Comments on: Leave Afghanistan

By: American Conservative Union

American Conservative Union — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 20:12:54 +0000

What is ACORN up to now? Watch the video at http://www.ACUACORNAction.org to find out what ACORN has become. Track former leaders to ensure that we know when ACORN attempts to create new groups using fake names to continue their work.

By: Nick Brown

Nick Brown — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 18:10:03 +0000

It’s time to go. At some point Afghanis have to fight for Afghani freedom. America was not handed its republic nor its democracy. There was no one to save us from the tyranny of evil but ourselves.

As Reagan said, we should be a beacon of light on a hill. We should do what we can to promote liberty in fascist and communist countries. However, at some point if the people in that country are unwilling to fight along side you and eventually lead the fight themselves, then you can’t force liberty on them. They are at that point comfortable being the slaves to man.

Consider if this was going on in Iran right now. If we were in Iran the people are ready for revolution and liberty. They would have taken the torch from us years ago and established their own democratic state.

It’s time to go. I’m tired of seeing our boys shed their blood for people in Afghanistan that could care less whether they received liberty from tyranny or not.

By: Dustin

Dustin — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 16:28:31 +0000

Isaiah,

Two points of difference between Iraq and Afghanistan, for example: Iraq is a very educated nation, and has had strong central governments for years. Afghanistan is very tribal, with a weak central government, and is less educated.

Regarding “major,” we lost in Vietnam (though we never lost a battle), and we tied in Korea. We haven’t won in Iraq yet, and we are losing in Afghanistan.

Note I said we won the first Gulf War.

By: ijs80

ijs80 — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 16:21:14 +0000

I’m curious what your definition of a major military conflict is. In the history of the world there has been no conflict quite on par with WWII. Korea would seem to be major engagement, as would Vietnam. We then had relatively minor interventions in Grenada and Panama. The First Gulf War was our biggest mobilization since Vietnam, if I’m not mistaken, and largely successful in its stated aims. Afghanistan and the Second War in Iraq certainly dwarf the previous Gulf War. I would argue that our intervention in Iraq has been largely successful. The project is not over, but we’ve gotten to a point where we are beginning to pull our forces out, having helped create a relatively stable democratic government. It does not have the stability of a mature democracy and it may end up failing, but then, the United States also could have failed in its early years. And Iraq was also a country of divided and squabbling groups, brought to heel by a dictator who brutally quashed opposition. Yet we have reached this point, in part, because we, or better said, our armed forces, persevered, and changed tactics when necessary. Afghanistan had an even smaller history of stability, and,as you pointed out, there has been a degree of neglect in that area of our foreign policy. What, then, is so fundamentally different about Afghanistan that more time and efforts similar to those taken in Iraq will not bring about a similar result?