« Heros call-Irena Sendler | Main | Mission in Afghanistan? »
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Define what you want accomplished & then how you think that may be best done. At the moment we're just flailing around with no apparently clear objective. Whether you like Mike Yon or not, particularly his facebook actions, he does deserve consideration for what he wrote in the past regarding Afghanistan and Iraq the differences in country building need to be considered. What worked in Iraq, was in the main because of working with the Iraqi people. It does not necessarily hold true for Afghanistan. Your poll does not address the key issue of just what the heck are we fighting for.
Posted by: Tim | July 19, 2010 at 09:54 PM
Send McCristal back and give him
whatever he needs to finish the job
HIS WAY. No political hacks involved
at all.
j. tyson usmc 3 tank bn. rvn 65/66
Posted by: Joe Tyson | July 20, 2010 at 06:28 AM
McChrystal? Seriously? Obviously you haven't met Gen. Mattis aka (Chaos). Let me tell you this, with Gen. Mattis in charge, things are going to get done.
I served under him, hell of a General plain and simple. I have all the faith in the world in Gen Mattis.
I selected the option, just continue as we are doing as to give Gen. Mattis a chance and see what happens. With a new command comes fresh new ideas. Gen. Mattis will bring the pain, trust me on that.
Posted by: Jay | July 20, 2010 at 08:29 AM
I hate to sound like an idiot, and I don't mean to be disrespectful of our military, but exactly WHAT is the mission in Afghanistan? Bin Laden is no longer the objective, so WHY are we there? WE are being invaded HERE along the southern border, both by Islamist terrorists and Mexican drug cartels. Why aren't OUR troops guarding OUR border?
Posted by: GMA213 | July 20, 2010 at 11:34 AM
Both: Continue on but stick to the plan and withdraw next year. America has a big heart, but we must set a time limit. We can't afford to continue on as our country's economy and citizens fall by the wayside. This war is more than 8 years old now and keep in mind that Bin Laden's strategy was — and is — painfully simple: to repeat his victory in Afghanistan against Russia by driving us into bankruptcy.
God bless our Marines, stay frosty and come home soon. The time is near when the soil under your feet will be American, your 'country tis of thee, sweet land of liberty'
Posted by: Sam | July 20, 2010 at 11:54 AM
Trust the commanders to their job, give them what they need to do the job, troops, equipment, whatever they need to get the job done. I’m sick of the politics. Setting a timeline for withdrawal while prosecuting a war is no different than shooting yourself in the foot right before running a marathon. I've got more but I'll just be preaching to the choir here for the most part. Just let them do their job and bring them home. God knows we need them on our Southern Border.
Posted by: Arrow | July 20, 2010 at 12:30 PM
i know little political,but i choose the number two.my own thought.
Posted by: aika gold | July 25, 2010 at 10:21 PM
Afghanistan Delenda Est! I feel strongly that after the initial operations were completed, that we should have put more convential, light infantry troops (USMC, etc...) in there and carried on with our punitive expedition...somewhere and somehow, we got caught up in "Re" - constructing a Stone Age Caliphate...now, like as or not, we must re-focus and finish the task...Gen Mattis may be our greatest hope yet...obviously, our last 2 "Chief Executives" aren't up to the task in defining our strategic goals...my two cents
Posted by: HM1 (DV/FMF/PJ) Michael E. Collins, USN (Ret) | July 31, 2010 at 02:41 PM