Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
NATO says at least 20 countries plan to increase their troop levels in Afghanistan, following U.S. President Barack Obama's announcement of a 30,000-troop boost to the war-torn nation.
NATO spokesman James Appathurai told reporters NATO members had shown a clear determination to support President Barack Obama's strategy in Afghanistan - not just through rhetoric, but by dispatching more troops
And why not jump up to show support for 0bama, he has told them they will all be going home in just over a year anyway.
i am not happy. i am watching history repeat itself. it's not enough to just pull up the analogy of the vietnam war, although that would be appropriate as well. just remember 1999:
Main Street Americans ask of the Serbian war, "What in hell are we doing over there?". At Nato's hideous jubilee party, these doubters are the great uninvited.
Such Americans are the dreaded isolationists who haunt the globalist dreams of the Clintons and Blairs (if such men can be said to dream). For their pacific concerns they are vilified as nativists and xenophobes. Why is it, by the way, that those who oppose killing foreigners are the ones called xenophobes?
The Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, has called isolationism a"cancer". If so, the cancer is congenital. Mrs. Albright may be unfamiliar with the basic foreign-policy statement of the American founding, the Farewell Address of George Washington, in which the father of our country adjured his posterity to "steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the world".
Washington's carcinogenic advice is still regarded as sound by millions of his countrymen. Even at the height of the Cold War, opinion polls found that one -third of the citizenry wanted to bring the boys home from Europe, and, despite nightly lectures by the Instant Balkan Experts of the idiot box, they would really rather sit this one out. But the two parties will not let them do so. Just as in the early 1960s, liberal Democrat technocrats have stumbled into an unpopular and potentially disastrous war, and the Republicans have demanded ... escalation!
now we have the same situation in reverse, with our country verging closer to bankruptcy daily. we have only to look at russia to see what an out of control military budget can do to a country.
tell me what we will achieve. tell me what we can "win". tell me how this won't possibly bankrupt us since we are already starting out BROKE. do you honestly think we can just keep printing money forever? how will the government take care of the "people" when its credit card is pulled?
It is a little strange that people who supported the wars in the past are all of a sudden worried about the cost of war. I have opposed Iraq and supported Afghanistan from the start.
What I do oppose it our permanent bases in Germany are other countries, because they suck billions upon billions every year even at peace time. There is no need for that. But I believe there is a need to successfully finish the war we have been fighting for eight years.
I haven't see such people yet, but I'll let you know if I see some.
It's cool. I've seen too many to count, and will help make up for you not seeing any.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
