By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Official: Obama Rejects All Afghan War Options - AP

TheRealMafoo on 12 November 2009

The interesting thing is everyone in this thread has an opinion about what they would do in Afghanistan. Obama has none. The worst thing he can do, is nothing (what he is doing).

The General has an objective given to him by Obama. You either need to change his objective, or provide him the tools he needs to complete the objective you gave him. Keeping americans in harms way ill equipped is not the answer.

Unless he things he knows better then the General on how to accomplish the objectives he set forth for the General. If he thinks that, he is 100% wrong.



Around the Network
MontanaHatchet on 12 November 2009

Hey Mafoo, what do you think about my opinion? I want to be critiqued.



 

 

Mr Khan on 12 November 2009
TheRealMafoo said:
The interesting thing is everyone in this thread has an opinion about what they would do in Afghanistan. Obama has none. The worst thing he can do, is nothing (what he is doing).

The General has an objective given to him by Obama. You either need to change his objective, or provide him the tools he needs to complete the objective you gave him. Keeping americans in harms way ill equipped is not the answer.

Unless he things he knows better then the General on how to accomplish the objectives he set forth for the General. If he thinks that, he is 100% wrong.

I don't think it's that he lacks an opinion on it (everyone has one), he's just being cautious about proclaiming what he wants against what the analysts are giving him. There is an advantage to it, as long as he does come forth with a policy relatively soon.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

TheRealMafoo on 12 November 2009
MontanaHatchet said:
Personally, I think the U.S. should just stop occupying countries altogether (unless they're an ally and it's a mutual protection thing), and just leave the rest of the world to its chaos. There are terrible dictators all over the world, and we lose trillions taking out a randomly picked assortment of them. Globalization is the most powerful tool in spreading democracy, so the United States should just focus on keeping its economy stable and paying off debt, so it can hold well in the global market.

I agree with this totally.

 



Tyrannical on 14 November 2009
MontanaHatchet said:
Personally, I think the U.S. should just stop occupying countries altogether (unless they're an ally and it's a mutual protection thing), and just leave the rest of the world to its chaos. There are terrible dictators all over the world, and we lose trillions taking out a randomly picked assortment of them. Globalization is the most powerful tool in spreading democracy, so the United States should just focus on keeping its economy stable and paying off debt, so it can hold well in the global market.

 

I, and my quote agree.

 

The Nazis made oil from coal duriing WWII, and we can do the same. Let the middle east keeps it's oil.



Yet, today, America's leaders are reenacting every folly that brought these great powers [Russia, Germany, and Japan] to ruin -- from arrogance and hubris, to assertions of global hegemony, to imperial overstretch, to trumpeting new 'crusades,' to handing out war guarantees to regions and countries where Americans have never fought before. We are piling up the kind of commitments that produced the greatest disasters of the twentieth century.
 — Pat Buchanan – A Republic, Not an Empire

Around the Network
Kasz216 on 14 November 2009
Tyrannical said:
MontanaHatchet said:
Personally, I think the U.S. should just stop occupying countries altogether (unless they're an ally and it's a mutual protection thing), and just leave the rest of the world to its chaos. There are terrible dictators all over the world, and we lose trillions taking out a randomly picked assortment of them. Globalization is the most powerful tool in spreading democracy, so the United States should just focus on keeping its economy stable and paying off debt, so it can hold well in the global market.

 

I, and my quote agree.

 

The Nazis made oil from coal duriing WWII, and we can do the same. Let the middle east keeps it's oil.

Yet had the Nazi's attacked the Middle east and freed it from england... they wouldn't of needed to do that and would of stood a much better chance in WW2.  Not only would they have had plenty of Oil after they turned on Russia, they would have two fronts from which to probe and could strike the underbelly of Russia from the Middle East.

The Middle East loved the Nazis at the time too... why they didn't make this move still confounds me to this day.  Good thing they didn't though.