wrote in message
...
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:45:50 -0500, H the K
wrote:

On 11/3/09 4:32 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 12:43:21 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Cheney has been responsible for the deaths of thousand upon
thousands of American, Iraqi, and Afgani lives.

That would not ring so hollow if Obama would stop the wars


How's he supposed to do that? Snap his fingers? It takes a while. We're
certainly drawing down in Iraq. A decision is pending in Afg.



Considering what just happened in Afghanistan in regard to the election
re-run, I'm hoping Obama resists the pressure to send in 40,000 more
troops, or any number resembling 40,000. Afghanistan is not a nation, it
is a collection of territories run by warlords, with a central
government run by a crook. Pakistan is also a failed nation. The
geography in that part of the world is pretty impossible.


True

It's too bad Dubya blew our wad in Iraq. Had our military concentrated
on Afghanistan and the Taliban and al Qaeda these past eight years, we
might be in a much better position now.

Not so true. We would just have more body bags.

We had an early opportunity in Afg. We had world-wide support, and Bush
squandered it. It would have made a difference.

The SU had no such support, and we were actively working against them.


Wasn't anyone paying attention to what happened to the Soviets? They
spared no expense and gave no quarter, using the most ruthless
tactics, and still got their ass kicked.
All "Joe Wilson's war" did was make it a little more costly for them
and challenged their air superiority but they still never really held
much ground, even before we gave Bin Laden the stingers.
At the time, it was their Vietnam. Now it is ours.
Air power will not will a guerilla war.


Wilson's war made it much more costly for them.

It's nothing like VN. Iraq is more like that, but even that is a flawed
analogy.


--
Nom=de=Plume