Destor on Ordering a Pizza Conservatively in Texas
Ramona: Hatred in a Lovely Church
Gallup: Obama 46, Romney 46
|
Destor on Ordering a Pizza Conservatively in Texas Ramona: Hatred in a Lovely Church Gallup: Obama 46, Romney 46 |
Read |
I have been a little angry lately, things are not going right in Afghanistan and I want everyone who reads me to know why. This isn't going to be too long, because I need to get a bike ride in this morning.
Obviously I was always opposed to the war in Iraq, as it had nothing to do with 9-11, but it most certainly had something to do with oil. Those facts are irrefutable. But Afghanistan was a different story, I did feel as though bin Laden needed to be caught, killed, to show Al Qaeda we weren't going to sit around and let them commit terrible offenses against Americans. So initially I supported any action that would directly go after that man. At this poing we know this President is taking lots of heat from the left and the right over Afghanistan. But I wonder, is it time to admit we lost what should have been a small action to get bin Laden, and it is time to leave, because there is nothing more than can be done in Afghanistan. I've heard general after general reiterate over and over again, we need to spend 10 or 15 more years in Afghanistan in order to save that country from itself. Because Al Qaeda is no longer an issue in Afghanistan. Ten to 15 more years! I don't think so, if we look at history, we know, in 10 or 15 more years we will still be in the same place we are now, and Afghanistan will not have changed one iota.
Does anyone else remember hearing the story of Tora Bora, when our military and the heads of our government basically let Osama bin Laden go, I believe that was in 2001 or early 2002, and that was the day the war in Afghanistan was lost, and there is no making up for the hugest military mistake we've ever made. Because we have spent money and lives in a place that never changes. But the question must be asked, and it must be asked sooner rather than later, why was the decision made to allow Afghani tribes to take out bin Laden as opposed to our highly trained military. I want to know why? I want to know if generals suggested this on purpose, in order to justify their own jobs, and now they think we should stay forever, in a losing proposition, because they lost the war in 2001, and they don't want anyone to realize we have lost yet another war.
The President, is in between a rock and a hard place, but is not making the correct decisions, because we must leave Afghanistan and Iraq completely, not only our we broke, but we seem to be in an endless state of war, and I really thought he would be more able to get us out of these wars of folly. I am more than disappointed he has not done so, but I am also disappointed that there is no acknowledging we have lost Afghanistan, because we failed to get bin Laden, and he was the mission. What is our mission now, to never admit we've lost? To be endlessly at war? I feel as thought this President is a victim of a country with a militaristic attitude and the only way to prove you are really American enough is to "complete the mission", whatever that mission might be, in it's current form. I remember the lack of respect John Kerry got from conservatives over his service in Vietnam, claiming he didn't deserve any of his medals, and they made up terrible stories about him, because deep down as a nation, we are still fighting that war too, and Afghanistan is merely an extension of our loss in Vietnam. We see faux patriotism where ever we go now, all over the country, you know KILL KILL KILL, endless War, transporting pieces of 9-11 all over the country, politicians constantly wrapping themselves in the flag. The TeaParty is merely a crazy extension of all this, they wear flags, accuse the President of not being one of us, drawing lines in the sand over who is American enough and who isn't. We aren't allowed to move on until we win, but we already lost, we lost when bin Laden was allowed to go free, and it was the military higher ups and the last administration that made the decision to let that happen, by giving the task to Afghani tribes, who have played both sides of the coin since the Soviets tried to conquer Afghanistan in the 20th century. Now that 6 in 10 American's no longer support this war, because it is obvious we cannot win, isn't it time to reasses, without the advice of the same generals who advised our past President that we should allow Afghani tribes to get bin Laden while trapped in Tora Bora? How can we trust the generals? Their job is to conduct wars, they have no other job. Our President should no longer trust them, he needs to take charge as only a civilian can, admit we lost in 2001, and get our troops out of Afghanistan once and for all. We will never win there, never, because the day bin Laden was allowed to go free, was the day we lost, and that should be George Bush's legacy, not Barack Obama's.
Now it is time to ride.
By Ismail Kahn, New York Times, May 23/24, 2012
PESHAWAR, Pakistan — A Pakistani doctor who helped the Central Intelligence Agency pin down Osama bin Laden's location under cover of a vaccination drive was convicted on Wednesday of treason and sentenced to 33 years in prison, a senior official in Pakistan said.
A tribal court here in northwestern Pakistan found the doctor, Shakil Afridi, guilty of acting against the state, said Mutahir Zeb Khan, the administrator for the Khyber tribal region [....]
By Sergei L. Loiko, Los Angeles Times, May 23, 2012
MOSCOW — Stiff new penalties aimed at opposition protesters were given preliminary approval Tuesday by Russian lawmakers loyal to President Vladimir Putin, the target of mass rallies and demonstrations before his March election victory.
The bill, which opposition parliament members termed draconian and protested by threatening to file out of a legislative session, calls for fines of up to $50,000 and up to 200 hours of community service for organizers of rallies and demonstrations that grow violent or exceed the approved number of participants.
The sanctions were approved on first reading by parliament's lower house, which is controlled by Putin's United Russia party. They mark a return by the Kremlin to a tough stance against critics after concessions during the recent election campaign [...]
Also see:
Russians back Putin, strong leadership
Washington Post, May 22, 2012
A Pew survey of 1,000 Russians found that President Vladimir Putin is well-liked by more than 70 percent of citizens, especially older adults.
Associated Press, May 21, 2012
HAVANA — It was all sunshine, smiles and celebratory speeches as officials marked the arrival of an undersea fiber-optic cable they promised would end Cuba's Internet isolation and boost web capacity 3,000-fold. Even a retired Fidel Castro had hailed the dawn of a new cyber-age on the island.
More than a year after the February 2011 ceremony on Siboney Beach in eastern Cuba, and 10 months after the system was supposed to have gone online, the government never mentions the cable anymore, and Internet here remains the slowest in the hemisphere. People talk quietly about embezzlement torpedoing the project and the arrest of more than a half-dozen senior telecom officials.
Perhaps most maddening, nobody has explained what happened to the much-ballyhooed $70 million project....
By Tamasin Ford in Monrovia, Guardian.co.uk, May 22, 2012
Husbands, not strangers or men with guns, are now the biggest threat to women in post-conflict west Africa, according to a report by the International Rescue Committee (IRC) released on Tuesday.
The IRC report, Let Me Not Die Before My Time: Domestic Violence in West Africa, based on data collected over 10 years by the IRC in Sierra Leone, Liberia and Ivory Coast, said domestic violence is the "most urgent, pervasive and significant protection issue for women in west Africa" [.....]
By Lolita C. Baldor, Associated Press, May 22, 2012
WASHINGTON -- Uncle Sam may not want you after all.
In sharp contrast to the peak years of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the Army last year took in no recruits with misconduct convictions or drug or alcohol issues, according to internal documents obtained by The Associated Press. And soldiers already serving on active duty now must meet tougher standards to stay on for further tours in uniform.
The Army is also spending hundreds of thousands of dollars less in bonuses to attract recruits or entice soldiers to remain.
It's all part of an effort to slash the size of the active duty Army from about 570,000 at the height of the Iraq war to 490,000 by 2017. The cutbacks began last year, and as of the end of March, the Army was down to less than 558,000 troops.
For a time during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army lowered its recruiting standards [....]