Author Topic: House Democrats lining up against Obama on escalation of Afghan War. (Read 866 times)

Soul Crusher · « **on:** November 27, 2009, 01:19:42 PM »

House Democrats from the Bay Area line up against Obama's expected troop surge in Afghanistan
Mercury News ^ | 11/27/09 | Mike Zapler

Posted on Friday, November 27, 2009 3:50:08 PM by NormsRevenge
________________________ ________________________ ________________

WASHINGTON — As President Barack Obama prepares to announce his long-awaited decision on Afghanistan, many war-weary Democrats in Congress are holding their tongues, uneasy about the possibility of a troop surge but wanting to give Obama space to make a defining decision of his presidency.

San Jose's Mike Honda is not one of them.

"I would oppose it," said the soft-spoken, unassuming Democratic congressman, who has emerged as a leading voice of progressives in Congress who oppose a troop buildup in Afghanistan.

Though his position is consistent with his liberal bent on most issues, Honda does not relish standing in the way of the man he worked hard to get elected president.

And his dilemma points to a larger difficulty for Obama — resistance among Democrats to a long and increasingly unpopular war, and potentially his first major rift with his own party — should he decide to follow the advice of some top military commanders to send tens of thousands of additional troops to Afghanistan. Such a buildup would cost billions of dollars that Congress must approve.

"It's not fun," Honda said of disagreeing with the president. "But trying to go in there with a traditional fighting force I don't think is going to work." The current situation, he added, is not unlike that of Vietnam in the 1960s, when the U.S. escalated a war that turned out to be unwinnable.

"If we learned anything from Vietnam, we didn't understand who we were fighting with," Honda said.

...

The White House is signaling that Obama has settled on sending up to 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan in an attempt to root out al-Qaida and "dismantle and degrade the enemy." ..

But there are growing signs that a troop surge of that size will face serious skepticism in Congress. ..

(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...

________________________ ________________________

Unreal. So now Obama has to go to the GOP to grovel for votes?

What a mess this is going to be.

Al Doggity · « **Reply #1 on:** November 27, 2009, 01:31:29 PM »

Quote from: 333386 on November 27, 2009, 01:19:42 PM

House Democrats from the Bay Area line up against Obama's expected troop surge in Afghanistan
Mercury News ^ | 11/27/09 | Mike Zapler

Unreal. So now Obama has to go to the GOP to grovel for votes?

What a mess this is going to be.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_13874452

The article doesn't really say that. Realistically, there's not much chance of him not getting his way.

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #2 on:** November 27, 2009, 01:34:29 PM »

Quote from: Al Doggity on November 27, 2009, 01:31:29 PM

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_13874452

The article doesn't really say that. Realistically, there's not much chance of him not getting his way.

Than why would he put himself out there like that and start a firestorm like this if the support is not there in his own party for this?

Al Doggity · « **Reply #3 on:** November 27, 2009, 01:38:34 PM »

It's not like the Bay area is liberal or anything and he might be playing to his constituents.

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #4 on:** November 27, 2009, 01:40:50 PM »

Quote from: Al Doggity on November 27, 2009, 01:38:34 PM

It's not like the Bay area is liberal or anything and he might be playing to his constituents.

If you go on DU or Huff Post, many are really pissed off about this and I am sure many others in the houseprivatly are pissed off as well.

Al Doggity · « **Reply #5 on:** November 27, 2009, 01:51:34 PM »

I couldn't find it posted on Democratic Underground or Huffington Post. Please post a link.

However, if it's such an unpopular decision, why do you think it's a given Obama will have a hard time pushing through Congress?

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #6 on:** November 27, 2009, 01:54:13 PM »

Quote from: Al Doggity on November 27, 2009, 01:51:34 PM

I couldn't find it posted on Democratic Underground or Huffington Post. Please post a link.

However, if it's such an unpopular decision, why do you think it's a given Obama will have a hard time pushing through Congress?

David Obey is already talking about it openly. Look at Blackens' post about the war.

Al Doggity · « **Reply #7 on:** November 27, 2009, 02:06:46 PM »

Everyone is talking about how his proposal has very slim chances.

Can you you post a link to the HuffPo comments? I'm curious to see exactly what they are angry about.

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #8 on:** November 27, 2009, 02:06:53 PM »

Check this out. I usually check out DU just to see whats on their minds over there.

http://www.democraticunderground.com//discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4159533&mesg_id=4160015

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #9 on:** November 27, 2009, 02:16:56 PM »

Al:

Check this out. Good video and comments.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-tv/arianna-discusses-afghani_b_371431.html

Straw Man · « **Reply #10 on:** November 27, 2009, 02:23:51 PM »

Let's face reality

Obama is totally fucked with both these wars (as are the TAX PAYERS who are paying for it and/or borrowing to pay for it)

we went to Iraq to disarm them of WMD's and then it was to get rid of Saddam and then it was to bring them democracy

why are we there now?

what does the US Taxpayer going to get in return?

The same goes for Afghanistan - what is out objective? Those goat fuckers don't want a democracy and they don't want us there.
Maybe a few people want us there but so what. I'm sure there are plenty of shit hole countries where a few people would like us to protect them from the other nutbags in their own country but it's not our problem.

We need to say "Smell You Later" to both these places and pack up and leave if for no other reason than we can't afford to keep paying the bill

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #11 on:** November 27, 2009, 02:31:03 PM »

Quote from: Straw Man on November 27, 2009, 02:23:51 PM

Let's face reality

Obama is totally fucked with both these wars (as are the TAX PAYERS who are paying for it and/or borrowing to pay for it)

we went to Iraq to disarm them of WMD's and then it was to get rid of Saddam and then it was to bring them democracy

why are we there now?

what does the US Taxpayer going to get in return?

The same goes for Afghanistan - what is out objective? Those goat fuckers don't want a democracy and they don't want us there.
Maybe a few people want us there but so what. I'm sure there are plenty of shit hole countries where a few people would like us to protect them from the other nutbags in their own country but it's not our problem.

We need to say "Smell You Later" to both these places and pack up and leave if for no other reason than we can't afford to keep paying the bill

Straw- if we were at least getting the cheap oil we were told was the real reason we went there by a lot of bush CT's, maybe you could make an argument that its paying its own way etc etc. But we are not even getting the damn oil!

As far as Afghanistan goes, I agree with you. Maybe Obama is trying to keep the lid on a explosion occuring in pakistan with all those tribes?

I dont know, but I dont see the compelling reason to stay there.

Al Doggity · « **Reply #12 on:** November 27, 2009, 02:36:16 PM »

Quote from: Straw Man on November 27, 2009, 02:23:51 PM

Let's face reality

Obama is totally fucked with both these wars (as are the TAX PAYERS who are paying for it and/or borrowing to pay for it)

we went to Iraq to disarm them of WMD's and then it was to get rid of Saddam and then it was to bring them democracy

why are we there now?

what does the US Taxpayer going to get in return?

The same goes for Afghanistan - what is out objective? Those goat fuckers don't want a democracy and they don't want us there.
Maybe a few people want us there but so what. I'm sure there are plenty of shit hole countries where a few people would like us to protect them from the other nutbags in their own country but it's not our problem.

We need to say "Smell You Later" to both these places and pack up and leave if for no other reason than we can't afford to keep paying the bill

I actually agree with you.

In response to 333, I saw that episode when it aired. I know that there are a lot of people who don't support the war. But realistically, there's very little chance of this surge not going through. There were a bunch of anit-Obama threads on DU during the campaign, so that's not really something new. AI thought you were referring to something about Honda.

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #13 on:** November 27, 2009, 02:39:37 PM »

Quote from: Al Doggity on November 27, 2009, 02:36:16 PM

I actually agree with you.

In response to 333, I saw that episode when it aired. I know that there are a lot of people who don't support the war. But realistically, there's very little chance of this surge not going through. There were a bunch of anit-Obama threads on DU during the campaign, so that's not really something new. AI thought you were referring to something about Honda.

Im sure he represents the sentiment of a lot of house members. The clip the blacken put on the other thread was also good too.

How are we going to pay for all of this?

Straw Man · « **Reply #14 on:** November 27, 2009, 02:39:49 PM »

Quote from: Al Doggity on November 27, 2009, 02:36:16 PM

I actually agree with you.

In response to 333, I saw that episode when it aired. I know that there are a lot of people who don't support the war. But realistically, there's very little chance of this surge not going through. There were a bunch of anit-Obama threads on DU during the campaign, so that's not really something new. AI thought you were referring to something about Honda.

I agree with your point about a "surge"

I think his hands are tied. He's got to take some action but it's going to rather small and impotent and then when it doesn't work he'll say I tried and now I'm getting out (just my guess)

The people in that country want to live in the stone age and we should just get out and let them do it

Straw Man · « **Reply #15 on:** November 27, 2009, 02:41:39 PM »

Quote from: 333386 on November 27, 2009, 02:39:37 PM

Im sure he represents the sentiment of a lot of house members. The clip the blacken put on the other thread was also good too.

How are we going to pay for all of this?

repeal the Bush Tax Cuts

Have a new WAR TAX specific for each war and adjusted every year to keep it cost neutral (our wars would last 3 days if that were the case).

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #16 on:** November 27, 2009, 02:44:04 PM »

Quote from: Straw Man on November 27, 2009, 02:39:49 PM

I agree with your point about a "surge"

I think his hands are tied. He's got to take some action but it's going to rather small and impotent and then when it doesn't work he'll say I tried and now I'm getting out (just my guess)

The people in that country want to live in the stone age and we should just get out and let them do it

The other issue is half ass measures. It seems to me that we are really just prolonging more of the same.

Skip8282 · « **Reply #17 on:** November 27, 2009, 03:52:15 PM »

Quote from: Straw Man on November 27, 2009, 02:39:49 PM

The people in that country want to live in the stone age and we should just get out and let them do it

We did that before with disastrous consequences. I won't pretend I know the solution, but somehow we have to keep the pressure on AQ. In the begining, we tried with special forces, but it wasn't effective enough and now more and more troops are being pulled in. I'm really starting to think that the only way is to win over the Afghan people but I'm not sure that's practical or achievable.

I think you're right about trying to push democracy on them though. It's like trying to fight an endless tide.

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #18 on:** November 27, 2009, 05:30:02 PM »

Quote from: Skip8282 on November 27, 2009, 03:52:15 PM

We did that before with disastrous consequences. I won't pretend I know the solution, but somehow we have to keep the pressure on AQ. In the begining, we tried with special forces, but it wasn't effective enough and now more and more troops are being pulled in. I'm really starting to think that the only way is to win over the Afghan people but I'm not sure that's practical or achievable.

I think you're right about trying to push democracy on them though. It's like trying to fight an endless tide.

I think I read that is costs a million dollars a year per soldier over there when all is said and done. We just cant afford this anymore. And yes, I did originally support the war, but if we won WW2 in 4 years, there is simpoly no exzcuse for this nonsense anymore.

Skip8282 · « **Reply #19 on:** November 27, 2009, 07:32:54 PM »

Quote from: 333386 on November 27, 2009, 05:30:02 PM

I think I read that is costs a million dollars a year per soldier over there when all is said and done. We just cant afford this anymore. And yes, I did originally support the war, but if we won WW2 in 4 years, there is simpoly no exzcuse for this nonsense anymore.

WWII and Afghanistan - it's apples and oranges. But, value is a factor and we certainly don't seem to be accomplishing our current objectives given what we've invested.