Ron Paul: End the War in Afghanistan NOW

[redlegphi 0]

Close on the quote, but it was actually Teddy Roosevelt, not FDR.
I agree with you that Iraq has been a large distraction to our foreign policy. However, I also think that once we invaded, we had an obligation to get Iraq back on its feet. I also think it may end up being in our best interests to have helped them get back on their feet, though that's really still too cloudy to call.
As for Afghanistan, I think we were right to go in there and I think we need to keep doing what we're doing now that we're there. Afghanistan wasn't just a country full of people who didn't like us. It was a country full of people that didn't like us who helped another group of people that didn't like us kill nearly 3000 innocent people. That's not a situation we can tolerate. So we've chased the Taliban and AQ into Pakistan. Before we can leave, we need to make sure that we've got the Afghan government and security forces stable enough to prevent them from coming right back over the border and taking back over control. That takes a while, but I think it'll be worth it in the end.

[redlegphi 0]

Almost forgot. In addition to reducing the amount of hard power we're throwing around, we also need to get back to throwing around soft power. We need to work closely with countries who are doing things we like or who are on the fence to get them on our side. We need to make it clear to the countries of the world why it's a good thing to be our friend, instead of just making sure they know it'll suck to be our enemy. Spending money and time on them now could prevent much larger (military) expenditures in the future.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

While the goals in Afghanistan may be laudable, we need to be realistic. This war cannot be won without invading Pakistan, and possibly Iran. The future historical term "The Second Hundred Years War" comes to mind.

[redlegphi 0]

It's not about winning or losing, it's about us achieving our goals. We don't have to completely destroy the Taliban to do that. All we have to do is get the Afghan government and security forces strong enough so that they can keep the Taliban in check without our help (or with less assistance from us). I think that's entirely doable.
As for Pakistan, they appear to be trying to handle things on their side of the border. As long as they continue to do that, there really isn't any reason for us to intervene there.

[Skyrad 0]

I'm going to respond to your post before I read what others have said.
I agree with a lot of what Mr.Paul said in the clip you posted. However, I do not agree with everything he said or all of his conclusions.

War is situational and situations change; I was against the war in Afghanistan in fact it was one of the only times in my life that I went on a march against anything.
But times change. We are now in a war in Afghanistan, will the USA and its allies be there in ten years? Yes most likely if they have the courage and backbone to finish what they started. It would be very foolish to think that when you go to war with an enemy who think in terms of eternity that you can win a war in a decade. Just as foolish would be to think that one can win a ideological war with hardware alone.
' We kill Taliban and we just get more Taliban' yes of course, what does he expect? But the war against the Taliban is not just against the Taliban, its against regional hard men, warloards, drug dealers and international Jihadists. The war in Afghanistan has to be seen in the larger context of the war against twisted people who use Islam as a front to wage a war of terror on innocents. This war is fought not only in Afghanistan but here on the internet, and in countries all around the world. But pull out of Afghanistan and the US will be defeated in the eyes of every Jihadist and sympathisers around the world the US will be humbled and defeated viewed as Russia was when it was chased out of Afghanistan by the Mujahadeen, it will be seen as Allah's judgement against the US.it will fire them up in a way not seen since 9/11 and then the war will be brought back to the US and throughout European cities, a war of terrorism.
In the eyes of the world (outside the US) the USA suffered a humilliating defeat in Vietnam, this would be worse because the VC didn't put on vests and travel to continue the war in the US.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[Skyrad 0]

Quote

If I recall correctly, the Taliban, whom we fight in Afghanistan, are the lovely people who gave shelter and some of the training to the folks who killed more Americans (and many citizens of other nations) on 9/11/2001 than the Japanese did on 12/7/1941.

Nah, you're confusing them with the CIA

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[Skyrad 0]

Quote

While the goals in Afghanistan may be laudable, we need to be realistic. This war cannot be won without invading Pakistan, and possibly Iran. The future historical term "The Second Hundred Years War" comes to mind.

I agree with the sentiment but not with the mothod. The Pakistani forces are hurting the Taliban & their friends; they need support in the form of intteligence and training but what Pakistan does not need is an invasion. Down that road lays disaster. I remember during the 1980's Pakistan was very pro USA, even in the slums you would see American flags flying along side Pakistani ones. After the US sold Pakistan the F16's there was real support for the US. That hasn't entirely gone away but is burried, what needs to be done is reinforce the fact that America is a benevolent nation and that the extremists are the enemy. With the constant bombings against civillian targets in Pakistan that isn't to unlikely a goal to achieve.
Invade Pakistan though and you would confirm the enemy's claims that this is a war against Islam and Muslims globally.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca