When is Obama planning on pulling troops out?
musicismylife78
Posts: 6,116
Alot of people voted for Obama because they thought he was antiwar.
My question I have asked over and over, and no supporter of his has ever answered for me.
I believe war is wrong. War is wrong when Bush initiates it, and its wrong when Obama continues it, and does nothing, and continues to send young kids to die.
Obama seems to think he can continue to wage war in Afghanistan by pulling out of iraq and moving those troops to afghanistan. I ask you, how is that any different than Bush;s war?
These young kids have been sent home and back, home and back, 4 or 5 times now. How is that any less of a criminal action than what Bush engaged in? How does he expect to convince the troops to feel good about this? You really think a 23 year old kid who has gone home and back to iraq 3 times now, will say "oh gee, now bush is gone and obama is president, yippie! I will do anything he asks, and this will be the greatest war ever!"?
Bush should be considered a criminal for his actions, and Obama should be also, as long as he continues to engage in war.
There is no honor in sending kids to die.
My question I have asked over and over, and no supporter of his has ever answered for me.
I believe war is wrong. War is wrong when Bush initiates it, and its wrong when Obama continues it, and does nothing, and continues to send young kids to die.
Obama seems to think he can continue to wage war in Afghanistan by pulling out of iraq and moving those troops to afghanistan. I ask you, how is that any different than Bush;s war?
These young kids have been sent home and back, home and back, 4 or 5 times now. How is that any less of a criminal action than what Bush engaged in? How does he expect to convince the troops to feel good about this? You really think a 23 year old kid who has gone home and back to iraq 3 times now, will say "oh gee, now bush is gone and obama is president, yippie! I will do anything he asks, and this will be the greatest war ever!"?
Bush should be considered a criminal for his actions, and Obama should be also, as long as he continues to engage in war.
There is no honor in sending kids to die.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Then those people weren't paying attention and are morons. He never said this and never claimed to be anti-war.
What I have been against the whole time is Bush's invasion of Iraq when we had no just cause to do so.
I wholeheartedly support the war on terrorism in Afghanistan as I beleive it is a just war. I really wish Bush would have kept his eye on the ball there way back when and not invade a different country that had nothing to do with the attacks on 9/11.
That is how it is different than Bush's war.
Give war a chance
he revisits, but seemingly only if you attack him/his view, or to make condescending comments as rebuttal to posts.
this is my thought as well, and i thought it was clearly and plainly spoken, a few times over during the campaign. i think animal addressed it fully. in an ideal world, i would absolutely be anti-war. as we don't live in such an idealized world, i am cautious of war, but i do see the necessity at times. and i fully agree, afghanastan should've been the order of business after 09.11 and NOT iraq, that was a personal crusade of bush & co......and we all just happened to foot the bill, the backlash...and lost soooo many lives unnecessarily, on all sides.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
its very simlar to Bush's policies. invading Afghanistan was a mistake. but that not saying we should be leaving now.
I didn't vote for obama because I thought he was anti war. or anti empire. democrats or republicans think alike when it comes to foreign policy. but there are differences. which equates to thousands of lives in some cases. so clinton bombs a pharmaceutical company in Sudan, killing 30,000. Bush invades Iraq, killing 1 million. small difference in policy, big difference in affect.
similar with afghanistan. experts have said the US will need to be there for 10-20 years to sort things out. as it is the warlords are giving hundreds of millions in poppy sales to the taliban-which equates to more violence. that country has been so fucked up for so long its hard to see an end. the US used to supply school books teaching the more militant side of Islam, just to get people fired up resisting the soviets. that's changed.
but for sure, its disheartening to see more troops being sent to a country that has been through more than any of us could imagine. they went from radical religious fundamentalists importing fighters to fight the russians to radical religious fundamentalists fighting the US. now those same crazy fuckers are benefiting from the drug trade (which they tried to erradicate) and are still resisting western influence. its hard to blame them, harder still to support.
the US is very responsible for the sad state that they're in...hard to look away AGAIN, as we did in the 80's.
the best course seems to be to send in an international coalition of troops, buy all the poppy grown, and bleed the taliban that way. violence is hardly needed.
but to your original point....how do you take over an empire and rule justly? it was built on the graves of the innocent...seems a change in that policy will take more than a simple ballot. something I think Obama would very receptive towards.
Rather than simply resorting to war, why can't Obama seek alternatives. He wants us to have a better image over there, but is sending more troops to ravage the region more, rather than getting into contact with those governing the regions. There are a few who know exactly where bin Laden is and, for a price, would be willing to hand him over. Paying a price for it isn't ethical, but it would cost far less than more war.
Then band together with the people, helping them stand up against the Taliban. The number one thing we can do over there to help is to follow thru on an old forgotten promise. We gave them the resources to grow grain, instead of poppies, with the promise we'd buy it from them. But we never went back and bought it, so most have resorted back to growing poppies cos the terrorists are buying. By failing to keep the promise, we are funding the terrorists.
Also, we need to ditch the bitch we put in power over there and restore the power for the last leader before the Taliban took control. He was a good, and loved, leader.
War will still be necessary to regain full control, but it is possible to 'lighten the load' so-to-speak.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
1. I'm pretty sure that if anyone was going to sell us Bin Laden's location, we'd have bought it long ago. No way is the government too "ethical" to just buy that sort of thing outright. I'm guessing they're throwing money around all over that country to get any info on him that they can.
2. I'm also reasonably sure that we HAVE been trying to band together with the people, and they're not buying it.
one did, well a few in the same area, but Bush chose to ignore them and start dropping bombs instead...cos we all know what a genius he is.
we were banding them together, but the way we've only been ravaging their country even more than it already was, combined with the government we appointed for them, they are turning their backs to us.