotainment host"...you make him sound like he's on friggin' ET. Please. Straw man all the way.

Nah, this is just another case of "Olbermann is stupid because he expressed an opinion I DON'T AGREE WITH." I fail to see how that's any different from "Obama is stupid because he's enacting a policy I DON'T AGREE WITH." It's every bit as senseless.

[EffieBlack]

31. Wow! You inferred all of that from my post?

Very interesting.

[Bluenorthwest]

29. Well you think the press has no part in a democracy?

It is a position Nixonian enough to stand with the escalation of the war. So hate the press, why not? Your dishonest use of hyperbole and insinuation is really a bit much. All American citizens should lecture the President when it suits them to do so, that is not just our right, but our duty.

[Zomby Woof]

32. In roughly 10 years, 58,000 U.S. servicepeople fell in Vietnam

In just over 8 years in Afghanistan, 930 U.S. servicepeople have fallen, and if you include the entire coalition, 1,533. Over 553,000 U.S. troops were committed to Vietnam, but not even 25% of that number has yet to be committed in Afghanistan.

Whatever else one thinks of either the wisdom or folly of our involvement in Afghanistan, I find comparisons to Vietnam specious and irresponsible. Afghanistan is to me, an exercise in waste and futility, and I am skeptical of any good coming out of the entire enterprise, but it's just sky-high rhetoric to equate it to Vietnam.

Olbermann's ego overcomes his common sense quite often, though. He isn't one to let the facts get in the way of a sanctimonious screed.