Kasz216 said:
Do we really want any Stable government in there though? I'm not sure if your aware.... but Karazi rigged the elections so he would be reelected. He may be setting himself up as dictator. Obama understandably doesn't want to send a bunch of extra troops to help out and train an army that may be led by the next dictator of Afghanistan. Such a move would only end up badly for us long term. Removing one dictator to install another? What would Afghanistan see as our legacy to them? Not to mention Karazi is pretty incompetant. The minute we left Afghanistan would probably fall apart like a house of cards. Karazi is a crook, incompetant leader and likely a would be dictator. Obama doesn't need to put more troops in. He has to threaten to pull them out. So that Karazi will straighten up. |
But the compromise is threatening to pull troops out in a way. Even though you send a few thousand more in, only half of your troops will ever actually be active, effectively reducing the amount that are serving. It is pulling them out, more or less. It's like pulling them out of the war, but not letting them leave the battlefield. It is at the very least a stepping stone to reduce the number of troops, and then eventually leave.
As for the government, I know Karazi has rigged elections and is an incompetent buffoon, I think resolving that is what I meant by installing a stable government.