YOUR COMMENTS

Spike,
I have to agree with Robert of Dover regarding Rumsfeld. His career should have been ended the day he said "we'll be greeted with tea and roses" in Iraq. What kind of contingency planning is that? Rumsfeld made a lot of mistakes and gave too much bad advice.

~Half the kids delivering tea to the troops were sent to scout out targets.
- Jim, Manchester

Dave in Dandwich,
You wanted Bush to have "gone into Afghanistan with money, schools, roads, loans, and food instead of bombs" and have USAID project administered under the Taliban and northern alliance shadow governments in the middle of a civil war? Are you nuts?? Have US taxpayers pay the Taliban to educate and train terrorists while they are terrorizing Afghani women and torturing non-muslims???

Herb in Concord,
I can't beleive you are comparing the way a war should be run and the way an important peice of legislation should be handled and saying they must be the same. Thats lame. Apples and oranges.
- Jim, Manchester

Stop the Presses!

Eric Holder is prosecuting the CIA! Holy Cow! I did not know that!

I did know Eric Holder ordered the investigation of possible crimial acts that happened during "inhanced interrogation".

Last time I checked that was the AG's job.

It's a funny thing Spike will call people party hacks for asking for a clear definition of the mission in Afghanistand, and then critizes our AG for doing his job. Last time I checked those were founding prinicipals of the US.

Judy, Much ado about nothing in reference to Obama and the Afghan commander talking directly. The military has a VERY clear chain of command. Just as I do not go to people a few steps above me, McChrystal would RARELY go directly to President Obama.

That is SOP in the military and the GOP trying to play gotcha politics even though they are WRONG. It would be more of a problem if Obama was micro managing McChrystal.
- Robert, Dover, NH

Spike,

When did I say he wanted troops to die? He was criminally negligent in his handling of the matter.

He didn't send the military we have, he sent the military that was easy to send (we had the armor, he was arrogant and decided that Iraq would roll over so he didn't bother)

What is your Swift move towards victory? I think we are all waiting with baited breath for your definition of victory.
- Robert, Dover, NH

Herb said it best: "I'll bash Obama as much as Bush as soon as he does something other than talk." Well, the truth hurts and you're too funny.

If Spike got daily intell about Afgan. and met with the commander more than once in 3-4 mos., he probably could decide what to do about Afgan. What's Obama's excuse? Soldiers' lives not important enough but a Chicago Olympics is?
- judy, bradford

Dave, indeed I have written too much in this thread. But, again, I see no formula for guaranteed victory in Afghanistan, only a horrible dilemma, caused by Obama's ongoing Apologize for America tour, which exposes his vanity to foreign enemies. We need better intelligence--but Eric Holder is prosecuting the CIA! Herb, perhaps it was wrong for me to name Obama to refer to the policies of the party he leads. But everything else in your last message is false. See you tomorrow.
- Spike, Brentwood NH

Well Spike,
The truth is that there hasn't been a rush on healthcare or dithering on defense. You are simply wrapped up in false perceptions due to your preferences on the topic at hand.

There is no "Obama" health care bill being voted on as of yet, nor can the President propose one. He can only try and guide the discussion and he has stated that his ideas are open for change or not set in stone.

Regarding defense, the recommendations have literally just come out. Is he supposed to simply pull out the rubber stamp and start another buildup without review? I thought your type would be happy he has at least continued the GWB status quo for now.

Who has the bias? I'll bash Obama as much as I did to Bush as soon as he actually does something other than talk.
- Herb C, Concord

I've read four posts from Spike totaling at least a thousand words and not once has he said 'what he would do' about Afghanistan.

Put down the red pen for a second and pick up a blue one, will you, Spike? Let's say you're the president, and you, by contrast, are 'serious about national defense'. Now what?
- Dave, Sandwich

Herb C.: Obama's rush toward a health-care takeover, versus his dithering on national defense, doesn't mean there are two Obamas, nor that his adversaries are trying to have it both ways. The health-care takeover directly benefits the bureaucracy, unions, and trial lawyers. Defending the nation gives payoff only to defense contractors that are not likely to vote for him. That's why Obama can't decide what to do in Afghanistan. (I've already voted: swift military VICTORY or swifter pull-out.)

Citing "decisions based on facts and goals" reveals your own partisan bias. Obama's health-care plan (both versions) faked the "facts" and was obviously not designed to achieve its stated "goals"--not even denial of coverage to illegals.
- Spike, Brentwood NH

Some of you folks are just amazing.
I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt here and listen to all of the sources at hand as well as whether or not our end goal has changed. I simply find it humorous that Obama can't win with many of you regardless of what he does or doesn't do.
The two most important topics being discussed lately, the wars and health care display the hypocrisy of your pre-judgements against this president. Do you want pragmatism and decisions based on facts and goals or do you want expediency? On healthcare, the cries are that it is moving too fast and without debate or as several of you have claimed: "It's being shoved down our throats". Yet, when it comes to a war and an occupation, there are complaints that he's not upping troop levels in an immediate or knee-jerk fashion. Which is it ?
For that matter, please chime in what you think the strategy should be there. No nation has ever successfully controlled Afghanistan. Should it just be another occupation without a foreseeable end ?
- Herb C., Concord

Oh, you guys are just LOVING that you can dump this war on Obama, and blame his 'indecision' for the lack of success. Have at it, I guess. It's Monday, and you have to hammer him with something.

But you have to admit, the math is unattractive: More troops, more Afghans and Americans dead. Less troops, possible instability and chaos. More Afghans dead.

But hey, what do you expect. It's war, not chess. That's what war is. As Colin Powell so eloquently said 'You break it. You own it'.

The odd irony is that it was Bush's 'decisiveness' that got us into this mess in the first place. If we had gone into Afghanistan with money, schools, roads, loans, and food instead of bombs, things might be different now. And much cheaper. But, unfortunately, they aren't- because the president and a few cronies let 20 wackos change the course of this and several other country's histories. Our revenge demanded not one, but two invasions.

And most of you were cheerleaders at the game.

For me, this is classic case of the 'Tyranny of the Few'. A few nutjob terrorists. A few pissed-off politicians. Making decisions that ultimately cause the deaths of thousands, who were never given a choice. When do 'the many' - that would be us - get to stand up and say, "Enough is enough. No. More. Killing."?
- Dave, Sandwich

Spike,
The job of nation building / society transformation currently belongs to USAID, National Guard Provincial Reconstruction Teams, international NGO’s, and most importantly the national and local governments. The military’s job is to:

1.Provide security while those folks do their job.
2.Kill the enemy.
3.Take ground from the enemy.

The purpose of the anvil/sweep offensive mentioned in my previous post would be #2.
- Jim, Manchester

Too busy to figure out how to prosecute a war he ran a campaign on, not to busy for his entourage to jet off to Copenhagen to party with the Olympic Committee and lobby for a Chicago Olympics @ taxpayer expense!
- Mae, Plaistow

The additional troops are late. They should have been on the ground 3 months ago and pushing east from Kabul to meet up with the Pakistan army pushing northwest thru Swat and Mohmandin in Kyber Pass in the Pashtun heartland. Then turning north and south to roll with armored columns in a sweep thru Gardaz and FATA to the south and Dir and Kounar provinces to the north.

Obama and Europe’s indecisiveness (and BHO’s failure to keep his campaign promise) has let lapse a huge opportunity, presented by the Pakistan army offensive into SWAT, to crush the Taliban insurgency between hammer and anvil. There is precious little time before snow flies. I doubt the Pakistan offensive will resume in Spring 2010.

Obama should not PUBLICLY declare our victory conditions until they are met, for the same reason Bush should not have publicized a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq; Top Secret military necessity. If the Taliban/Al-Quieda knows our primary goals they can thwart them. If our goals APPEAR ambiguous and nebulous they will flail uncertainly.

Afghan society can be transformed, if a significant majority of the population and it’s government is on board with us, over the course of another 10 -15 years. Those conditions are not currently met. If they are not met within the next year we lower the bar for ‘victory’ condition AGAIN and commence to withdraw.
- Jim, Manchester

So what else is new? The Obamessiah continues the campaign mode he was in before the election. "Hope and change", he promised us. Ha! More of the same old same old. 2012 cannot come fast enough for me.
- Guy Plante, Manchester

It gets even better - Obama announced today that he will travel to Copenhagen on Friday to lobby for his cronies in Chicago to receive the Olympic games.

Yippee!

Gates admitted yesterday that Obama has not met with Gen. McChrystal since their first and only meeting in March, but rather than meet with him now and act on his urgent troop request...

How can anyone still support Obama?
- Tom, Campton

PPS to Robert of Dover--Having chosen to go to war ("with the army you have, not the army you would like" --Rumsfeld), you make a plan; the enemy finds the weak spots; you correct them. Our armor did not stand up well against the explosives manufactured in Iran and used in Iraq, and we reinforced the armor. Yes, I am serious--and you, implying that Rumsfeld should have gone sooner because he wanted our troops to die, talk like a party hack. Robert, if you were Secretary of Defense, there might have been additional weak spots, because, like Obama, you are looking at your party's legacy and not victory.

And it was illegal for a President to send troops to New Orleans without a proper request from the governor. She didn't want to give Bush a feather in his cap and, as I remember, took a nap instead.
- Spike, Brentwood NH

Nice article. Obama did announce a brand spanking new strategy 6 months ago and is bailing on it already. Obama is now at odds with the general he appointed with great fanfare 6 months ago. Why? The general wants Obama to commit enough troops to follow through on the mission, and fulfill Obama's promise that Afghanistan is the "just war" and he will fight it to win it.

But what does Obama do rather than render a timely decision on the troop request? He goes on Letterman while our under-equipped soldiers are left hanging in Afghanistan.

Obama has now alienated both the military and intelligence establishments. And how is that promise to close Gitmo going?

Obama - you are an absolute disgrace.
- Tom, Campton

Spike,

Are you serious? Premature end of Donald Rumsfeld's career? Huh? On what world did that happen?

It should have ended LONG before it did.

This is the guy who sent us to war with the same equipment we train with here in the US instead of uparmored trucks and body armor. (Thank God for the late Senator Kennedy stepping up and saving so many American lives!)

This is the guy that lied to us about Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman.

This is the guy that helped cover up the 17 Marines deaths in the opening days of the war that died by "Friendly Fire" when the rules of engagement were ignored and A-10's were set loose on US Marines in Nasiriyah.

This is the guy who ignored calls requesting troops for New Orleans and instead went to a dinner party.

I am only saddened, just like many I serve with today that he has never answered to the criminal acts he committed.
- Robert, Dover, NH

We invaded Afghanistan and overthrew the Taliban in search of Al Qaeda. After eight years, Al Qaeda is alive and well in Pakistan. Our reason for going there failed. So how many other countries will we overthrow to secure a no parking zone for Al Qaeda? If we stay, twenty years from now we’ll be fighting the Taliban’s children. And will anyone remember why? The British were there for 80 years. Do we have the stomach to stay in Afghanistan forever?
- Gary Way, Bedford

Last week, this man informed we huddled masses that he has singlehandedly transformed the world as we know it in the 9 short months since his ascendency to the throne. He keeps busy making the rounds of the Sunday morning talk shows, offers alms to the Iranians and North Koreans, stiffs our long time European allies, is secretly releasing Gitmo detainees to foreign countries, continues strategizing domestic policies with SEIU/ACORN/AFL/CIO and apologizes non-stop to the world for the United States of American pre-Obama.
Despite his lofty pronouncements of his battle plan for Afghanistan during his campaign that never ends, he can’t make up his mind whether or not to take the advice of his Military Advisors and send in more troops, because it’s more important to count the votes than it is to take a stand on National Defense. In the meantime, our young men are getting killed by the dozens in Afghanistan. It’s time to get out before they are all annihilated since it seems a "winning battle plan' is not on his agenda these days. In the meantime, his latest top priority is to fly to Denmark to pitch the 2016 Olympics in Chicago.

Spike is right. But the alternative we’re left with is terrifying.
- Sandy, Thornton

PS to Melvin. Thank you. No, we will never "transform...society," nor have we in Iraq, and we should stop using the military for such social engineering.

Regarding laser target identifiers and the rest of our marvelous technology, Clinton's credibility in the Bosnian operation that even ally Bill Mahr called "cowardly," and the premature end of the career of Don Rumsfeld, testify to the impossibility of a successful, remote-control, button-pushing war. If you draw your weapon, you must be prepared to fire; if you commit the military, you must be willing to put boots on the ground.

Chris, not only is Obama sacrificing US soldiers to push the health-care takeover, he just used tariffs against Chinese tires to keep the AFL-CIO on board. If China retaliates fully, the price of everything at Wal-Mart doubles and many jobs in importing and managing foreign manufacturing disappear. If China dumps its investments, the dollar is worthless. Obama is betting our future on that awful bill.
- Spike, Brentwood NH

Since apparently you won't print my first comments possibly bc I'm too honest and direct?; I'll try this:
What's important to Pres Obama? He's going to push hometown Chicago for Olympic venue this week but has only spoken w/the commander on the ground once in 70-80 days regarding Afganistan!...yep, Chris and Spike are right! The Prez is politicizing w/our honorable troops' lives; universal health care won't be an issue once we're in WWIII bc of ineffectiveness and inaction by Obama.
- judy, bradford

As someone who is preparing to go to Afghanistan shortly I applaud the president for not just blindly throwing more forces at the mess.

The military needs to be given a clear objective. The military is not coming forward with any ideas as to what the clear objective is, the State Department is not coming forward with a clear objective is.

Bottom line, there will never be an affective democracy in Afghanistan. The country is too fragmented to support one. Even in 2009 there are not roads between many areas of the country.

To "win" in Afghanistan means getting them back to a pre-soviet state where they had commerce that was not just herion. Some of the best dates, almonds, peaches and other crops were the best in the world. Why isn't the USDA there helping them get back that standard?

Please President Obama, don't blindly send troops like the commander in chief before you. Have a clearly defined goal before you move forward, even more than opperating under strength, the miliatary hates opperating without knowing their purpose!
- Robert, Dover, NH

Obama is holding out committing troops to get his health care passed. He doesn't want to lose any Democrats in Congress who might be antiwar. Americans on the battlefield will die needlessly as we wait for a decision.
- Chris, Merrimack

As usual Spike has it right. My only concern is that the government of Afghanistan is so corrupt and there is so much opium trade that we may never transform that relic of cromagnon man society into anything even close to the 6th century AD, let alone free and democratic.

Since the great president has now revealed himself to us and the world as waffling and committed to nothing except bashing his own country and praising our enemies, I think the time to get out is now.

While campaigning BO blasted Bush on Iraq and said that we should be fighting in Afghanistan. Now that we have basically "stabilized" Iraq, and Afghanistan is heating up, he can't make a decision. He is quite capable of making a great Sunday talk show tour and yukking it up about football scores though.

I say we bring the troops home, and leave laser target identifiers all over and then when the Taliban and Al Quaeda come back and start their training we give them an encore of 2001.
- Melvin, Keene

The President will not only not define victory, he recently professed embarrassment at the very concept of victory in Afghanistan. He had better bring the troops home, because military engagement without a military goal (that is, without a concept of victory) means indefinite occupation in hostile territory with no way to measure the effect--and a predictable trickle of dead American heroes.

When he pulls out, the Karzai government collapses, Afghanistan returns to fundamentalism, and our attackers have a new sanctuary of anarchy in which to train for their next attack.

Such awful choices are the payback for electing a President (and a Congresswoman) unserious about national defense, a President who again last week apologized at the UN for the US before Obama and offered himself as a tool for foreigners to transform the US. Days later, Iran shot off test missiles. Obama's seriousness is what they were testing.
- Spike, Brentwood NH