How long will troops be in Afghanistan?

[tekisui]

I ask this because Obama's Surge is going to take the better part of next year just to get the troops in there. Then, we will have to wait a year or two to see any effects. It is harder to get troops and supplies in and out of Afghanistan than it is in Iraq.

I think we will be there past 2016. It will be up to another president to get out. We don't know who will be president in 2013-although I think it will be Obama.

Do you trust the next President to get us out? This won't be over with Obama. We are at a critical crossroad. Obama is about to double the war, making it that much harder to untangle ourselves.

How long will you give until you have seen enough?

[TexasObserver]

1. If the president escalates the war in Afghanistan, his place in history is secure.

And that place will be as a president whose bad judgment on foreign policy so overwhelmed anything else he did that he will forever be one of those disappointments who could have been much more, if not for caving in to the powerful war party interests.

[Warren Stupidity]

2. effectively forever. same with iraq, germany, japan, korea, ...

once you let the gangsters and thugs inside, they just won't leave.

[theoldman]

3. We will be there for about 50 to 60 years.

[tekisui]

4. I wouldn't doubt it.

[Mari333]

5. seen the Vietnam Wall in DC?

expect a huge one like that, even bigger.
we are allowing the USA govt to murder our own kids for corporate profit.
years and years.

[eleny]

7. Corporate lust is a monster

[Bigmack]

22. Actually, I think it will be quite a small wall...

I have read that huge numbers of "private contractors" are in Afghanistan.

The Masters of War have figured it out: Private Contractors = more acceptable "troop" numbers + low "troop" casualties + no messy veterans benefits + broader rules of engagement + smaller "walls" of dead troops.

Bastards.

[Warren Stupidity]

24. The other part "severe head injuries aren't dead people".

We've traded actual dead soldiers for soldiers with severe head injuries. Low body count. Hide the permanently injured. Contract out everything we can. No news is good news. War Forever.

[Bigmack]

31. So right.... nt

[tekisui]

6. 1st eight years of Vietnam-400 deaths. 1st eight year of Afghan-900

Roughly.

[BeFree]

8. Another side

By placing more troops two things are accomplished.

One that the military is placated and then they have to prove themselves or just fade away.

Two that somehow the military does prove they can make peace, Afghanistan becomes relatively peaceful and then we can, within two years, claim victory and get the hell out before the elections.

Either way, in two years Obama will be able to say that the end is here, either because the military proved it was incapable or that the war was a great success.

Change, forced upon the MIC, is going to be a long, slow process.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

9. Option 1 will go over well...

[tekisui]

10. I seriously doubt any troop reduction by 2012.

[BeFree]

12. but...

....why not? You think the military will fail?

That a troop surge will not make things better?

Well, if it doesn't work out, then it proves all of us right, and the military has to back down.

[tekisui]

13. When it doesn't work, they will request more troops.

Or, another change in strategy. The military will never say, 'Aw sucks, ya'll. We gave it our best. Time to leave.'

If it gets worse, we will have to stay until it gets better. If it gets better, we'll have to stay to keep it secure.

[BeFree]

15. Request for more?

They'll be told: "You had your chance, pack your bags."

Hey, all this is just conjecture. Another side. It pays to look at problems from many different angles, eh?

[Warren Stupidity]

20. Once in our history, under extraordinary circumstances, that happened.

The only time I know of that Congress actually said no to more military funding for continued war was in 1974 after the sitting president was forced out of office. It wasn't long after that a concerted effort to ensure that the Democratic Party would never again stand up against the kleptocracy was under way.

[BeFree]

21. There ya go

Get congress to say no.

And I doubt equating Obama with Nixon has any validity. The war was lost.

[Warren Stupidity]

23. The point being that it was an anomaly.

You are proposing our relying on something that happened exactly once in our history under extraordinary circumstances that are unlikely to be repeated. The point was not Obama == Nixon.

[BeFree]

26. So

This time it won't be an anomaly? There is precedent?

That's good. It worked then, it will work again. Methinks we have our work cutout for us.

[cowcommander]

11. Until he gets the job done

[tekisui]

14. He being Obama?

The war in Afghanistan will outlast him.

[G_j]

16. what job is that?

nt

[Warren Stupidity]

19. 'the' or more precisely 'fremon an moxy' or whatever.

[anonymous171]

17. Forever. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. Until congress cuts off the funding or we're completely broke.

I prefer the former.

[cherokeeprogressive]

25. I don't think they will have begun exiting Afghanistan until sometime post 2012.

I have already seen enough.

[Orsino]

27. Only until there's some sort of severe economic crisis here at home...

...and we realize that we can't afford such adventurism.

[tekisui]

29. Wait--isn't that where we are now?

We can't afford these wars. We can't afford to employ or provide healthcare to Americans, much less Big Wars.

[Orsino]

30. Shh.

You'll wake the sleepers.

[arcadian]

28. We're never leaving

Unless thrown out.

[mike_c]

32. I've ALREADY seen enough....

Obama is betraying America's best interests, in favor of the MIC's better interests, IMO.

[mdmc]

33. 100 years