Afghan violence spikes

Msierra, SF — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:04:52 GMT

Screw Bi-Partisan
Implement Democratic initiatives !!

How about this one ??

From the LA Times:

'...The economy was a shambles. Millions of Americans were out of work. Saying something drastic needed to be done, the newly elected president announced a massive economic stimulus package aimed at repairing the nation's sagging infrastructure and putting people back to work.

The first "emergency agency" established by President Franklin D. Roosevelt was the Civilian Conservation Corps, which eventually put 3 million men to work in the national park system.

By the end of the program in 1942, CCC workers had built scores of bridges, constructed flood-control projects, cut 97,000 miles of fire roads and planted 3 billion trees, prompting the nickname "Roosevelt's Tree Army."

The rustic, rock-and-timber buildings and massive lodges constructed by highly skilled artisans are now famously part of the national parks' visual style, often referred to as "parkitecture." In parks such as Yosemite -- where an unusual number of projects were undertaken -- the CCC's imprint remains.

Now, some in Congress and elsewhere are reaching back to embrace Roosevelt's Depression-era strategy by calling for a similar parks restoration program to be included in President Obama's economic stimulus plan. The House version of the bill has $2.25 billion earmarked for projects in parks. The Senate version is still under debate and expected to be voted on Monday.

The CCC was born with the Depression in full roar and one out of four American wage earners out of work. Tens of thousands of unemployed and hungry young men took to the road rather than be a burden to their families.

The Labor Department recruited around the country, and working for the corps became a much-desired job. The program accelerated so quickly -- 300,000 men joined in three months -- that at the time it was the most rapid large-scale mobilization of men the country had ever witnessed.

Each enrollee signed on for a one-year stint and was paid $30 a month -- with a stipulation that $25 be sent home to support their families. In addition to young men, the corps hired what it called LEMs, or "local experienced men," to lead work in skilled trades.

Former National Park Service Director Roger Kennedy, whose forthcoming book about the CCC and the parks is called "When Art Worked," said the program was intended to heal the spirit of the workers as well as the nation.

"The CCC was a great deal more than a work program," Kennedy said. "It was an education and nutrition program. Most of the people who worked there got the first decent meals in their lives. You could see the people growing, literally, eating good food and working hard outside. You can see the transformation in the photographs from the time."...'

Hire the unemployed and put them to work !!
That's what the CIA does
But, this will result in something useful

Afghan violence spikes

Sandy Moore, Indy — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:05:58 GMT

I'd like to know where all the federal help and FEMA was for the ice storm in Kentucky??? It took DAYS for a few national guardsmen to show up. Meanwhile, people are freezing to death!! SHAMEFUL, Obama!!!!!

Must be a Racist Thing

Great point! Bush was hammered for the response in New Orleans.

Mr. Obama, why are you letting this catastrophe happen to the people of Kentucky? It's shameful, unexplainable and reflects poorly on your concern for the white's in Kentucky. America demands an answer for this negligence and action to be taken by your administration.

Afghan violence spikes

Msierra, SF — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:06:15 GMT

What happened to Petraeus ?

I thought he was gonna solve this problem

Isn't he Superman ?
C'mon General, do your stuff !!

Afghan violence spikes

Anita, Birmingham, Alabama — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:17:37 GMT

U.S. and coalition deaths were up 35%; Afghan civilians deaths were up by 46%

The report, which has not been publicly released, shows that violent attacks against all targets in Afghanistan jumped 33% in 2008. IED attacks for the year not only jumped in number but also proved to be more lethal. While IED attacks were up 27% -- the number killed by the roadside bombs went even higher, up 29%. Last July alone there were more than 400 IED attacks.

The number of attacks against Afghan government targets, police, army and government facilities was up a staggering 119%. Afghan police were the most vulnerable to attack -- 60 percent of all security forces, including Americans, killed last year were Afghan police.

Kidnappings and assassinations of government officials and civilians alike were 50% higher.

The report blames the increase in attacks on more sophisticated military operations by enemy insurgents, and the enemy's continued use of safe havens in Pakistan.

This is where our troops should have been in the first palce. What a disservice to our troops and country.

Afghan violence spikes

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:17:53 GMT

At the current time we have approximately 60 troops patroling an area roughly the size of Washington DC (does not include much of the region in the mountainous areas between Afghanistan and Paksitan). In each of these areas our troops is coming under heavy pressure from the Taliban and other Afghan tribal insurgents. They are most often surprised and pinned down by attacks rather than doing the surprising. Given we were to add an additional 30,000 troops and subtract the support personnel this might add an additional 20,000 troops to thelp patrol these areas. This would result in approximately 180 troops patroling regions the size of Washington DC or larger (that's 180 troops minus those they may need to infiltrate the mountainous areas). Does anyone have any idea how many police officers there are in the greater Washington DC area where there is no war going on, where they are policing the city under peaceful conditions, and where a large portion of the population provides support to the criminal element. Now imagine attempting to fight an enemy and to maintain peace in a similar sized area with 180 troops or less. Bring the troops home. We have no business policing Afghanistan.

Afghan violence spikes

Ron Indiana — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:19:58 GMT

Evidently Petraeus thought he was still talking to Bush and wanted President Obama to continue keeping troops in Iraq. After leaving the Oval Office Petraeus apparantly wasn't so happy. There is a word that applied when a military general does not follow the Commander-in-Chief. INSUBORDINAION! My guess is the military will come up with a 16 month plan to downsize the number of troops in Iraq and increase the number in Afghanistan.

Afghan violence spikes

Ed Crane, Middlebury, IN — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:22:40 GMT

How about that stock market dropping like a rock again today. Change we need and can live with.

Afghan violence spikes

Nashville_fan — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:28:01 GMT

More of George Bush's legacy that the media is already trying to pin on President Obama. The latest issue of Newsweek calls Afganistan "Obama's Vietnam".

Huh?

I hope that Afghanistan is no one's Vietnam, but in any case it is FORMER PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH (43) who mismanaged the war in Afghanistan. Period.

Many of the choices that President Obama will have to make have been dictated by the gross negligence shown by the Bush Adminsitration. . . and most of the options are not good.

Let's not try to rewrite history by pretending that President Bush left anything other than a BIG FAT MESS when it comes to foreign policy.

Afghan violence spikes

Less IS more — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:29:36 GMT

***What happened to Petraeus ?

I thought he was gonna solve this problem ****

Isn't he Superman ?
C'mon General, do your stuff !!
Msierra, SF
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

**Applauds Wildly** - First post I think I have ever seen in the last 6 months that doesn't include Copy & Paste! I didn't think you had it in you

Afghan violence spikes

MSierra, SF — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:29:49 GMT

Nj : '...I love Obama but HATE pelosi and some of those house dems
They still play like kids...'

REALLY ??

how do you fieel about Mitch McConJob ?
Is he a partisan kid ?

How about John Boner ?
Is he a 'kid' ?

How about Sen David Vitter ?
He tried to kill the auto bail out ?
Does his partisanship bother you ??

Talk about kids, he has his hooker girl friend put DAIPERS on him ?
But, only when he's bad ??

Afghan violence spikes

Josh Larson, FL — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:31:27 GMT

Bring the troops home. We have no business policing Afghanistan.

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL

But that is where Obama and Biden want to take the fighting to. They said as much in the campaign. Keep my America safe. Wait till they attack Dauphin Island, then you'll change that tune.

Afghan violence spikes

MSierra, SF — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:34:15 GMT

I think there was another Washington report published lately
It documents the Bush handling of the Iraq War

Too busy to mention THAT report, FR ??

Let's not CONFUSE people with salient facts, huh ??

Afghan violence spikes

Erica, Salinas CA — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:36:28 GMT

Nashville fan, guess what: It's Obama's war now. Though it's tempting for Dems, you can't continue to blame everything on Bush. It's all up to Obama to handle from here on out.

Afghan violence spikes

ace — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:39:57 GMT

the war in afghanistan is where we should have been all along. leaving the afghanistan theater to start the iraq war harmed our success and progress in afghanistan undoubtedly.

the soldiers that president obama will commit to afghanistan is what is needed to reinforce troops so that they will have proper rotations, logistics, personel, lrrp's without taking away from conventional forces and it will also allow the state department to focus on infrastructure rebuilding and coalition building within the afghan indigenous population.

general petraeus must be given time to make the evaluations neccessary. he must look at how things were previously done in depth. he then will asses what went wrong where and hw. he then will plan out a strategy to be reviewed by the president and joint cheifs. that takes time. he must interviews his officers in the field and confer with the allies that in theater that are apart of the mission. we are going to see improvement in afghanistan in time. it took 6 years of neglecting afghanistan once we invaded it. it is going to take a few years to get back on track. general petraeus will need time just the same as president obama will need time.

Afghan violence spikes

Bentley in NY — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:45:51 GMT

I saw a fascinating documentary a week or two ago on one of the History channels. According the to the documentary, our first invasion of Afghanistan was actually quite successful, we nearly completely obliterated the Taliban there. However, after that success came the almost complete withdrawal of troops in favor of Iraq. Once this happened the country was left in disarray. The documentary made a point of saying that if we had focused on REBUILDING Afghanistan after our invasion, we would not still be there. The Taliban was essentially given a 5 year recruiting period while we were busy in Iraq. They took advantage of the disarray and the Afghan peoples troubles to regain power. They're now stronger, more powerful, and better equipped than they ever have been. Which is evident by the shocking statistics previewed above. Further proof of GWB's failure at everything he did. A half dozen other countries have tried to rule Afghanistan and all have failed, including the british and the russians. Afghanistan has always been in the bottom 5 poorest countries in the world, I doubt we'll be able to change that. But I hope we can at least stabilize the country.

Afghan violence spikes

Pete, Salinas, CA — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:47:17 GMT

Let's not try to rewrite history by pretending that President Bush left anything other than a BIG FAT MESS when it comes to foreign policy.

Nashville_fan

The next hard solid attack that kills thousands of Americans on American soil will be how Bush's legacy will be remembered. You should be smart enough to figure that one out.

Afghan violence spikes

Anita, Birmingham, Alabama — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:51:39 GMT

Correction, we have about 300 troops that patrol an area 3 times the size of Manhattan New York. The Bush administration invested billions of and we have lost thoundsands of lives in the wrong place.

1. If President Obama just walk away from these wars that we are in. Let those responsible for 9/11 go free, then we are sending those responsible for the loss of lives of our citizens the message that it's okay to kill us.

2. The last administration had the opportunity to capture Osama countless times and didn't act uopn it.
We will not be able to dissolve terrorism, but we do owe the families of the victims of 9/11 our efforts.

3. No war is preferable, no lives lost is absolutely preferable. At the same time this administration must "attempt to clean up" the mess we are left with.

4. To do nothing is not an option.

Afghan violence spikes

Pacheck, Huntington Beach, Ca. — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:52:32 GMT

GET OUT!! there is absolutly nothing in that country worth a bag of wet hammers. Their GNP is opium, their whole perspective on everything is to weird to understand. Cut these people loose and get as far away from them as possible. They are a cancer to normal life.

Afghan violence spikes

Anna Molly — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:59:27 GMT

First Read ~ Please read this article that I have posted here more than once ....

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/07/world/europe/07diplo.html

And then tell me again why this news is "startling."

This is nothing more than the natural outflow of seven years of failed policy; C A -- who has reason to know -- makes a good point that you can't win this war with conventional tactics -- at least not with the conventional tactics currently being employed -- and that until we change our tactics the deployment of additional troops will not be sufficient and will only cause more needless heartache and pain for American families.

By the way, hello, C A.

Afghan violence spikes

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:13:50 GMT

Josh Larson, FL (Sent Monday, February 02, 2009 12:31 PM)

Josh:

I understand Afghanistan is where Obama and Biden want to send more troops. I am against sending more tooops so on this one I disagree with Obama and Biden. As far as Daulphin Island, they can have it. There's nothing there.

Afghan violence spikes

Nashville_fan — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:15:44 GMT

"The next hard solid attack that kills thousands of Americans on American soil will be how Bush's legacy will be remembered. You should be smart enough to figure that one out. " - Pete, Salinas, CA
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
So as long as the Americans who are killed are in another country, like oh say, IRAQ, that is just fine with you?

Somehow I think the families of the fallen and wounded soldiers disagree.

Afghan violence spikes

damn — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:26:00 GMT

i guess we are the new russia

Afghan violence spikes

ace — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:38:11 GMT

we can't just leave afghanistan. deployment and redeployment aren't as simple as just packing our bags. we have investments in people (assets) in country. there are things that must be finished. the additional troops to be deployed to afghanistan isn't to broaden the war, but to get the bro's back home on 12 to 13 month intervals. this will allow them to stay home for at least that long.

troop rotation has been ill-affected by the iraq war. it is so easy for non-military people to say get out now. most civilians don't understand the scope of all that goes into an engagement. osama bin laden is in the afghan-pakistan mountain range. he declared war on us. that can't be forgiven. we need to find him, kill him or bring him to justice.

no one should be able to attack our great country and just go play hide and seek until some begin to say we don't want to fight anymore. he drew first blood. iraq was wrong. afghanistan is right as long as we remained focus on getting that murderer.

Afghan violence spikes

Anita, Birmingham, Alabama — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:38:35 GMT

The last administration knew about the opium feilds. I am a lot more cynical.

1. The Bush administration has welcomed countless drug dealer nations to our shores and this one was no different.

2. It is a known fact as the saying goes on the street, "when the Republicans are in office, there are drugs a plenty". "When the Democrats are in, drug dealers beware, you a$$es are going to jail". There are less drugs for the drug dealers and users.
We are also left with a growing number of Mexican drug wars croping up in our cities and states, compliments of the "Bush" administration.

3. I think that we will be able to get those that are resposible for those attacks against us since Bush is out and he can no longer protect them.

I am against building anything for them. Just give the warlords more viagra and we'll get what we want. I am for working smarter, not harder no pund intended.

Afghan violence spikes

Pete, Salinas, CA — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:43:09 GMT

So as long as the Americans who are killed are in another country, like oh say, IRAQ, that is just fine with you?

Somehow I think the families of the fallen and wounded soldiers disagree.

Nashville_fan

I fought on foreign soil, more than one time for this country, my family and friends. I lost friends and have family members who were wounded in war and have known many others who have died.

I do not know one person I served with or who has actually experienced the opportunity to defend freedom, our country and our families that has any regret, only resolve to keep this country safe and secure.

Maybe your experience in military service was different. I gave 20 years of my life to defend this country, my family and friends and all Americans.

Afghan violence spikes

Kathy from Michigan — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:49:30 GMT

The media waters down the real story. Musharraf told Bus 43 that he was concerned that the Taliban were recruiting the Pashtuns (most Americans don't even have a clue as to who the Pashtuns are!). They do not recognize the border between Pakisatan and Afganistan. They have beaten and bankrupted invasion from Alexander the Great, the Khans, the Singhs, the Russians (don't forget, we helped Osama Bin Laden in the very same region when he was fighting Russia).

The "tribe" (and I hesitate calling them a tribe), are essentially ethnic Iranians. There were no Alquida in Iraq, they were in Pakistan and Afganistan. As the Taliban won over many Pastuns, they became Taliban and we are fighting both Taliban and Alquida in Afganistan.

Not all Pashtuns are part of the Taliban, I just think the media has done a horrible job of explaining the mess that GW got us into. He wanted to fight a "One Size Fits All" "War on Terror"

Afghan violence spikes

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:53:58 GMT

Good Morning to you Anna Molly:

You are correct. A coventional approach to nation build does not work against unconventional tactics to be free and independent. I use "free" in this sense simply to mean "not being interferred with" and not in the same sense as we Americans define freedom. We see our tactics as a means of providing freedom to people across the world. Much of the world sees the same as interferring with their right to determine their own path regardless of the personal freedoms they may or may not experience. And some if not most would rather live under the tyranny of one of their own then under a false sense of freedom and security under an occupier as the U.S. In the end, it all comes back to home and these people will be responsible for and accountable to their own. That is unless the intentions of the U.S. are to permanently colonize these countries with U.S. Citizens and to absorbed the native population of another country into an ever expanding American population.

Afghan violence spikes

jawillie, Philadelphia, PA. — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 19:03:24 GMT

>>>Nashville fan, guess what: It's Obama's war now. Though it's tempting for Dems, you can't continue to blame everything on Bush. It's all up to Obama to handle from here on out.
Erica, Salinas CA (Sent Monday, February 02, 2009 12:36 PM)

==========
Yes, Erica, it IS Obama's war, NOW! However, it was BUSH who was COMMANDER IN CHIEF when it began. HE was responsible for its execution. Tempting as it is for you Repubs to lay the blame for it all at Obama's feet, you'd do well to keep in mind the reason this is now OBAMA'S WAR. It's because BUSH FAILED!

Still Looking for my ACORNs in the Stimulus Package.
http://jawillie.blog.com

Afghan violence spikes

Richard, Washington State — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 19:09:21 GMT

Nashville_fan:

Any possibility "Obama's Vietnam" might simply be a reference to an incoming president being handed a war to finish?

Like Eisenhower's Korea? Or Nixon's Vietnam?

Anyway, I'll be up front and fully acknowledge that President Obama is being handed something he didn't start and resolving it won't be easy. Relative to Korea and Vietnam, though, Afghanistan is a small, moderately overweight mess.

But he will be responsible for the results of his own actions going forward. I certainly hope to be able to praise him.

Afghan violence spikes

Gary Schear, bozeman Montana — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 19:10:20 GMT

Obama Administration:
Pick a goal, achieve it, and get out. It is not called "The Graveyard of Empires" for no reason.
This Hubris thing happens to Democrats as well. It was a Democratic Administration that wandered stupidly into the last idiot quagmire. You have a little time but if you keep pouring American blood and spilling Afghani blood into that miserable useless moon scape the streets here at home will fill up again. Granted we didn't get a lot of coverage from the media during the bush regime but the media might find massive anti-war demonstrations more of a story on your watch.
Meanwhile in Russia: A Russian version of Charlie Wilson, probably ex-military with a grudge, is working feverishly to provide the Taliban with their version of stinger missiles. How will the Administration be able to complain to the International community about that one when the Black Hawks start going down?

Afghan violence spikes

eagle1776 — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 19:23:33 GMT

Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban are in Afghanistan. They are the ones responsible for attacking us. This is where we should have been concentrating our efforts all along. Properly used the locals can help tremenduosly in the fight against people they don't want around either. To have spent so much time and treasure not to mention thousands of American lives to take out a two bit dictator that was no real threat to us is inexcusable. To go after those who did us harm is the right thing to do. There will be casualties. That is unfortunate. We should have learned some things about the Middle East and how they do things. Properly applied we can minimize the harm to us and maximize the harm to the enemy with the help of the people in Eastern Afghanistan and Western Pakistan. Not including them will be a big huge mistake. They can support us or the enemy. I think they would prefer us but we have to make it worth their while. Use the tribal culture against the enemy. They do things differently than we do. If we understand this and use their culture against them we win. If we fight like we were going against an European army we will lose.

Afghan violence spikes

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 19:55:24 GMT

eagle1776 (Sent Monday, February 02, 2009 2:23 PM):

eagle:

Some good thoughts. But I am reminded of entering into VN villages treating the locals kindly, giving the kids chocolate bars, taking a few days to care for the sick and leaving behind medical supplies that we could not afford to leave behind, giving blood to people in the village who needed it, helping them to round up and pen runaway hogs, giving them food to eat if necessary and patching up holes in the roof of their huts, treating their women kindly and the men with respect, hugging the kids and leaving behind coloring books and crayons, etc, etc.

And when visiting the village again being shocked by the reception you received which was a combination of destain and fear. Why? Because the cong had visited the village as well and had promised to come back. And rather than give blood they took it. Rather than treating the women kindly they raped them. Rather than treating the men with respect they beat them, killing a few to set examples . Rather than giving food they took it. Rather than hugging the children they threatened them. And then they gave the village an ultimatum. Side with the American soldier and the next time we visit it would be worse.

Shed your Americanism for a moment eagle and try to picture yourself as your typical, friendly, loving, non-agressive, lowly educated Vietnamese (or Afghan) village resident. Now who would you support, hide if necessary and be sure you did not anger. The Americans or the cong?

The U.S. is not capable of providing 24/7 security and attention to all the people's of Afghanistan just as it was not possible to provide the same to the people of Vietnam. Under this scenairo, until one day these villagers want a change and will be willing to suffer greatly and to die to make changes, their guide which will determine who they will support, will be fear.

Afghan violence spikes

Anna Molly — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 20:50:51 GMT

Here is a compelling addendum to C A's post on how hard it is to fight the insurgency in Afghanistan. The parallels between this account and C A's description of Vietnam are spooky, to say the least. Some things never really change. When I first read this, all I could think of was Vietnam. And I wasn't even there.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/magazine/24afghanistan-t.html?ref=world