We’re missing the point

So today everyone – me too – is all agog about Stanley MacArthur. And Obama. And will he? Or won’t he? Should he? Would he? And, omg, what if he doesn’t?? And what if he does??  Rock and hard place, but I stay with my previous post – Stanley must go, or more to the point, Obama must step up to the plate, defend civilian control and fire the general’s ass.

But even as we enjoy ‘the fret’, we’ve once again missed the point.

Why the hell are we still in Afghanistan? We hit the ground there in October of 2001. It is now June of 2010 and exactly what have we accomplished? I cannot name anything.

So on this 237th day of the ninth year of the war, I’d like my president to fire the general and then get the hell  out of Afghanistan.

15 responses to “We’re missing the point

  1. Why the hell are we still in Afghanistan?

    Because, rather than finish that one off, the simpleton-in-chief decided to throw a vanity war thousands of miles away. Now, through the wonders of the right-wing-controlled “liberal” press, no executive can leave a war without becoming a loser. If a Democrat were to attempt to disengage from a war, the old Dolchstoß story would be trotted out and the Democrats would be soundly trounced in the elections that followed. Also, the next generation of Timothy McVeighs would begin lapping up the crazy conspiracy theories.

    We’re doomed.

    Like

    • That’s such an important point and yet I am starting to believe that the ‘waffling’ and backing down in front of challenges (not Obama per se, I mean my whole damned Dem party) is hurting us more. I really want a strong unequivocal stance. And then move on. And don’t take questions or get engaged in argument. Just say that McCrystal isn’t the point. And move on!

      Like

  2. The point isn’t the fact we’re still in Afghanistan Moe. (though that does sore vex me) Afghanistan is a war the U.S could have won years ago had there not been endless restrictions in the “rules of engagement”; but I digress.
    I think the point people are missing is, why would the commander of the forces in Afghanistan make those remarks? His remarks are reflective of the lack of respect our military has for Obama; which I think comes from the lack of respect from Obama towards our military.

    Like

    • [His remarks are reflective of the lack of respect our military has for Obama; which I think comes from the lack of respect from Obama towards our military.]

      Steve – that could be true, probably is on McCrystal’s part anyway. But if a general publicly challenges his C in C, he’s got to go. Because whatever his opinion or frustration, we demand civilian control of the military and that is far more important than whatever one gereral thinks or even what one president’s policy is.

      By the way, at least it sounds like everyone here agrees that we lost Afghanistan the day the neocons fulfilled their decades long wet dream of invading Iraq and taking down the ‘regime’.

      I wonder: when Rush calls the current administration a ‘regime’ and his wannabes around the country say the same thing, does that mean Candada needs to get over here and remove Obama? (don’t tell me Rush is kidding cuz it really doesn’t matter when his audience takes him seriously)

      Like

      • First of all Rush didn’t coin the word “regime”. It’s commonly used to describe what conservatives see the Obama administraton as.
        Next, what I was saying about McChrystal, was that his opinion of the current ‘administration’ is more than likely the opinion of the vast majority of military personnel; because they know the obvious contempt Obama has towards them. Even though I don’t agree with Rush on every point (I rarely listen to him anyway) there is no one that leans somewhat left that can prove him wrong about 99% of the time. He’s attacked because he’s rich, was fat, puffed up, married multiple times, etc. But on the actual substance of the issues … he’s right nearly all the time.

        Like

        • Steve, doesn’t matter who coined the word, what matters is the definition. Regime means the government is illegitimate, which cannot be said of a government that was fairly elected.

          You have no idea what hte vast majority of the military thinks of Obama. And I have no idea what the vast majority of the military thought of Bush. I think I may go to Stars and Stripes and see if they’ve got any poll info.

          As for Rush – he was attacked way before he was rich or multiply married. He was attacked because – to use one of his favorite words – he is utterly disingenuos.

          I remember when the market dropped nearly 1000 points in one day some weeks back. And Rush began shouting on the radio – “that’s Obama’s economy”. By the next day, when it was clear that it was a human or techical misstep that caused the market to plummet, Rush was on to other things.

          He may have tapped into a belilef set among some of the public, but he gets his facts screwed up a LOT.

          Like

          • “Regime means the government is illegitimate …” My point exactly.

            I have plenty of idea as to what the majority of the military thinks of Obama, but I’m growing weary of making obvious points.

            What “misstep” are you talking about Moe? I saw one article that said “someone hit the wrong key on the keyboard”. Please don’t think I’m that naive to believe something like that.
            Rush has the tendency to jump on stuff like that and that (and just about ONLY that) is where he goes wrong.

            I’m not even going to ask about Rush’s facts being screwed up. I’m not sure why you have this thing against a conservative radio host. “Utterly disingenuous” … come on Moe, I know you can do better than that. Even if he is ‘disingenuous’ 30% of the time (he’s a radio guy); Obama has been disingenuous 99% of the time.

            Like

            • Let’s stick with the ‘regime’ thing Steve. You just said you believe that the current government of the United States is illegitimate?

              Like

        • Can’t seem to find any polling data re military attitudes toward Obama or Bush. My search terms keep bringing up attitudes about military actions instead of the military’s own attitudes.

          Meanwhile, what’s this about ‘Obama’s obvious contempt’ for the military? Show me.

          Like

  3. Amen!

    Like

  4. After 9/11 I called this war “the most just and moral war in the history of war”. Now I say enough is enough. Time for our troops to come home. I think Biden is on to something if they want to use Special Forces and CIA with drones. But no more Joe Infantry. We did our part. And by We I mean our troops. God knows no average American made any sacrifices to help besides a CARE package here and there.
    And I’m no Walter Cronkite but when they lost me, they lost the war.

    http://56rebels.wordpress.com/2010/06/23/the-rolling-stone-interview-shows-afghanistan-can-not-be-won/

    Like

  5. …it sounds like everyone here agrees that we lost Afghanistan the day the neocons fulfilled their decades long wet dream of invading Iraq and taking down the ‘regime’.

    Bush ranted about invading Iraq throughout his first presidential campaign. 9/11 and the so-called Hunt for Osama bin Laden sidetracked Bush from his original plan, but it was just a temporary setback. He eventually got what he wanted. So, now we’re stuck with the sticky stuff from both the Afghanistan Sideshow and Bush’s Wet Dream.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s