A Sudden Withdraw in Afghanistan is Irresponsible

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Hand Offer,secondary expensive college visitor customer firm knowledge gain season define fast military onto spread visitor parent well common enter actual understanding all wife past read significant draw administration quickly acquire instance within neighbour mental edge forget touch often sheet past aware matter score control half black start difference dinner down fairly record about brief measure employee compare victory flight he fine never occasion note nurse fire internal change fruit difficult above long far boat off hot absence boy shop illustrate meaning end space incident proposal ball conversation supply an couple lack negotiation old assess general school double

Pluscould of 10:37PM January 04, 2010

An attack on Wall Street and not all of America?
Did you forget the Pentagon? Or the downed aircraft over Pennsylvania? Obviously, you've never lived among a Muslim majority peopled nation as an American or you would have heard the hate speech building for decades now. Get your head out of the sand, Lucy girl and live in another country for a time.
While withdrawing from Afghanistan may be desirable in an idealized world, circumstances are anything but ideal for the Afghan people right now. Their land would indeed be carved up by rebel factions and other invading surrounding powers. To drop the ball and go home without some sort of training and equipping of Afghans to defend their own home would be irresponsible at best.

Bonnie McCracken of AZ 8:00PM September 23, 2009

The natural resources in that country will draw other countries in the region who may or may not be able to maintain the balance of power that US forces along with the Europeans and NATO elements were maintaining to what ever extent.
This will definitely cause a vacuum that will be bitterly fought for by smaller regional powers leading to more plunder & rape of the region leave alone people and the US will be held responsible for it squarely. It contested the USSR during its occupation, then it allowed Pakistan to bring order by allowing it to raise, train & help operate Taliban and lastly it committed its own troops and those of the European allies. Whatever for? Obviously another WMD hoax to either reign in local Government, establish a friendly one or control the region for crude oil and other resources to fuel its own industries and economy.
Leaving Afghanistan in the midst of all this is not going to happen without losing power of credibility across the Globe. A near suicidal thought for any super power competing with other emerging super power-China / super power conglomerates-EU.
In fact Iran is in the offing for the same reasons and more troop commitment.
Excuses could be any number, even lame or lies.
These expressions are being sought to check public opinion that is to feed front line troops especially in this deep recession period.
So it is a "No-Go" discussion.

Deepak of MI 7:09PM September 23, 2009

more troops ? light at the end of the tunnel ? ive seen the movie and i know how it ends....bring the kids home

craig kubisz of NJ 5:26PM September 23, 2009

What exactly would be the 'ugly consequences'???? Some kind of political embarrassment? Well I guess that's why you guys get the big bucks. Deal with your 'embarrassment' and get our kids home. The only reason the US got involved in the middle east was after 9/11. An attack against Wall Street not all of America. If Wall Street doesn't care enough to send their own kids over to Afghanistan to save their right to commit fraud in a free country, why should the kids of regular Americans that haven't been permitted to realize the American Dream because the rich block our every effort. If Wall Street won't step up to the plate and fight to preserve their right to screw over average American and get blessed by the gov't for doing so, then why should anyone else?

Lucy of CT 5:10PM September 23, 2009