Do you support our war effort in Afghanistan?

[Skip Intro]

Poll question: Do you support our war effort in Afghanistan?

Personally, I'm on the fence about it. I abhor war, but at the same time, we have a repub and Dem president telling us that there is a real terrorist threat based there (and Pakistan) and that we must act against them before they can act against us (again?). I don't know what to think, myself. If both bush and Obama tells us that there are real threats to us based there, I'm prone to believe it, as much as I hate to read about our accidental killings of innocents. What do you think?

[gateley]

1. I've heard there's just a handful of Al Q left in Afghanistan. All we're doing is

trying to keep the peace between the Taliban and the populace and get pretend like we're getting support from Karzai who takes our money and ships it off to who knows where?

There is nothing TO win.

Edit to add about the Republican president telling us there is a threat there, he also told us there were WMD in Iraq and that Hussein was in cahoots w/bin Laden. Both lies.

[leftstreet]

2. If a real threat existed in the US, would it be okay if Canada invaded us?

:shrug:

If the international intel community can't apprehend some criminal 'terrorists' they should disband.

[readmoreoften]

3. Why? Because I read Anand Gopal's dispatches.

Because of Bagram Airfield Theatre.
Because the millions of working-class left-leaning Pakistanis are in a better position to help working-class Afghanis fight the Taliban than the US Army.
Because we're kidnapping and disappearing people
Because the troops have NO IDEA why they're really there (I've asked a bunch.)
Because it's a quagmire.
Because it's a waste of money.
Because it's a massive source of pollution.
Because we really don't give a flying shit about Afghani women, so seriously, let's cut the crap.
Because the tax money going to "reconstruction" is just being absorbed by a Russian Doll of infinite contractors who contract to contractors.
Because it has nothing to do with "national security" and everything to do with competing with China for mining resources.

Etc. Etc.

[BeFree]

4. I support Peace efforts

What will war accomplish? It will make us safer? When? It will stabilize the region? How?

If you support the war, I suggest you enlist, or just take a trip over there and go fight.

[jpgray]

5. No clear objective. No end in sight

Apart from many other serious concerns, I think these are the most basic possible requirements to meet for going to war, even an unjust war. So, no.

[Skip Intro]

10. Yes, no clear objective. Thank you. nt

[Angry Dragon]

6. I voted no

We are no safer, we have created more terrorist
than if we never went there.
Just a really big mistake
An excuse for the first step to invade Iraq

[LAGC]

7. At some point, we ceased being "liberators" and became "occupiers."

Helping the Northern Alliance overthrow the Taliban was all well and good, but insisting on a prolonged military presence afterwards was the biggest mistake. There's no reason we couldn't have just given peripheral support to more liberal factions and let THEM fight their own war. Right now so much of the opposition to U.S. military presence there isn't because most people want the Taliban back, but they just want the foreign OCCUPIER gone.

We should get out of the way and support democratic forces within peripherally, but not militarily. Our reason for being there is long over.

[OutNow]

8. I voted NO

because there was no FUCK NO option.

[CrawlingChaos]

15. +1

[NuclearDem]

9. As much as I care about innocent Afghan lives...

I can't support the war anymore. I've seen too many of my friends come back fucked up because of it.

I came back with PTSD that literally nearly killed me. I hate that war.

[TwilightGardener]

11. Somewhat--I support them wrapping it up. If you can't get it done in 10 years,

you can't get it done (whatever it is we're doing over there). Looking forward to troop withdrawals, even if they're only gradual.

[Ghost in the Machine]

12. No... because it was a sham (and an illegal invasion) when it started...

..and it still is to this day. Bush's wars have become Obama's wars. I didn't support them under der Chimpenfurher and I don't support them under Obama. Period. Bring our troops home NOW!

[Skip Intro]

13. Why would someone unrec an open conversation? nt

[Greyhound]

14. No, and can we please stop pretending that this mass-murder has anything to do with "terrorism"?

The fact that Obama elected to go along with this global obscenity is an indictment of his entire administration.

The fact that he is willing to set this blatant crime aside in order to extend legitimacy to a cabal of international looters for no other reason than their profits at the expense of the Afghans, the very concept of international law, and the American people themselves clearly demonstrates for whom he is "working hard".

Murder is murder and all the excuses and lies in the universe do not change that.

[Skip Intro]

16. Are/were no wars justified? nt

[Greyhound]

17. Wars are never 'just' though sometimes they are unavoidable.

Afghanistan is among the most heinous in that it was entirely a choice, eminently avoidable.

[Skip Intro]

19. I'd say Iraq was the most heinous act of agression by the US.

I'm not sure about Afghanistan. Bin Laden was anchored there at one point, if you believe what you read. I don't know what to believe at this point. I know that killing is wrong. But war is killing. And some wars are justified. WW2 was justified, imho. If we just knew the truth of 9*11, the truth, this would all be more clear. Then again, I don't know where we'd aim the guns then.

[Greyhound]

23. Yes, Iraq is as bad or worse. But if OBL was really the motivation for this war of aggression,

it compounds our crime since he was offered up before the invasion.

WWII is a little tricky (from an academic perspective) because Americans didn't want to get involved at all. Humanitarian aid, the liberty fleet, was acceptable but the people wanted no part of "Europe's war" despite FDR's belief that it was necessary and inevitable. Then the Japanese attacked us and that was that.

Of all our wars this one was definitely the most justified and by winning and then not claiming defeated territory as our own (debatable) we earned the world's admiration.

Maybe the American Revolutionary war?

[Skip Intro]

24. Was OBL offered up before invasion? How do you know what to believe and what not to believe? nt

[Greyhound]

31. It was on the news both here and abroad, and the Idiot Frat Boy publicly

rejected their offer. The Taliban (or whichever criminals were in charge) offered to turn him over to a 3rd country for trial after 9/11.

Just like Iraq was always about stealing their oil, OBL was a pretense to get that pipeline built.

[moondust]

18. Maybe/not enough info.

NATO obviously has a lot of blood and treasure invested already in trying to stabilize Afghanistan. What I think very few people know is how far or how near that goal is to being achieved on any given day. It would be a tragedy to sacrifice so much and pull out prematurely with disastrous consequences if there truly was a light visible at the end of the tunnel.

[OHdem10]

20. I support our troops. This war is making me weary and besides

it is taking money we need so badly for our people here at home.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

21. I say NO, I don't support the war.

Why? I hate war, and I no longer trust those who tell us we need to fight it.

[Puregonzo1188]

22. No. And I don't think the US was justified in invading and bombing after 9/11 and I don't think our

current occupation is ethical.


We need to get out.

[Violet_Crumble]

25. I voted no...

I'm Australian, and we should pull out of Afghanistan and should have never been there in the first place. We shouldn't blindly follow the US into every war it starts...

[Catherina]

26. Both Bush and Obama are lying. The only terror threats are the ones we create.

It's the lost law of Machiavelli. Eye a man's resources and call him a terrorist.

[TexasObserver]

27. No. It's utter folly and a waste of hundreds of billions of dollars.

[Amonester]

28. No, because arresting international criminals is...

INTERPOL's job ( http://www.interpol.int )

Not the Imperial Military-Industrial-Complex's for Empire Builders And Profiteers Inc's job (where the poor are sent to get killed)

[onethatcares]

29. because all war is a racket

and it's about time we stopped trying to force our way on the world.

To spend a trillion dollars looking for one person,when finding that person could cause him to be a great martyr, is insanity in the nth degree.

Perhaps, it would be better to actually do something to make the world look up to us, instead of us looking at the world through a bombsight.

[madokie]

30. Yep the Vietnamese were coming to get us too

anymore questions?

[yellowwood]

32. No

And that goes for the attack on Iran that the neocons are trying to get us into.

I know that extricating us from this quagmire takes time, but it should be a priority.

I believe that this militaristic position of ours makes more enemies.

Cost of war:
http://costofwar.com/

Casualties:
http://icasualties.org/oef/

I understand the argument that our occupation there is good for some women's rights, such as educational rights, but I just think you have to ask yourself: Which one of your children are you willing to sacrifice for this cause?

[ShamelessHussy]

33. The threat is US

We have been terrorizing, torturing, and murdering their people for years.

But I find it remarkable they we are potrayed as the good guys, under threat.

:shakes-head:

[TheKentuckian]

34. No, because there are more astronauts in America than terrorist in the region

What we are doing is creating insurgents (aka motherfuckers with no beef till you occupied their country), so we have no enemy to dictate this level of force for this kind of length of time

We have no actual achievable goal.

The cost to benefit ratio is below garbage. We have no hope of a return on our investment be the return security, a better life for Afghans, regional peace, or even resources (though multinationals will profit quite nicely).

We are killing more civilians than terrorists.

We are occupiers.

It is sucking up resources that are desperately needed here.

It goes on and on but mostly it is a largely worthless, dangerous, and expensive game with no payoff.

[w8liftinglady]

35. From what I understand,"Alexander the Great" was the last to "Win" in Afghanistan

I'll admit...in 2002,I supported our invasion...because I was freaking ignorant.Should we still be there 10...20 years later?..Should we sacrifice our...and their...families for some unknown principle,while our own country is circling the drain?

I think you know the answer.

[Better Believe It]

36. "our war effort"???!!! Don't include me! It's not my war effort.

[lunatica]

37. I never supported it because it was like going after a mosquito with a cannon

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

38. No. It's a war started and fought for political PR and has been lost.

There is no "terrorist" threat in Afghanistan and Pakistan is more at risk due to our interference and aggression in the region.

It isn't just unwinnable, it's lost. It will end when the regional powers, China, India, Pakistan, Iran, act, or we're finally too broke to fight it.