Sending more troops to Afghanistan could backfire

what BBB quoted needs repeating imo :



but who wants to hear that message ; it's just so boring !
better to follow the example of alexander the great , the british and the soviets : keep digging until the walls are caving in and you can't get out of the hole !
at least you'll have some story to tell .
hbg

"nobody is so stupid as to be worthless , he can always be used as an example of the results of stupidity ! "

America has lost credibility with the Afghan people, we have not done what we have said we would, we have not shown competence in what we have done, and we actively deprive very poor people of any living at all by destroying their poppy crops......more troops will not help that.

More importantly our relationship with Pakistan is in tatters, they being a nuclear power with a very weak government always a hair trigger away from Nuclear war with India......using overwhelming force in Afghanistan has the potential to further destabilize the entire region.....

But the alternative is????

USA is a useless soup sipping super power..
Most of us know the plight of the citizens who vegitate there.

I've mixed feelings about our being in Afghanistan at all, being against our involvement way back when with the mujahadeen, seeing the point re the Taliban but with big qualms even then, confused about our odd bin Laden chase, very unenthused about our acting on Pakistan soil - but feel generally that Afghanistan and several other places have such timeless rivalries that I see no real use for our big feet, near endless expenditure, not only of money but lives of all concerned. Granted, lives will be lost if we take our big feet out. Which is why we should think harder before we step in the first place.

My humbel question.
What is wrong with USA?
Why the hell USA seeks a new enemy to exist?
I live in Germany.
USA had helped with chewing gum , cigaretes in the name of of MARSHAL PLAN.
NONE OF THE CITIZENS in germany is infatuated/facinatec/elated / with the corporate controlled, consume-oriented, compassionate christin conservative.

When asked in Berlin by CNN's Candy Crowley whether he believed the United States needed to apologize for anything over the past 7 ½ years in terms of foreign policy, candidate Obama responded, "No, I don't believe in the U.S. apologizing. As I said I think the war in Iraq was a mistake…"

So what does our contemporary "charmer of change," Barack Obama, propose regarding Afghanistan?




Obama's recipe for success involves:

Sending 2-3 combat brigades (each of 3-5,000 troops) to Afghanistan;
Pressure NATO allies to follow suit;
More use of drones, aircraft, etc. ;
Training Afghan "security" forces;
Supporting an Afghan judiciary;
Proposing an additional $1 billion in non-military assistance each year with safeguards to see no corruption and resources flowing to areas other than Kabul;
Invest in alternative livelihoods to poppies;
Pressure Pakistan to carry the fight into its tribal areas and reward it for so doing with military and non-military aid;
Should Pakistan fail to act in the tribal areas, the United States under Obama would act unilaterally;
New? Change? President George W. Bush and candidate McCain have long signed on to exactly these policies. Certainly both would also see Afghanistan primarily through the lens of "making America safer." George Bush Sr. did just that during 1988-1990 when America was presumed safer once the Soviets were out of Afghanistan. Then, he cut and ran.

Candidate Obama adopts the Pentagon's military solution - defeating Al Qaeda and the Taliban - without paying much attention to either what gave rise to these groups or to the complexity of tribal society on the Afghan-Pakistan border

http://www.counterpunch.org/