Monday May 28, 2012

JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION

Joint Chiefs chairman calls Obama's Afghan plan risky

World Jun. 24, 2011 - 07:00AM JST ( 19 )

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Order by Time Order by Popularity

19 Comments

-1

Lieberman2012Jun. 24, 2011 - 07:26AM JST

It was a cruel joke by Axelrod and the liberal media complex to elevate to president an untested, inexperienced, inflexible ideologue like Obama.
0

grammefridayJun. 24, 2011 - 08:05AM JST

the liberal media complex

and what excactly is that??...somesort of hippie counterpoint to the right wing military industrial complex??
0

SerranoJun. 24, 2011 - 08:07AM JST

Yeah, well, it's also risky to continue to have 100,000 U.S. troops remain there in an open-ended commitment while the U.S. economy continues to flounder.

Obama should ask the Chinese, who have the world's biggest army, to replace the 33,000 departing U.S. troops if the Afghanis can't handle the situation.
0

SerranoJun. 24, 2011 - 08:37AM JST

I hereby amend my last post - the AFGHANS should ask the Chinese, who have the world's biggest army, to help if they can't handle the situation.
0

minello7Jun. 24, 2011 - 09:45AM JST

According to news reports, both the US and the British are in talks with the Taliban. The results of those talks have not yet been released, but I wonder if the troop withdrawal announced by the US,Britain and France have anything to do with those talks?
2

paulinusaJun. 24, 2011 - 10:04AM JST

Serrano: The Chinese have been so keen to take advantage of Afghan natural resources they might eventually end up sending in troops to protect their interests.
0

ihavegreatlegsJun. 24, 2011 - 11:20AM JST

But the Chinese aren`t aggressive like that Serrano. :-)
1

VirtuosoJun. 24, 2011 - 12:43PM JST

It was a cruel joke by Axelrod and the liberal media complex to elevate to president an untested, inexperienced, inflexible ideologue like Obama.

Whereas the reformed alcoholic rich boy with zero intellectual curiosity who sent the troops to Afghanistan --- and then before the job was finished attacked a second country that wasn't even involved --- came to the office tested, experienced and flexible?
-1

WilliBJun. 24, 2011 - 12:59PM JST

Of course the plan is "risky". More than that, it means defeat. But keeping up the impossible mission of nation-building in a nation that does not want to be built forever is runious, so defeat it is!

If it takes a blind, naive ideologue like Obama to finally do what is necessary, so be it.
0

Spidapig24Jun. 24, 2011 - 01:04PM JST

WilliB,

Well said l totally agree with you. Why try and force western values and government on a country that doesnt want it. The US did a good job and got rid of OBL now its time to leave and maybe give money instead of bombs and they might prevent Afghanistan from imploding
0

Lieberman2012Jun. 24, 2011 - 05:08PM JST

Sec of Def Gates is openly saying this is all about Obama trying to win back his far left base.
0

WolfpackJun. 24, 2011 - 09:23PM JST

I think it is safe to say that the Secretary of Defense doesn't support President Obama's decision to precipitously withdraw troops from Afghanistan. He simply says he "supports it" because he is ordered to do so. I am just surprised at how willing he was to state his true feelings about Obama's decision in public. I guess that when you only have a few months left in your job, it's easier to be truthful.

It should be no shock to anyone that Obama cares more about being re-elected than prevailing in some foreign war. He is aiming to have troop levels return to pre-surge levels just in time for voters to go to the polls for his re-election. When running in 2008, Obama was all in support of the war in Afghanistan. The Iraq war was just a war of choice - kind of like the war in Libya. I do give Obama credit for copying former President Bush's surge strategy in Iraq. He didn't think it would work in Iraq at the time but having been proven that he didn't have any idea of what he was talking about, he decided to stay the course with the surge.
0

SerranoJun. 24, 2011 - 09:37PM JST

Question: How long will it take the Afghans to repay the U.S. for all the help they've received?
0

USNinJapan2Jun. 24, 2011 - 10:13PM JST

Virtuoso

Say what you will about GWB, it still doesn't change what Obama is, and more importantly, what he isn't.
0

Taka313Jun. 24, 2011 - 11:33PM JST

Sec of Def Gates is openly saying this is all about Obama trying to win back his far left base.

Your lack of credibility is showing again. There is no evidence of this at all.

Taka
1

LagunaJun. 25, 2011 - 01:22AM JST

Some people just don't get it. Obama campaigned as a moderate; he has governed as a moderate. The Afghan morass transcends politics, and yet he's bound to be hit by both sides: too fast! Too slow! Maybe the Republicans should take succor in the actions of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor yesterday, who withdrew from budget negotiations because he was required to negotiate: if I can't have my way, I'll pick up my marbles and go home. Fortunately, the president is an adult.
0

herefornowJun. 25, 2011 - 01:27AM JST

Yup, and the Joint Chiefs also said President Kennedy's blockade of Cuba was too risky and that we should just bomb and invade them and start WWIII. Luckily, he choose a wiser option. Which I believe Obama has done as well.
0

WolfpackJun. 25, 2011 - 12:16PM JST

@Laguna

Some people just don't get it. Obama campaigned as a moderate; he has governed as a moderate.

Dude - you have been smoking a bit too much of that medical marijuana. President Obama is a far left ideologue (ie Socialist). Of course President Obama's plan is risky; but getting the troops home just before the next election is of paramount importance to the far left of his party so he is willing to take the chance of failure in Afghanistan.
0

lostrune2Jun. 25, 2011 - 04:00PM JST

It's inevitable. For the first time, a majority of Americans want to bring the troops home from Afghanistan. The death of Bin Laden is the turning point. The killing of Bin Laden is considered by most Americans to be victory enough, and that at this point, America simply cannot afford to keep pouring so much money there. If government is the will of the people, then the majority of Americans will be satisfied with a pull-out.