The Democrat Thread

[Rex Kickass]

And I highly doubt we accomplish those objectives. You can't just make an entire nation want a democracy. This is a land of tribes and sects that have lived that way for millennia. Brute force won't change that.

 

Democracy for Afghanistan stopped being an objective when Democracy in Iraq became an objective.

 

A functioning democracy in Afghanistan does not constitute a US victory. A relatively stable state where it is difficult for trans global terror organizations to strengthen and grow does.

 

Since we took our eye off the ball in 2002, there has been no difference between the core of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. I've been hearing a lot about how the Taliban got its resurgence, and it basically did so because Al-Qaeda fighters sought to rejuvenate the movement in tribal areas of Pakistan.

 

Focusing on Afghanistan and ignoring Pakistan pushes the issue into the tribal areas of Pakistan.

Focusing on Pakistan and ignoring Afghanistan pushes the issue back into Pakistan.

 

Right now, Pakistan is focusing on fixing its mess in the tribal areas, since it suddenly got too bloody to use the Taliban/AQ existence as a bargaining chip for them. We can't walk away from Afghanistan now, when there is the first real chance in seven plus years to squeeze, constrict and severely dampen the flames of this trans global terror concern.

[BigSqwert]

Here's a tidbit from today's Greenwald that sums up my disappointment in Obama:

 

So, to recap: we have indefinite detention, military commissions, Blackwater assassination squads, escalation in Afghanistan, extreme secrecy to shield executive lawbreaking from judicial review, renditions, and denials of habeas corpus. These are not policies Obama has failed yet to uproot; they are policies he has explicitly advocated and affirmatively embraced as his own.

[NorthSideSox72]

Here's a tidbit from today's Greenwald that sums up my disappointment in Obama:

Might be a good point if it were true, but most of those aren't, or are done at a much lesser degree than we saw before.

 

[Y2HH]

Might be a good point if it were true, but most of those aren't, or are done at a much lesser degree than we saw before.

 

I only murdered her a little bit, your honor...I shouldn't be held as accountable as that guy who murdered her a lot!

 

I don't care if it's a lesser degree or not, aren't these the very things he said he'd NEVER do? And how are most of those not true?

[NorthSideSox72]

I only murdered her a little bit, your honor...I shouldn't be held as accountable as that guy who murdered her a lot!

 

I don't care if it's a lesser degree or not, aren't these the very things he said he'd NEVER do? And how are most of those not true?

Did I say it was OK? Pretty sure I didn't.

 

Let's break it down...

 

indefinite detention: not at all, in fact we are seeing people released, sent to trial, taken out of Gitmo, etc.

military commissions: still there, but I don't recall anyone saying they shouldn't be.

Blackwater assassination squads: Xe has lost lots and lots of contracts, their presence is decreasing rapidly, as expected, and that's a good thing.

escalation in Afghanistan: This looks like it will be true, but Obama all but said it would be.

extreme secrecy to shield executive lawbreaking from judicial review: Not sure precisely what he is getting at here, so might be true, kind of vague.

renditions: Is this still happening? Probably occasionally, but probably less, however we don't really know.

denials of habeas corpus: Again very broad statement here, I haven't seen it, all I've seen is getting more people in front of judges.

 

So basically, as I said, mostly untrue, or partially true.

 

[BigSqwert]

indefinite detention: not at all, in fact we are seeing people released, sent to trial, taken out of Gitmo, etc.

 

 

What about these 75 guys being held?

 

[NorthSideSox72]

What about these 75 guys being held?

75 of the 200-something? You make my point here quite well - they are making a lot of headway, more than half, and then they'll get to those 75. Did you think they'd just up and release all 250 of them and say "have a nice life"?

 

 

[BigSqwert]

75 of the 200-something? You make my point here quite well - they are making a lot of headway, more than half, and then they'll get to those 75. Did you think they'd just up and release all 250 of them and say "have a nice life"?

Based on the article I linked, I don't get that impression.

[NorthSideSox72]

Based on the article I linked, I don't get that impression.

Might or might not happen, I was focused on what is happening or has happened.

 

My point is, I think its funny that some people had this bizarre idea that Obama would come in and change everything instantly. That is not possible, for any President. He's made progress in every area that was cited in your quote that I responded to. To me, that is success, for a President just one year in.

 

[bmags]

Did I say it was OK? Pretty sure I didn't.

 

Let's break it down...

 

indefinite detention: not at all, in fact we are seeing people released, sent to trial, taken out of Gitmo, etc.Wrong Obama is doing this for SOME GB inmates, not all, he´s left the door open for many to be held indefinitely.

military commissions: still there, but I don't recall anyone saying they shouldn't be.

Considering the joke of justice they were and still failure to reconstitute them as something legitimate, WRONG.

Blackwater assassination squads: Xe has lost lots and lots of contracts, their presence is decreasing rapidly, as expected, and that's a good thing.

Check out the chart of them in AFghanistan, more hired guns than NATO troops

escalation in Afghanistan: This looks like it will be true, but Obama all but said it would be.

extreme secrecy to shield executive lawbreaking from judicial review: Not sure precisely what he is getting at here, so might be true, kind of vague.

What he´s getting at is something he´s documented extensively, OBamas embracement of state secrets, intense fighting to shield any info such as the case in britain, where an english citizen was sent to egypt and tortured, with documents showing CIA involvement. The failure to prosecute anyoen for the illegal tortures happening in Bush 03, despite much less modern countries in Eastern europe even taking those steps.

renditions: Is this still happening? Probably occasionally, but probably less, however we don't really know.Yes Obama specifically left ext. rendition open for a reason.

denials of habeas corpus: Again very broad statement here, I haven't seen it, all I've seen is getting more people in front of judges.

then read about them.

So basically, as I said, mostly untrue, or partially true.

 

see comments in quote

[GoSox05]

We should invade every country. That will for sure stop terrorism.

 

We need more of this. This will work!

 

 

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091207/scahill

 

 

[bmags]

We´re only being partly evil!!! go U.S.! Now Egypt and Iran can only half-laugh when we tell them to support human rights.

[NorthSideSox72]

see comments in quote

The only thing there worth responding to is your extrapolation about secrecy - in that direct vein, I agree.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

We´re only being partly evil!!! go U.S.! Now Egypt and Iran can only half-laugh when we tell them to support human rights.

LOL, you guys are delusional. You have 250 dangerous individuals in custody, you realize the previous President did this in a way that was despicable, so... you do what? Release all 250 back to their countries? What did you expect would happen? Your la-la land desire to have a complete 180 here is not possible in any reality.

 

[BigSqwert]

LOL, you guys are delusional. You have 250 dangerous individuals in custody, you realize the previous President did this in a way that was despicable, so... you do what? Release all 250 back to their countries? What did you expect would happen? Your la-la land desire to have a complete 180 here is not possible in any reality.

We have 250 dangerous individuals based on what evidence? Hearsay?

[bmags]

LOL, you guys are delusional. You have 250 dangerous individuals in custody, you realize the previous President did this in a way that was despicable, so... you do what? Release all 250 back to their countries? What did you expect would happen? Your la-la land desire to have a complete 180 here is not possible in any reality.

 

read some of these cases before you talk out of your ass and then claim we are delusional.

[Balta1701]

indefinite detention: not at all, in fact we are seeing people released, sent to trial, taken out of Gitmo, etc.

Note; I don't think it counts if people are taken out of detention in Gitmo and then disappear into Bagram. (I will give credit for the KSM trial and for getting the Uyghur people out of there).

[NorthSideSox72]

read some of these cases before you talk out of your ass and then claim we are delusional.

I have, though I certainly don't claim to be an expert. Do you?

 

What is delusional is this idea that people seem to have, that Obama could simply "solve" all 250 cases in less than a year. Its not possible.

 

And as for talking out of my ass, I seem to be the only one in this discussion looking at the situation as it stands in reality, not in some world I've built in my head where the US government can be turned on a dime.

 

[JorgeFabregas]

That country, unlike Iraq, is still a haven for the terrorist network that was not only responsible for 9/11, but also for other acts, and will be in the future as well.

Isn't the estimate of Al Qaeda members in Afghanistan somewhere between 30 and 100?

[BigSqwert]

Isn't the estimate of Al Qaeda members in Afghanistan somewhere between 30 and 100?

LOL. For each Al Qaeda member we dedicate 15K troops.

[NorthSideSox72]

Isn't the estimate of Al Qaeda members in Afghanistan somewhere between 30 and 100?

I have not seen a recent estimate of a specific number, so you tell me. Part of the issue here is that many Taliban, AQ and affiliated groups range back and forth between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

 

[bmags]

I have, though I certainly don't claim to be an expert. Do you?

 

What is delusional is this idea that people seem to have, that Obama could simply "solve" all 250 cases in less than a year. Its not possible.

 

And as for talking out of my ass, I seem to be the only one in this discussion looking at the situation as it stands in reality, not in some world I've built in my head where the US government can be turned on a dime.

 

The Bush administration seemed to. The executive branch, through it´s judiciary, has much of the resources to solve these problems. With one declaration, yes, extraordinary rendition ends. Not use state secrets for any business the state does. that ends. Not try and shut down cases in OTHER COUNTRIES that are researching what illegal activities their intelligence agencies did. All within their power. And yes, they can move forward with prosecutions for ALL of these inmates, and the ones that didn´t do anything do not have to be indefinitely detained. All of these is fixable. But they don´t want to fix them, or else they would have.

 

And now, let´s put american soldiers to die for a drug dealer to get his act together and help a country he´ll never have control over.

[JorgeFabregas]

Petraeus agrees that there are no Al Qaeda in Afghanistan as of May:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84N7Vl9wPjY

He says there are affiliate groups, however.

 

McChrystal says there are no major AL Qaeda signs in Afghanistan:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/11/m...a_n_283634.html

 

A US official says that Al Qaeda is based on Pakistan, where there are 300 agents:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/11/...in5613564.shtml

 

"If you debrief senior Taliban guys, they'll tell you that al-Qaeda stole the victory, because they were going to win prior to the World Trade Center attacks," the U.S. military intelligence official said. "The more they connect themselves to al-Qaeda, the less the population's going to welcome them back."

 

The Sec. of State says ousting Al Qaeda is our only goal in Afghanistan:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/n...sting-al-qaeda/

 

Pat Benatar sings Love Is a Battlefield:

[NorthSideSox72]

The Bush administration seemed to. The executive branch, through it´s judiciary, has much of the resources to solve these problems. With one declaration, yes, extraordinary rendition ends. Not use state secrets for any business the state does. that ends. Not try and shut down cases in OTHER COUNTRIES that are researching what illegal activities their intelligence agencies did. All within their power. And yes, they can move forward with prosecutions for ALL of these inmates, and the ones that didn´t do anything do not have to be indefinitely detained. All of these is fixable. But they don´t want to fix them, or else they would have.

 

And now, let´s put american soldiers to die for a drug dealer to get his act together and help a country he´ll never have control over.

Its not nearly as easy as you characterize it. Executive Orders can be overturned by Congress, the judicial system isn't ready for all of them at once, and making a blanket rule about state secret use is incredibly dangerous. The only one you mention here that could even possibly be done as quickly as you'd like is extraordinary renditions, which I think is a difficult subject, and simply turning it off has consequences as well.

 

No, Bush did not do it, at all.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Petraeus agrees that there are no Al Qaeda in Afghanistan as of May:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84N7Vl9wPjY

He says there are affiliate groups, however.

 

McChrystal says there are no major AL Qaeda signs in Afghanistan:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/11/m...a_n_283634.html

 

A US official says that Al Qaeda is based on Pakistan, where there are 300 agents:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/11/...in5613564.shtml

 

 

 

The Sec. of State says ousting Al Qaeda is our only goal in Afghanistan:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/n...sting-al-qaeda/

 

Pat Benatar sings Love Is a Battlefield:

 

LOL, love the Pat Benatar. Nicely done.

 

AQ is not the one and only thing to be concerned about, of course, and you'll not my original post said Jihadists, and I think I said extremists later - AQ is but one of many groups and individuals in that category.

 

The Pakistan part of the issue, however, is very dicey. We cannot invade Pakistan at this point, but what we could do, and I think they are trying to do, is force the hand of the Taliban et al. Make them either fight in Afghanistan, or give it up and run to Pakistan. Then, you push to that border, and force the Pakis to try to do more (which they already are, though not enough). Basically, you squeeze them.