Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Do you support the President's new strategy in Afghanastan?

The two top U.S. military and civilian officials in Afghanistan presented a united front before Congress on Tuesday as they defended the new war strategy that President Obama unveiled last week

Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, said there are no "silver bullets" for success there. He said that the deployment of 30,000 additional troops by next summer demonstrates U.S. resolve, even though he had presented scenarios that envisioned up to 80,000 extra troops.

"The president's decision rapidly resources our strategy, recognizing that the next 18 months will likely be decisive and ultimately enable success," he said during a hearing before the House Armed Services Committee. "I fully support the president's decision."

The general tried to lay out a measured set of expectations. He declined to commit to eliminating the Taliban, but instead talking about defeating them militarily.

Answer Question
 
sweet-a-kins

Asked by sweet-a-kins at 3:17 PM on Dec. 8, 2009 in Politics & Current Events

Level 34 (67,502 Credits)
Answers (19)
  • sweet-a-kins

    Answer by sweet-a-kins at 3:18 PM on Dec. 8, 2009

  • No!!

    The only value to having US troops in Afganistan is to use Afganistan as a staging area for military actions in Pakistan.
    rkoloms

    Answer by rkoloms at 3:33 PM on Dec. 8, 2009

  • i agree with the above poster..... soon it will be a full fledge war in pakistan.

    funny thing about the 18 months is that it's not an exit plan....its actually a plan to start handing over power to afgan people... well we have seen what that's done in iraq... zilch.

    but the plan is pakistan... ultimately..
    Aasiyah

    Answer by Aasiyah at 4:18 PM on Dec. 8, 2009

  • I support the war on terror, and whatever it takes to win the wars, but i do NOT support the withdrawl timetable. If we withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan before the goals are achieved, in order to please voters, then we're going to have another Viet Nam on our hands, or worse!

    A half-arsed job is worse than staying the course until the missions are complete.
    LoriKeet

    Answer by LoriKeet at 4:18 PM on Dec. 8, 2009

  • NO!!! it is time to get out!

    And I do not want to hear " it is better to fight them there than here" They have been here for years.The borders a wide open!! The 9/11 guys lived in FL. and trained to fly here in the U.S.
    The war is not about terrorism, if it was it would of been over by now!!!
    Everyday more and more people are reading and seeing that the war was not about terrorism. Look at Glenn Beck he is now changing his mind about the war.

    It is time to" WAKE UP" people!!
    gammie

    Answer by gammie at 4:19 PM on Dec. 8, 2009

  • What IS his strategy for Afghanistan? He goes on TV and says that he plans to start pulling out in 18 months, then all of his underlings go on TV over the weekend and poo-poo his time lines and say that there is no deadline for starting to pull out. It doesn't sound like there was much of a strategy there. IMO, he gives McChrystal less than he says was necessary (months ago) to appease the left. By committing more troops, he does something to appease the right. He continually sounds as if he does not have a plan (at least to me).


    I have to say, I am not so sure this whole thing hasn't been orchestrated from the beginning. I don't trust any of them or what they say. I am just going to operate off of the assumption that they are all lying, and if I am wrong, then so be it.

    QuinnMae

    Answer by QuinnMae at 4:27 PM on Dec. 8, 2009

  • Yes and no. I want us to withdraw from Afghanistan now; I think it's a no-win situation. However, if we aren't going to withdraw, we should fight it with everything we have. In that case, I support more troops. I disagree with his setting a withdrawal schedule; it's too early to set a date for withdrawal until we know how the troop surge works. It's unrealistic to set a deadline at this point.
    mancosmomma

    Answer by mancosmomma at 4:58 PM on Dec. 8, 2009

  • Its the right decision. However I disagree with the timeline.
    Carpy

    Answer by Carpy at 6:13 PM on Dec. 8, 2009

  • I don't support the July 20, 2011 date as a deadline/transition whatever thingy they are calling it now. These people will just go underground for 2 years. They will just melt back into their villages and go on with their lives. It's just 2 years. They waited from 1993 to 2001 to bomb the World Trade Center again. They can just wait us out. We're leaving on 7-20-11. Mark your calendar.
    jesse123456

    Answer by jesse123456 at 6:15 PM on Dec. 8, 2009

  • I think it is stupid to share strategy with every yahoo that can read a paper or turn on the news. The timetable is a joke.


    gammie you are certainly right about 1 thing. The 9/11 hijackers did live and train in the US. It is becoming more and more apparent that the enemy is entrenched among us.

    We have been lax. This is a multiple front war and one of them is now here at home. We have been very fortunate in that we haven't had to endure the suicide bombers and misc other attacks other countries have. It is coming though. Keep your eyes and your ears open.
    yourspecialkid

    Answer by yourspecialkid at 6:26 PM on Dec. 8, 2009

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.
close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN