30,000 more troops to Afghanistan: The right choice?
Last night President Obama laid out his long-awaited plan for the war in Afghanistan. In a nutshell he wants to send an additional 30,000 troops to the country but also wanted to set an end date for the war as well - saying that he'd start bringing troops home in 2011.
So how did that go over? A lot of you on Current News had an opinion on this - here are some of your reactions.
From unimatrix0:
From resolute:
From UrbanGypsy:
And in response, from JonRaymond
:
Add your voice to the conversation - respond here.
Recently on the Current News Blog:
- Welcome to Istanbul
- 1 in 4 US children on food stamps - Real Recovery
- While you were feasting: Swiss minarets, bin Laden blunders, Iran nuclear enrichment
- Hasn't this just been a whole year of Black Friday? - Real Recovery
- The recession visualized - Real Recovery
So how did that go over? A lot of you on Current News had an opinion on this - here are some of your reactions.
From unimatrix0:
Obama is doing the best with a bad situation. By sending in more troops, and getting our NATO allies to contribute more troops, Obama is pleasing the Generals and actually living up to his campaign promises.
Recall, Obama always supported the war in Afghanistan.
The fact that Obama is setting a timetable for withdrawl is a signal to the base that he is going to get in and get out.
Given the situation, this is the best we could have hoped for. Immediate withdrawl would be unethical, Afghans have risked their lives supporting our cause. We owe them a few more years of training and support.
From resolute:
I am very disappointed in Obama. He voted against the Iraq war and should have done the same here.
They say if you put a good man in a bad system, the system always wins. Obama had no chance to stay good once he took the presidency.
From UrbanGypsy:
As an Int'l Relations student it was amazing to witness such an important new development in American strategy. This will be remembered as a defining moment.
Leaving Afghanistan unstable would be a grave mistake. It was in an unstable environment that provided the shelter for terrorists to launch an attack on this country in the first place. The deadline narrowed our goals and provided focus to our mission.
People on the far left and on the far right will criticize this... but then again, pragmatism and prudence has never been a virtue of idealists and dreamers...
And in response, from JonRaymond
:
What the hell makes you think this will make it any more stable? If anything, it will make it more unstable. The more troops we push in the worse it gets, the more terrorism we motivate, This will escalate things worse so that when it does O will come back with, gee wiz, we'd better send in 30,000 more.
Add your voice to the conversation - respond here.
Recently on the Current News Blog:
- Welcome to Istanbul
- 1 in 4 US children on food stamps - Real Recovery
- While you were feasting: Swiss minarets, bin Laden blunders, Iran nuclear enrichment
- Hasn't this just been a whole year of Black Friday? - Real Recovery
- The recession visualized - Real Recovery
-
- groups:
- Afghanistan News, news blog
-
- tags:
- Obama, War, Afghanistan, Taliban, 4 more
