Have you forgotten?

[fodderblade]

This week US and allied commanders (NATO)reported that the Taliban is growing stronger, and Al Qeada is growing and shoring up its strength along with them. From May-Sept, 160 allied soldiers killed in Afghanistan vs. 92 killed in Iraq.

It is an ultimate disgrace to America and her beloved troops that 7 years after 9-11, we still haven't defeated the enemy or have Bin Laden by a noose. All because of failed leadership, mismanagement and policies based on oil and corporate glad handing rather than righteous justice for the 9-11 attacks. Money and corporate contractloyalties be damned.

You can thank Bush's absurd distraction and diversion of men and materials to Iraq for the lack of success in "Forgotistan" - a term coined by some of our troops there and popularized (thank God) by the media.

Paul Rieckhoff, who served in Afghanistan and Iraq, said the troops refer to it as "œForgotistan."�

9-11 came from Afghanistan - not Iraq.


I have not forgotten.

[RainmakerIII]

Very Good PostI have not forgotten either.

[Lanse couche couche]

I have not forgotten that Bush declared a global war on terrorism, not just those specifically linked to 9-11.Having said that, i think that Afghanistan has been mismanaged. Would be nice to see a troop surge and more of a willingness to strike terrorist havens in Pakistan.

[fodderblade]

We went to war over 9-11, those thugs are still at large BECAUSE we diluted our efforts in Iraq. The "global war on terror" was a farce - we can't fight globally - that is more clear each day. 7 years later we still haven't defeated the Taliban. No one can say with a straight face that we'd been in this same situation today if all this time all our forces had been in Afghanistan securing the country and hunting the real 9-11 attackers.

Bin Laden attacked us and we committed the bulk of our forces elsewhere.

The term "Forgotistan" has resonance and deep meaning.

If not for Iraq, we might well have Bin Laden and Co. hanging from a noose. The Bush appologists realize this and it shakes them with terror that the American people are not going to excuse it any longer - and the political consequences will be dire for the party that claimed such "global war on terror" and never came close to capturing or killing Bin Laden.

Inexcuseable.

I have not forgotten 9-11.

[Lanse couche couche]

Can't fight globally? We seem to have done a pretty good job of that during World War Two when both actual fighting and covert/espionage operations damn near spanned the globe.And we seem to be doing a pretty good job of it now since we are winning in Iraq, former terrorist states like Libya are now toeing the line, and the U.S troop deaths in Afghanistan are a lot less than the number of people who were killed in Chicago this summer. Not to say that things can be handled much better, but it is pretty naive to see things only in terms of a war on those responsible on 9-11.

[fodderblade]

ORIGINAL: Lanse couche couche

Can't fight globally? We seem to have done a pretty good job of that during World War Two when both actual fighting and covert/espionage operations damn near spanned the globe.And we seem to be doing a pretty good job of it now since we are winning in Iraq, former terrorist states like Libya are now toeing the line, and the U.S troop deaths in Afghanistan are a lot less than the number of people who were killed in Chicago this summer. Not to say that things can be handled much better, but it is pretty naive to see things only in terms of a war on those responsible on 9-11.

Not it is not niave at all, it the reason we went to war in the beginning. Only after Bush pre-determined that he would invade Iraq, for no good reason, did he declare we would fight a "global war" on terror. He arbitrarily created a reason and rationale for invading Iraq because he had no factual reason for doing so.

It is niave to believe all that you were told from the Bush whitehouse concerning the situation in Iraq and the reasons for invading were/aretrue.

[Lanse couche couche]

You do realize that Al Qaeda is not a homogenous organization like the Shriners. Everyone doesn't officially sign up, go thru initiation, get a membership card,agree to abide by all the rules, and hang out at the same clubhouse. The fact is that Al Qaeda is a bunch of often loosely linked suborganizations scattererd far beyond afghanistan.there did not appear to be much linkage between AQ and Iraq, BUT, even rival groups in the muslim world will sometimes cheerfully put aside their differences to kill Americans or our allies in Israel. Beyond that, Iraq was harboring terrorists, since, for example,we captured several members of the network responsible for the Achili Lauro hijacking.

[DougMD]

Every terrorist killed in Iraq is one that we don't have to worry about killing us here. Invading Iraq for no good reason? That's laughable! While I personally don't think it was worth it IN HINDSIGHT, the 17th resolution Saddam broke was all about force if he didn't comply.

BTW, I find it ironic that we had more killed in Chicago, Obama's stomping ground, than in Afghanistan. Isn't this proof that his policies based on idealism are deadlier than policies based on realism?

[fodderblade]

ORIGINAL: DougMD

While I personally don't think it was worth it .............

It's good you've seen the light. Maybe now we can unite as a nation and go after the 9-11 attackers for real.

Bush took what should have been the most unifying moment since 12-7-41 and turned it into one of the most divisive moments since the Vietnam war.

All Americans are diminished to some degree by this betrayl.

[Lanse couche couche]

Uh, the 9-11 "attackers" are all dead. Many of those who supported them and providedleadership were probably hiding out in Pakistan or elsewhere before the first bombs even started dropping in Afghanistan. So, how do you propose to go after them by concentrating entirely on Afghanistan.