Deseret News | Obama said to want revised Afghanistan options

Reader comments
Obama said to want revised Afghanistan options

Earl | 8:07 a.m. Nov. 12, 2009

It's hard to understand why we have to reinvent the wheel every time we go to war. It's as if Vietnam never happened. Remember "Vietnamization?" Why they think it will work now when it has never worked before is totally bewildering. We need to get out yesterday.

Simplify the mission | 8:21 a.m. Nov. 12, 2009

Get Osama Bin Laden, and get out.
It is the mission George Bush promised.
It is the mission George Bush failed.

Anonymous | 8:39 a.m. Nov. 12, 2009

Bin Laden is in Pakistan. Al Queda is down to about 100 people in Afghanistan, but strong in Pakistan. More troops won't fix that. We need to be more strategic and get out.

Comments continue below

These people don't want change | 9:51 a.m. Nov. 12, 2009

The people in Afghanistan like the way they are. We can't change them. They like having 10 wives, they like hitting them and they like to take heroin and sell it to the rest of the world. We could do more good just by burning there poppy fields from the air with napalm and not having even one US soldier there. Now the army wants to keep playing war games and is asking for more money and more troops. Of course the army is going to tell you they want to fight more, that's what they do. Obama is smart asking for an exit plan. Here is my exit plan, get out and spend the money we save on our country, not there.

Nero's Protege | 10:27 a.m. Nov. 12, 2009

While Obama fiddles with his on-the-job training as Commander in Chief (not having one minute of military experience prior to being elected Commander-in Chief), thousands of US Soldiers (including hundreds of Utahns) are in harms-way and facing increasing hostile threats in Afghanistan. How many months will it take, Mr. Obama? There is nothing you can do to please your Radical Leftist Anti-War under any Circumstances Political base. Do the right, principled thing, and either support Gen. McCrystal's call for 45,000 more troops, or bring them all home.

ormondo | 2:51 p.m. Nov. 12, 2009

yes

CB | 3:26 p.m. Nov. 12, 2009

Interesting that our President who is capable of reading so well what other's write, but when it comes down to making a decision, he just can't bring himself to do it. Why? Is it ignorance, fear, a reluctance to be held responsible? How many men have died since he took on Afghanistan and made it his war? Why aren't we seeing the body count they were so eager to pin on President Bush? Has anyone tried drawing a picture for him? Or better still put him in a helicopter and set him down in the middle of it all. He's really good at flying all over the world.

palin | 6:59 p.m. Nov. 12, 2009

I just figired the republicans didn't really want to win so they went with Palin.

I find it odd that sooooo many conservatives refer to her as a "breath of fresh air". But hey, run her again. Please.

I'll admit she didn't really say she could see Russia from her house, that was SSNL. She did imply she had foreign relations experience with Russia based solely on it's proximity to Russia. That's still worth a giggle now and then.

decisions | 7:01 p.m. Nov. 12, 2009

Telling the department of defence to get back to work and bring him something other than the same ol crud was the right thing to do. If I were still in the military I would appreciate it.

Re: Anonymous | 7:04 p.m. Nov. 12, 2009

Let me educate you! We are not fighting Al Qaida in Afghanistan, we are fighing the Taliban there! We fought and defeated Al Qaida in Iraq. Al Qaida is the group led by Ossama bin lauden who fled to Afghanistan for protection. 9/11 operatives were Al Qaida and not Taliban. Bill Clinton could have taken out bin Lauden but he didn't and that is why 9//11 happened! Why is it that liberals always try to reinvent history and why is it that liberals refuse to believe terrorists exist because they hate America, not President Bush?

Re: Re: Anonymous | 9:39 p.m. Nov. 12, 2009

There is not a single shred of evidence that Al Qaida was in Iraq before the US invasion of that country. Not even the Bush adminstration made that claim.

Osama Bin Laden was based in Afghanistan during the planning and execution of the horrific events of 9/11. President Reagan had previously trained and supplied him there as he and his group fought off the Soviets.

Sadaam Hussein, while a vile dictator, posed to realistic threat to the US either before or after 9/11.

President Bush let down our allies, the Afghanis and most importantly his own country by diverting resources away from Afghanistan to fight the unnecessary war in Iraq.

Some very basic understanding of this situation can be gained simply by reading some of the many books on this topic found in any library or even more simply by reading an online encyclopedia article or two.

By the way, I'm certainly not a 'liberal'. I've been a Republican for thirty years and have volunteered hundreds of hours for my party during elections. The truth is the truth though and our party got it wrong with President Bush.

xscribe | 9:40 p.m. Nov. 12, 2009

Maybe the President wants to work with actual data and go over all scenarios instead of hastily making a decision that might, say, put us at war for 10 years. Oh, wait, coming up on 10 years in Iraq and the same for Afghanistan. Guess some president already made that hasty decision without an exit strategy. Some want to blame Clinton for 9/11. You're entitled to your opinion, but that doesn't make it fact. But most experts would agree that while we were fighting the war in Iraq, under Bush, we dropped the ball with Afghanistan, thus the problem we have today. Some people prefer to work with actual data instead of "gut feelings."

Actual Data? | 3:56 a.m. Nov. 13, 2009

Oh, come on xscribe. We're not dealing with "actual data" here. This isn't some wonkish public policy seminar going on in Afghanistan that has to be focus-grouped. We're dealing with Soldier's LIVES! There are US SOldiers already in Afghanistan who, every day while Obama dithers and dathers, and studies the data (whatever that means). And how many months' studying the data will it take? Every day without the addiitonal troops needed is another 24 hours that some US troops already over there are exposed to greater dangers than necessary or are perhaps killed because of it!! Get real.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.