McCain: Afghan drawdown 'unnecessary risk'
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
U.N. Security Council blames Syrian gov't for Houla killings
( 3 )
-
U.S. drones kill 5 militants in Pakistan
( 3 )
-
NATO has fight on its hands in Afghanistan - Panetta
( 1 )
-
Iran may rethink 20% enrichment: spokesman
( 0 )
-
Egypt's uprising activists weigh Brotherhood vote
( 0 )
-
1
Gov't turns to AKB48 to sell bonds
-
2
Japan declined U.S. offer to station nuclear experts in Kan's office: Edano
-
3
Edano says he didn't deliberately mislead public about extent of nuclear crisis
-
4
Tabloid blasts growing numbers of foreign welfare chiselers
-
5
Lame applicant pool plagues Don Quijote
-
- ALT - Mie Prefecture - Yokkaichi City - June start
- NPO法人グローバル教育推進機構（GLAD), Mie
- Salary: ¥230,000 / Month For a full working month. Some months differ.
-
- Business Teaching Positions - Part-time - Kanto Region
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥3,000 ~ ¥5,000 / Hour
-
- National Relief/Substitute Teacher - summer start
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥275,000 ~ ¥300,000 / Month
Order by Time Order by Popularity
46 Comments
Login to comment
0
chewitup
What an utterly pompous, self-serving, self-righteous thing to say. Is it any wonder Pakistan is not our best buddy?
McCain would have us baby sit the Karzai government forever. Never mind the withdrawal date, we have seen the pro-war faction move the goalposts over and over and over again.
0
minello7
The gung ho brigade arrives in Kabul. Only last week an article said the Americans were talking to the Taliban,I would like to think that those troop withdrawals have something to do with those talks,and wasn't it mentioned that all foreign troops would be out of Afghanistan by 2014.??
0
RomeoR
Now that bin Laden is sleeping with the fishes, pulling the troops out of there looks like a good idea . . . in the short term. But, I have my doubts. We will be back there in the long run.
McCain was correct when he said we'll be in that part of the world for the next 100 years.
RR
0
Serrano
"Obama's withdrawal plan could deplete American military strength before dealing a decisive blow to the Taliban"
The U.S. has had over 100,000 troops in Afghanistan for how long now?
How much longer will it take to deal the decisive blow?
And why aren't there any Chinese troops in Afghanistan? Can't the world's biggest army spare any troops for a free and prosperous Afghanistan?
0
Cricky
As there has never been a power that has subdued this area, I really have to doubt the claim that "we can" in this case. It's a rugged country that has many valleys and obscure areas. And a population of males that define themselves by violence. You do not poke a bee hive. If you do run away!
0
johninnaha
US taxpayers have supported this "war" to the tune of around 450,000,000,000 dollars.
If anyone wants the exact figure (it's constantly updated) go to:
http://costofwar.com/en/
The total of Afghanis (military + civilians) killed in Afghanistan is 19,629 and the total injured 48,644.
The damage to buildings and property is immense.
The suffering inflicted on people who have lost husbands, wives, children, just because they got caught in cross fire is beyond estimation.
For what?
What has been accomplished?
If this money had been put to peaceful use, it could have raised living standards planet wide.
War is no solution, it just adds to the problem.
Obama's decision to pull out of Afghanistan is the best thing he has done.
2
grammefriday
these clowns need a history lesson... how many foreign powers have left this country with their tail between their legs over the last few hundred years?....
1
sakurala
I think this whole war plan was a mistake. If you want to attack a terrorist group, you have to pick and choose your battles carefully. If not, you bomb civillians, making them detest you and perhaps even drive them into the arms of your enemies. Also, the enemies are handing out food which also attracts the starving and desolate. In addition, America is extensively damagin infrastructure, it makes it very difficult for the innocent people to continue with their daily lives. The average citizen just wants stability which they cannot get at the moment because the US government may bomb them thinking a terrorist may be in the area.
If America wants to succeed, they need to put us special missions to get the known terrorist without harming innocent people and help develop the economy for average citizens.
-1
ihavegreatlegs
It is the CHINESE TURN. SEND THEM IN,
-1
BreitbartVictorious
I think Obama is angry about having to make the call to kill OBL, and this is how he is going to get back at the military, by shaming them in Afghanistan.
-1
Spidapig24
Afghan security forces, now that is a joke isnt it? These so called security forces are infiltrated with Taliban fighters, look at the recent cases of coalition forces being killed by their so called allies in the security forces. The security forces in other areas use their power to extort money, settle tribal scores or are to scared to leave their bases or are to high to fight. Yes there is a proportion that are good and loyal but there is also a large number tha arnt.
Lets face facts the US and Nato have been losing this war for a long time and its time that they call it quits in this country. They where never going to win and truly eliminate the Taliban, no country in history has ever conquored and held Afghanistan and this just adds to that list. The US should have taken its queue from the UK/UN and opened dialogue with the Taliban long ago. As once they leave it is the Taliban who will sweep back into power. Maybe by talking to the and negotiating they could have some influence in post NATO Afghanistan. However l think there is alterior motive here wouldnt have anything to do with a fear of Chinese influence in Afghanistan by any chance?
0
Ivan Coughanoffalot
Going into Afghanistan in the first place was an unnecessary risk. Nearly ten years on, what's been accomplished? A generation of radicalised young men prepared to die to strike out at their perceived enemy.
"Unnecessary risk" could also be a term which defines unleashing Sarah Palin on an unsuspecting world.
0
just-a-guy
You guys want to know why Pakistan stabbed your back with arrogances? Because Pakistan has Chinese supports and they were not feared to lose anything, Pakistan is not far away to be a 'failed state' and no matter how America's anger, they are going to behaves like that way! As long as America stucked in the myth of 'enduring freedom' in afghanistan, China is very happy to see America's lost! Sometimes I want to laughs at Mr Lieberman at his visions “We want to have a good relationship withPakistan....remarks! That was my most grateful to him! Keep going......well done!
0
just-a-guy
Good job,Pakistan! Your deception game has changed the world power play! Your contributions was remarkable, keep producing 'talibans' as long as it takes....You broke the records of 'insurgent productions' that the Viet Congs did !
0
just-a-guy
Graham: “Our goal is to make sure that the enemy doesn’t hear withdrawal and the Afghan people don’t hear withdrawal.” Well said !!!Mr Senator your vision was great and brilliant. America and her allies has a long way to go in afghanistan, I really looking forward a troops surge after Obama gone, he was just 'uncompetence' and his policy of defeat was definately a shame for the western world! If US and NATO troops withdrawal afghanistan will be deemed as defeat after vietnam and there will be no more 'American century'! Dont worry the war funds, China and the rest of the world will keep buying your debts whatsoever!
0
just-a-guy
The war in afghanistan for US and NATO was absolutely necessary! Good for many third party countries!
-1
Laguna
Thanks, just-a-guy; sometimes interpretation like yours is required when words come from a Republican mouth.
0
Frungy
Yup. And add to that the fact that they have NO idea who the Taliban really are, they could be anyone. They're not winning, they're just losing and it's costing a fortune.
Obama has the right idea, although he's still moving too slowly.
The long-term problem is that of Vietnam, that the U.S. have killed so many innocent locals that it would be a miracle if there wasn't some sort of retribution, and then the war-mongers will use that as an excuse to re-invade. The U.S. is happy to inflict misery and suffering on other people, but just refuses point-blank to realise that at some point a price will have to be paid. Hell, Al-Qaeda wouldn't be around if the U.S. hadn't sponsored it during the cold-war, yet they still had the incredible naivete to complain after the 9/11 attacks... as if they hadn't sponsored the killing of a hundred times as many people merely for their political agenda.
... something to meditate on U.S., throughout history every Empire has tried to convince itself it was immortal and would never fall, but from the Roman Empire to the British Empire every single one fell... one day the U.S. Empire will fall and it would be a damned good idea not to go out of your way to make more enemies who'll be looking to get their own back.
0
tokyokawasaki
johninnaha - No single war has ever cost the US 450 trillion dollars. I think you may have added three zero's by mistake?
0
tokyokawasaki
Whoops my mistake. You wrote 450 billion :)
0
BreitbartVictorious
The Taliban, their Arab backers and of course all the heroin addicts in Europe funding the "insurgency" have so much blood on their hands...
-1
SushiSake3
Why is anyone listening to this old guy?
-3
Spidapig24
BreitbartVictorious,
Very funny! I would also say that the US and NATO also have a fair proportion of this blood on their hands as well. Not only that the European heroin addicts can thank NATO and the US for the bumper opium crops coming out of Afghanistan. After all the pre invasion Taliban had nearly eradicated the issue. After all the pre invasion 2001 crop amounted to 185 tonnes while 2010 the crop amounted to 6900 tonnes. Big well done to NATO and the US there.
0
LFRAgain
grammefriday,
Well said.
"Decisive blow." Wow. Blinders on, one and all.
This is the second administration that was unable to deal a decisive blow to the loosely organized but highly motivated rabble called the Taliban, and if Obama doesn't fulfill his campaign promise to pull our troops out of there, saving both lives and money, then we'll see this no-win situation continue into a new presidential administration.
What makes no sense is that if the Russians could figure out that fighting a land war in Asia was a really bad idea, then why is it so hard for the U.S. to learn from that lesson, despite wasting 10 years in the area with a local population that seems to lack the will to help itself?
McCain is still living in some sort of idealistic alternate universe in which good would triumph over evil if only everyone would just play by the rules. Leiberman is willing to trade his own mother's soul so long as it garners support among his Israeli allies. And Graham will say just about anything to gain brownie points with his constituency.
Not exactly the three Republican voices of reason I'd look to for answers as far as the Afghanistan situation is concerned.
0
chewitup
And sadly Americans are not angry about who is getting filthy rich. That money is not just going down a rabbit hole!
0
TorafusuTorasan
Hey, it's about time for Lieberman2012 to chime in. His namesake is in the news! Running up his tab with another jaunt to quaint Afghanistan--plenty of U.S. House members taking study trips there too.
Give these three senators their own lambskin caps, plush robes, and honorary sheriff's badges already.
0
zurcronium
McCain yelled "Get off my lawn" to some folks walking past him.
McCain is senile, Lieberman a trader to his country and Graham is a racist. They all cheered for the Iraq invasion and have not had the decency to apologize to the world for the trillions lost and millions dead. McCain was a buddy of Gadaffi until he wasnt.
Sen. John McCain, visiting Libya this past week, praised Muammar Gaddafi for his peacemaking efforts in Africa. In addition, McCain called for the U.S. Congress to expand ties with Gaddafi's government, according to Libya's state news agency.
McCain had a face-to-face meeting with Gaddafi, which he detailed on his Twitter page with the following message: Late evening with Col. Qadhafi at his "ranch" in Libya -- interesting meeting with an interesting man.
0
Jeffrey Duelley
Like others have already stated, no empire has ever successfully conquered Afghanistan. The list of failed attempts is numerous and goes back thousands of years. It's time to call it quits.
0
Virtuoso
McCain is not senile, but the only world he has ever known is one in which either WW2 or the Cold War existed between rival superpowers. He has been unable to wean himself away from this Orwellian perspective, of a world constantly at war, or under threat of war. Or to put it another way, there is no place in his scheme of things for peace. Such a viewpoint is by no means limited to senior members of the U.S. Senate.
0
BreitbartVictorious
"Like others have already stated, no empire has ever successfully conquered Afghanistan"
The trouble with this oft-repeated statement is that it makes a false equation - between "Afghanistan" and that of a real nation-state, which the region of Afghanistan has never really been, in the European sense of the word.(It was Europe that basically exported idea of petty nationalism to Muslim nations.)
Also, the US is hardly looking to conquer Afghanistan.
If you look at the history of the region the various tribes involved like to claim they have never been defeated, but this is because allegiances are fickle. They switch when defeat is imminent.
This sentence made me laugh out loud, at work: zurcronium:"McCain is senile, Lieberman a trader to his country ...."
Trader Joe!
0
Taka313
Could someone remind grandpa mccain that he's not president again. He keeps forgetting that he lost the election when he makes his statements.
And what's up with lieberman?
What a douche.
Taka
0
Spidapig24
BreitbartVictorious,
So lets change the wording then no nation has successfully invaded and held the area of land that present day Afghanistan occupies, and no other nation has conquered the afghan people. Is that better? Just because a country doesnt follow European standards doesnt make it less of a country. And maybe its that thinking that has got NATO into the trouble they currently find themselves in.
Well what would you say they are trying to do. They invaded the country, they diposed the ruling government and installed a sympathetic government. Sounds like conquering to me.
Actually if you really look at the history of the tribes in the area you will see that there is usually one thing that unites the tribes and that is foreign invaders. And once they have been removed from the country the Afghans go back to fighting each other for control.
-2
BreitbartVictorious
Someone misses the Taliban. Say no more.
-2
BreitbartVictorious
If Obama would actually lead maybe others would follow.
0
Spidapig24
BreitbartVictorious
Goto love the your with the US or you like the Taliban stance. So G. Bush of you, your either with us or your against us. Lets face facts shall we, since the US invasion drug production in Afghanistan has gone through the roof, violence and deaths have increased, and we are 10 years on and has anything changed? Billions of dollars wasted propping up a corrupt puppet government, the population swinging back to support the Taliban, casualties amongst coalition troops continue to mount. As you so siccinctly said, say no more
-2
BreitbartVictorious
I always marvel at how some people will take without question figures and info offered by the likes of the Taliban or Hamas or Iran's theocrats ("We have almost eradicated opium growth in the region - and homosexuality too!").But then I check their political affiliation and I understand.
spiderpig:"Lets face facts shall we, since the US invasion drug production in Afghanistan has gone through the roof, violence and deaths have increased, and we are 10 years on and has anything changed?"
It is America's fault Europeans can't get enough of that heroin? Does personal responsibility have any place in your worldview?
Violence and death are what the Taliban brought. Even the WHO says every year that the US military is there the infant mortality rate is lower than when the Talibs ruled Kabul. A minimum of 40,000 lives a year saved. Yes, I know, folks like spidapig never bother to even ask "How many lives saved in Afghanistan?"
-1
Spidapig24
BreitbartVictorious,
Wow where do you check ones political affiliation on the internet, l havent found that site yet?
What l said had nothing to do with the fact that Europeans use Afghan heroin. It has everything to do with the fact that like it or not under the Taliban heroin production was at its lowest ever in Afghanistan and now with NATO in the country it is at massive levels. Looking at that fact alone what does it tell you? It says the Taliban where able to almost eliminate it and since NATO has come in that gain has turned around and production is back to where it was pre Taliban.
-2
Spidapig24
breitbartVictorious,
Continued
Well done spinning the facts there. Yes the infant mortality rate is lower now than before the invasion but why is that. If you actually included the full story you would see that the reason for the high infant mortality pre US invasion wasnt the Taliban. It was the 20+ years of war with Russia and then civil war. Which the Taliban where winning. Who knwos what would have happened when the civil war was over. But to sit there and blame the Taliban for the high infant mortality rate is crap and you know it. They took over a country where ever service was destroyed by years of fighting, most of which took place before the Taliban even existed.
Hey dont put words in my mouth, is Afghanistan better now than before? I dont know do you? Have you asked and Afghani's l doubt it. My point is yes the Taliban wherer evil, yes they did things we in the west didnt agree with but one thing you obviously dont get is that the Afghani's in some areas hate foreigners in their country more than they hate the Taliban.
But as l said, you stick with your G. Bush line you are either with us or against us. Thats the problem with people like you everything is black and white, right and wrong. Guess what the world isnt like that and as the precious US is finding out imposing your values on others has a nasty way of coming back and biting ones butt.
2
Zenny11
Hmm, been thinking that for some time about various countries, etc.
So X0.000 kids are saved but who guarantees them a good life, good education, good jobs, etc. Just saving something/someone for the pure sake of saving them might do more harm than good, IMHO.
Often doing Charity/doing good can end in more suffering for the "saved" person.
1
globalwatcher
Jeff, I share the same view as yours. What had happend when Russian was involved. Nothing changed. Let's call quits.
-2
BreitbartVictorious
spidapig:"It has everything to do with the fact that like it or not under the Taliban heroin production was at its lowest ever in Afghanistan and now with NATO in the country it is at massive levels."
LOL. To verify this you would have to produce records showing that heroin use in Europe dropped off for the period you mention. But as I said before, you are so credulous you buy whatver the Taliban says.
-1
Spidapig24
BreitbartVictorious,
I will say it again, you keep repeating the Bush mantra you are either with us or against us and from your posts l can see that is your approach to. You either believe the garbage the US pedals or you are a Taliban supporter. If you have an opinion other than your mighty US worship look out you are brainwashed by the Taliban.
Oh and by the way as for my figures, they dont come from the Taliban but the United Nations office on drugs and crime. So sorry better luck next time.
0
BreitbartVictorious
"I will say it again, you keep repeating the Bush mantra you are either with us or against us and from your posts l can see that is your approach to. "
Where has anyone here said you are with or against us? People like you really miss Bush.The anti-war Left has been silenced by the guy in the White House. He took your money and your vote but threw you under the bus.
0
Spidapig24
BreitbartVictorious,
Thanks for the laugh there, one little problem with your theory (actually a couple). 1. Bush didnt take my money and my vote because lm not American. 2. If l was there isnt a snow flakes chance in hell l would have voted for him anyway. So sorry try a different tact next time. ;-)
0
BreitbartVictorious
"Thanks for the laugh there, one little problem with your theory (actually a couple). 1. Bush didnt take my money and my vote because lm not American. 2. If l was there isnt a snow flakes chance in hell l would have voted for him anyway."
But he is still America's president, in your head. How else to explain your bizarre, easily-disproved belief that I have repeatedly said "you either are with us or against us" ? Good luck with the removal.
0
Spidapig24
BreitbartVictorious
No he's not the next incompetent idiot is.
I use that analogy because if one says anything remotely disagreeing with US philosiphy or strategy you straight away come out with one liners like " someone misses the Taliban", or "leftwing looney". Very much like the war criminal Bush came out with his famous your with us or against us declaration. You get it now?
Back to top