Two Winnable Wars

Reader Comments
Back to blog

180 compliance criticized carbon actual

hwitfordge of ID 12:30PM July 05, 2009

Cordesman is on the right track for sure. It doesn't matter what our expectations are in either place, it matters what the good people of those countries expect for their future and we can only give them a glimpse of the possibilities and hope that they grasp them. Freedom is not free, it has to be fought for and won and never let go. That is the real issue and we are either willing to stay the difficult course of freedom or watch it slip away on the side lines. It is much harder still to get actively involved on the ground or in a support role rather than write hollow commentary which is largely uneducated about the reality in either country or misrepresent the amazing things that the men and women of the USA and other countries are doing in these far away places, far from the shores of our country but so close to what is basic in our lives-freedom, security, and progress.

Rix Mills of 9:45PM February 26, 2008

It depends on how many times you re-define "winning" to meet lowered expectations.
Winning in Iraq meant achieving the goals of depriving Saddam of the WMD he was addicted to and leaving Iraq as a shining city on the hill after a 30-90 day occupation, at a cost to the U.S. of < $2 billion dollars since Iraqi oil would pay for reconstruction "sooner rather than later."
Reference: "The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: 9/8/03: Last February, with invasion just weeks away, sources in the Bush administration told Newsweek that they were expecting a postwar occupation of Iraq of 30 to 90 days."
Winning in Afghanistan meant getting bin Laden and neutralizing al-Qaeda.

Luther of IL 3:24PM February 25, 2008

The May 15th Prophecy has already declared what will happening in Iraq and Afaghistan
Do a Google search of the May 15th Prophecy and you will see for yourself that it has been the only source with 100% accuracy about the happening in Iraq,Lebanon, Iran and the greater Middle East

LastDay Watchers of CA 2:15PM February 25, 2008

Here's a post I wrote for Bill Arkin's column
in the Washington Post today:
The German Army has excellent field Officers,
some of the finest in the world,
why should they be allowed
to shirk their duties?
I read their public opinion polls too
and in my estimation
the German politikos
have not presented the case well to the public
for helping out the good people of Afghanistan.
Charity work on this level
is not for the feint of heart
especially when somebody
is trying to shove a Kalashnikov
down your throat.
So just how do you purpose securing
the next generation of Afghanis
from the local bullies?
They need education, good roads
and fair trade too
you know.
Hiding under the bed
is all good and fine
but it takes a special someone
a person with real heart
to get this job done.
Afghanistan is the poorest nation on the planet.
and people talk about helping out Darfur?
please...
they don't know what it takes
to change the world.
It takes heart
It takes commitment.
It takes a lot of LOVE

Steve Real of CA 11:37AM February 25, 2008

thoughtful question, but as with many things in america, not a popular sentiment, so, doubtful we would noty hear more than the normal rhetoric. disagree on one point, although the administration has performed poorly in many areas, lack of foresight, judgement, they never stated this would be quick.

Elliswhitehead of TX 10:44AM February 25, 2008