War without end and world war 3 is what they want. You have to know that all the new good jobs are going to be defense contract related and homeland security spook jobs. Human intelligence rat on your neighbor, secret police work or build new weapons systems. Our health care work patching up war wounded vets. A sad state of affairs.

Excuse me, but wasn't this the plot of Lions for Lambs?

The Political Junkie @ 1:

Good God, Bush keeps this up and we're not talking about impeachment anymore.

Passport time...

We're not talking impeachement anymore. Here's why:

Ralph Nader: "Things Are a Lot Worse than We Thought!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIO-tCPSfHA

Everything is running like clockwork. Escalate little by little. There will be no massive protests that way. They can keep this shit up for years and years.

The ideal goal is: A never ending war / permanently destabilised Middle-East= Permanent US engagement.

Things will be going even less well in Afghanistan if the U.S. sends 3,000 more Marines marching into that country. One wonders if our less than empathetic leaders have ever asked themselves how they would feel if thousands of foreign soldiers were to fly into this country, breaking down doors and terrorizing people. Sending more soldiers and Marines into Afghanistan is not the best way to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people. The best way to do that is to stop invading and occupying other countries, especially those countries such as Iraq which have oil or, in the case of Afghanistan, an oil pipeline.

It's about time ....in fact take about all of them out of Iraq and ( give them a well deserved rest ), and send about 100 thousand troops into afganistan , where they should have been from the start , and maybe we can accomplish something worthwhile .

General_Rennenkampf @ 5:

Heh, these idiots are lying to themselves if they think they can win in Afghanistan. Those Afghans are the winners of every previous war they've ever fought. America's just going to break itself the way the Soviets did.

I agree and have been trying to explain that to people since the first bombs were dropped. People just don't get it. But then again they aparently think the American colonists were a major military super power and King Georges military was a handful of dead-enders.

Can't lose ALL the wars we start can we? George "F Troop" Bush may leave office with a .000 batting average- mid-east in flames, bankrupt America, and the GOP in ICU.

johnny canuck @ 10:

It's about time ....in fact take about all of them out of Iraq and ( give them a well deserved rest ), and send about 100 thousand troops into afganistan , where they should have been from the start , and maybe we can accomplish something worthwhile .

Yes, i am thinking 35 to 45% heroin addicted vets for one.

EVERYTHING Bush has done right... he has always done after the Democrats in Congresss have forced the issue. It's about time he's escalating American troops in Afghanistan. Maybe he should borrow some of the thousands serving in Iraq and send them where they should have been all along... fight the RIGHT WAR.

Afghanistan is where one-time superior global governments go to die.

The Soviet Union tried that...and they haven't been heard from since. Russia's like a global ghetto, with high unemployment, poverty and a dependent economy that means another continent, like China, owns them.

Just like America, who should probably change it's name to the United States of China, cause the Chinese friggin owns us.

We're already expended in Iraq, trying to start shyt in Iran, and how in the hell we're going to fit Afghanistan into the mix? We couldn't win in Afghanistan alone, but if we're fighting wars on two other fronts, and trying to stave off Korea, while attempting to address Kenya and Rwanda?

Meanwhile, in 11 months, Bush flees to Paraguay, free of all the shyt he started, and beyond prosecution unless someone files charges at the Hague.

The Political Junkie @ 20:

Afghanistan is where one-time superior global governments go to die.

Afghanistan has destroyed empires throughout history.

As I've said before, GW Bush has no sense of history and thus had no idea of the powers that he was %#$*ing with when he started this cluster$&#.

The Ottoman Empire has been the flashpoint for two world wars, the Crusades, etc.

To me this is an example of bush's career. He gets into something, it begins to fail, so his dad bails him out and he moves along to begin another adventure and the story repeats itself over and over.  Oil company loser, baseball team loser, etc.

This time his dad can't make it better for him, so at the end of the year he will just walk away from the hell he has created, to pursue another adventure.

The difference is that when he walks away from the hell his two wars have created, he will leave thousands of dead people behind. No one can fix that for him, ever.

pissed off patricia @ 24:

To me this is an example of bush's career. He gets into something, it begins to fail, so his dad bails him out and he moves along to begin another adventure and the story repeats itself over and over.  Oil company loser, baseball team loser, etc.

This time his dad can't make it better for him, so at the end of the year he will just walk away from the hell he has created, to pursue another adventure.

The difference is that when he walks away from the hell his two wars have created, he will leave thousands of dead people behind. No one can fix that for him, ever.

I'm sure he feels sorry.

Liberal AND Proud @ 19:

CheneyIsADick @ 15:

Erroll @ 8:

Things will be going even less well in Afghanistan if the U.S. sends 3,000 more Marines marching into that country. One wonders if our less than empathetic leaders have ever asked themselves how they would feel if thousands of foreign soldiers were to fly into this country, breaking down doors and terrorizing people. Sending more soldiers and Marines into Afghanistan is not the best way to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people. The best way to do that is to stop invading and occupying other countries, especially those countries such as Iraq which have oil or, in the case of Afghanistan, an oil pipeline.

Imagine what would happen if the Chinese suddenly were to demand payment of the massive amamount the US owes.

If they were unable to collect, would they have a right to impound?

They are not going to demand repayment. They have us by the shorthairs. They're gonna &%#$ with us. And they know we can't default.

We are in no position to demand a Bretton Woods III. We are a net debtor nation...we are beggars...we are the third world...rampant inflation...falling wages...weak currency...bloated debt...trade imbalance.

Yeah, I know the reality of the situation. Every American that understands what is happening has my heartfelt sympathies. It was just a (dark) humor attempt at taking the thoughts of Liberal AND Proud a step further.

Chris H. @ 23:

We don't have enough troops to send. If a Republican is elected as President and these wars continue we will see a draft. I am going to serve.

Like Uncle Jed once said to Jethro , " someday I've got to have a long talk with you boy ! ).

pissed off patricia @ 31:

Liberal AND Proud @ 26:

pissed off patricia @ 24:

To me this is an example of bush's career. He gets into something, it begins to fail, so his dad bails him out and he moves along to begin another adventure and the story repeats itself over and over.  Oil company loser, baseball team loser, etc.

This time his dad can't make it better for him, so at the end of the year he will just walk away from the hell he has created, to pursue another adventure.

The difference is that when he walks away from the hell his two wars have created, he will leave thousands of dead people behind. No one can fix that for him, ever.

I'm sure he feels sorry.

I will admit that he's a sorry SOB, but that's about the only way I can use the word sorry with his name.

POP, I was being a bit of a pain in the ass with that comment.

Bottom line...I can't say what should happen to GW Bush. My mom raised me better than that.

anon @ 29:

The US is an empire - the imperial guard are needed in Afghanistan to protect the natural gas interests of the corporations.

The days of the military being used to defend the US from foreign are over - at least until sovereign wealth funds become a weapon ... oh wait, that is already happening.

The U.S. Army is used as a personal security force for U.S. corporations. Period. They are security guards paid for by US.

Liberal AND Proud @ 34:

anon @ 29:

The US is an empire - the imperial guard are needed in Afghanistan to protect the natural gas interests of the corporations.

The days of the military being used to defend the US from foreign are over - at least until sovereign wealth funds become a weapon ... oh wait, that is already happening.

The U.S. Army is used as a personal security force for U.S. corporations. Period. They are security guards paid for by US.

It's not the first war US troops do this. The same thing happened on a much smaller scale in Viet Nam.

Chris H. @ 23:

We don't have enough troops to send. If a Republican is elected as President and these wars continue we will see a draft. I am going to serve.

Serve what? Your interests? ... no. My interests? ... no.

Corporate interests? ......

Liberal AND Proud @ 32:

pissed off patricia @ 31:

Liberal AND Proud @ 26:

pissed off patricia @ 24:

I'm sure he feels sorry.

I will admit that he's a sorry SOB, but that's about the only way I can use the word sorry with his name.

POP, I was being a bit of a pain in the ass with that comment.

Bottom line...I can't say what should happen to GW Bush. My mom raised me better than that.

I knew how you meant the comment. It's all good. :)

i supported the Afghanistan invasion and occupation.

btw wouldn't you rather oil -- aka wealth and power -- not be in the hands of the Taliban? they are religious zealots that hate vaginas and actually was apart of killing innocent americans.

the afghanistan venture could have been successful, the US had the UN and the world on her side in it, and justification. but bush fucks it all up and spreads discontent and army forces too thin.

Talking about 3,000 troops for Afghanistan is meaningless. Other analysts suggest far larger numbers are needed, not to mention the looming requirement of the Afghans to start a draft. However, even if a draft were started to day, Afghan forces would not meet their current-planned requirements until the end of next year, 2009. Neuman in NYT raised the issue of supporting a draft in Afghanistan. The editorial well outlines some of the challenges NATO has yet to address. This is a start.

However, the editorial in the NYT fails to consider NATO's Geneva obligations: To provide stability as an occupying power. The record of NATO is unclear: Other than Bosnia, this is essentially the first "large scale" use of NATO ground forces outside the NATO theater: NATO remains untested; NATO's record as an occupying power in Afghanistan has not met the test. It is an error to suggest NATO's failures should be pawned off to the Afghans. The more appropriate solution would before NATO to outline the NATO-plan to provide security; then transition that stability to the local AFghans. Indeed, Afghanistan may need a draft; but NATO needs to provide leadership, and now-implement a plan for NATO troops to provide stability.

Brussels Needs To Outline A NATO Plan

Before we talk seriously about "What AFghanistan should do" it's more appropriate to talk about what NATO has a responsibility to do, now: Implement a plan, and first discuss in Brussels a military draft within NATO countries. Current NATO ground forces are insufficient. The post-2001 assumptions need to be revisited. NATO leaders need to discuss whether they want to remain relevant as an alliance in responding to an attack on one.

If NATO seriously discusses and implements a draft; then provides stability for Afghanistan, then the AFghans will see there is something they can do, and that their draft would contribute to something that is real, not something NATO imagines, but cannot provide. NATO needs to first stand up; and as the AFghans are prepared to fill-in, then NATO can take a smaller role.

Congress and Pelosi Cannot Rubber Stamp, as Was Done With FISA, POW Treatment Issues

Congress with the AUMF permitted the President to use forces. It's time for the US Congress, in concert with the legislatures of NATO, to discuss funding requirements to conduct drafts in NATO countries; and provide the security Geneva requires. Then we can talk about transitioning the NATO-led stability to the AFghans. Anything else, asks us to reward incompetent planning relative to Geneva; not forcing NATO to meet its GEneva obligations; and expecting the AFghans to do what NATO has not been able to do: Provide stability.

Afghanistan Will Take Time, Resources: Premature For US To Credibly Attack Iran

This is going to take many decades, as it did in Germany. The problem has been, unlike Germany's WWII, the US has not led the effort to provide security in Afghanistan, but removed the troops. It's as if the US won WWII, but moved combat forces out of Berlin, and marched against Russia. Patton's dream then of using the Allied forces to confront Russian Communism was imprudent, just as this President's foolish invasion of Iraq. Resource constraints must be embraced and managed, not pawned off to the occupied peoples of Afghanistan.

Congress Needs to Engage With Russia and India

The right forum isn't just NATO, but the UN Security Council. Indeed, the problems from Pakistan will be challenging, and this requires getting the Indians, Chinese, and Russians on board to get their support in a regional stabilization effort.

Let's make NATO and the UN work as intended, unlike what happened during the run up to the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003. Let's focus on showing the world that NATO and the UN Security Council can provide stability for Afghanistan; and help meet its Geneva obligations as it helps the Afghans provide for security.

NATO does not hold all the cards. Do not expect the Afghans to pick up an incomplete deck.

Suicide bombers (people in police uniforms) got close to their objective in a hotel in Kabul today: The Norwegian foreign minister was almost hit.

Liberal AND Proud @ 47:

CheneyIsADick @ 46:

Suicide bombers (people in police uniforms) got close to their objective in a hotel in Kabul today: The Norwegian foreign minister was almost hit.

But...but...the surge is working?!?!

My point, exactly!

I,like many here,was all for going after the Taliban who were OBL's cronys. BUT once we allowed OBL to escape and the wardrums for Iraq began pounding I knew I had been duped. I should nave known better,concidering the friends I lost in Nam. Never again. It's all according to plan. Never ending war. OBL never 'brought to justice'. All hate . Mega profits and all done in GOD's name. I wanna puke. I 'm cried out already.

I like the idea of a draft in Afghanistan but I don't think that NATO or the UN would participate any way with it. Those dam Europeans and human rights.

"ain't no party like a Betray Us party because a Betray Us party don't stop"-John McCain and Joe Lieberman

GDliberal @ 52:

I like the idea of a draft in Afghanistan but I don't think that NATO or the UN would participate any way with it. Those dam Europeans and human rights.

It's a NATO operation in AFghanistan: Inoked after 9-11. This means NATO has responsibilities, including Europe. Now that it's difficult, can't say, "Those damn Europeans" -- they are part of NATO.

However, if you are correct, than NATO 'shouldn't" be there, then it's time to revisit the AUMF and the other agreements after 9-11. If people want to discuss changing the rules know -- "Oh, not that . . ." -- then time to revisit the FISA violations, and Geneva abuses.

Can't pick and choose when the rules do or do not apply.

The real story is that the Afghan front is 7,500 troops shy requested for spring fighting season that was supposed to be manned by NATO. The US was not scheduled for any additional deployments, outside of regular rotation, to Afghanistan but are now forced to supplement NATO shortcomings.

This has even far greater ramifications as one more death nail in the NATO coffin. Many NATO nations strictly limit rules of engagement or outright refuse to fight in Afghanistan. If Germany and France pull out as expected then NATO is effectively finished as a strategic/military alliance.

Good job Mr. Bush. You rid us of another burdensome organization and failed treatise.

MountainMan23 @ 59:

In my opinion the war in Afghanistan is a sham designed to return opium production to pre-Taliban levels (mission accomlished!) and maintain sufficient chaos on the ground to cover for that and the various other rackets these criminals are engaged in.

Remember GW is Skull & Bones, and that's all old opium money -- and slave trading money before that, btw.

Delightful chaps ..

Bingo! What they have created is the return of Afghanistan to the tribal days (pre-Taliban) which apparently even the people despise. Besides, how many more years are we going to hear of "insurgents" killed daily, or "Taliban" or "terrists"? Why haven't they ran out? How many "terrist insurgents" could possibly live there? All of them? Even when Nato and friends blow up schools? It's a scam.

David Hawes @ 55

Anonymous @ 56

Those dam europeans and human rights.
Was me being a smart ass.

A lot(not all) of europeans believe that a draft(conscription) by a state is a human rights violation. Some of those countries may not want or be able to send troops under those circumstances. As an example the Germans have a lot of troops over there and while they do have a draft it is suppose to end in 2010. Them and others may not view a draft as "bringing democracy" to Afghanistan.

Darn; The Bush gas Pipeline to India is still on hold because of the violence.

More Troops, More troops!!!!!