Skip to main content

The Democratic National Committee is officially giving President Obama a push to accelerate the withdrawal from Afghanistan. The DNC on Saturday adopted a resolution that makes explicit what the administration has left typically opaque.

The resolution adopted Saturday states that "the Democratic Party supports prioritizing job creation and a swift withdrawal of U.S. armed forces and military contractors in Afghanistan which must include a significant and sizable reduction no later than July 2011."

The resolution cites the length of the war (nearly ten years), the cost (more than $100 billion per year), the lack of public support (72 percent want to "speed up the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan") and the argument that the conflict does not require a military solution.

"The passage of my resolution places the Democratic Party squarely on the side of American people who overwhelmingly support a swift withdrawal from Afghanistan, beginning with a significant and sizeable reduction in U.S. troop levels by no later than July of this year," said Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), who submitted the resolution. Other submitters were DNC Vice Chairs Donna Brazile and Rep. Mike Honda (D-Calif.) and DNC Secretary Alice Germond.

The administration, of course, has only said it plans to begin withdrawing forces in July of this year. It has said nothing about the numbers of troops it will begin withdrawing. It has said nothing about the pace of withdrawal. It has said that it hopes to hand over security by 2014, but even that doesn't necessitate that all troops be withdrawn. And as more and more contractors flood into Pakistan, it's also not clear that the war won't be more and more contracted out, still at great taxpayer expense, but without official U.S. troops—which makes the DNC resolution's wording on withdrawal of military contractors all the more telling. The administration hasn't said whether or not it expects still to be spending billions on contractors after 2014.

The president often makes clear that his plans depend on the development of a stable Afghan government. That, of course, remains a chimerical goal, as the current Afghan government continually and blithely thumbs its nose at the president's repeated admonishments about corruption and reform. Which continues:

President Hamid Karzai managed Sunday to avoid the election of a strong opposition politician to the post of speaker of Afghanistan's parliament, after his supporters and critics had wrangled over the position for a month.

The West had hoped that the new parliament could provide a vital check on Karzai, with the Afghan leader increasingly distanced from his international backers, who regard him as power-grabbing and unpredictable.

Karzai had feared that the West would push parliament to impeach him, according to several politicians who know the Afghan president well, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue. The speaker position would be key to any such move. Western officials often blame many of the failures of the mission in Afghanistan on Karzai.

Meanwhile, the systematic corruption of those to whom we dish out billions to manage and prosecute the war also continues:

A new report blasts the U.S. government for wasting tens of billions of dollars in Iraq and Afghanistan by relying too much on contractors and doing too little to monitor their performance.

The interim report from the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan points out that contractors in the war zones sometimes have exceeded the number of military personnel. Numbering 200,000, contractors now roughly match the military force.

"Misspent dollars run into the tens of billions," the report said. The 64-page report was released Thursday and will be followed up next week with a hearing on how to improve contractor accountability.

This hasn't prevented the administration from tripling the number of private security contractors operating in Afghanistan since June of 2009. All to no avail. Another new report suggests that this has been one of the deadliest months for Afghan civilians killed by NATO airstrikes. Oops. Afghan civilians continue to suffer for nothing. But at least someone, channeling a legendary wise man, is making sense:

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates warned Friday that the U.S. should avoid future land wars like those it has fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, but should not forget the difficult lessons it has learned from those conflicts.

"In my opinion, any future Defense secretary who advises the president to again send a big American land army into Asia or into the Middle East or Africa should 'have his head examined,' as General MacArthur so delicately put it," Gates said in a speech to cadets at West Point.

Perhaps someone should ask Donald Rumsfeld about that.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  The DNC is being cynical (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rogereaton, cybrestrike, Blizzard

    They know Obama is not going to withdrawal.  This is political theater.

    •  As for this (0+ / 0-)

      "the conflict does not require a military solution."

      Simply fantasy.

      •  Time for NATO and the UN to do their jobs? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        rebel ga

        We need to bill them for the work, or just LEAVE.  Consumer rebated import duties are a good way (most straight forward way)  to bill the rest of the world for this "relief" effort if that is what it is.  How about the contractors working for the UN as funded by a worldwide tax on financial transactions and a percentage of GDP?  America can't afford this shit any longer.

        •  I think just leaving... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          The Dead Man, JesseCW, rebel ga

 a good strategy for NATO and the US. If NGO's want to stay and can be protected, give the country back to the Taliban who want it soooo badly. Let an organic movement of Aghanis take over like the Middle East.

          Whatever Bush started is not working out. What a surprise!

          "Always remember this: They fight with money and we resist with time, and they’re going to run out of money before we run out of time." -Utah Philips

          by TerryDarc on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:29:28 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Our "military solution" is the conflict. (5+ / 0-)
      •  Drop food, not bombs (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        aliasalias, rebel ga, Johnny Q, Blizzard

        If we were concerned about ending terrorism and not perpetuating obscene profits for military contractors we would be making sure everyone had enough to eat.  As shown in the rest of the Middle East, the people have the ability to rise up against internal dictators.

        "My body of workers will show the world that the problems of mankind can be solved. Through the process of sharing and just redistribution, the needs of all can be met. This growing group will show men that there is but little need for the suffering of so many, for the hunger, disease and anguish  which beset mankind."
        - Messages from Maitreya the Christ

      •  it doesn't matter what is "required" (0+ / 0-)

        There is no military solution.

        Will the revolution be easier if we HR each other a lot?

        by JesseCW on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 12:42:53 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Sums up our whole system. (7+ / 0-)
      This is political theater
    •  seems like everything's (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      shaharazade, cybrestrike, Blizzard

      political theater with the Dems and Obama right now, with 2012 looming and all. Or am I being cynical myself?

    •  I am starting to wonder if everything (5+ / 0-)

       is not just political theater.  Why are the only real critics of GOP hackery John Stewart and Bill Maher?  Why do Democrats not speak in plain english to the American people as these two do?  Perhaps it all is nothing more than a shell game; fake outrage here, a sternly worded letter there, all to keep the two sides fighting against each other while the Congress does the bidding of the super wealthy and corporations.  When was the last time that our Congress passed a bill that actually helped the average American and hurt corporations?  They have passed some that helped both, but that is the best we can get.  The deck is stacked against us and until more progressives are elected, we are going to be on the short end of the stick no matter how many petitions we sign.
             This is a golden opportunity for the national Democratic Party to make a stand.  It is US versus them, people versus the corporations, right versus wrong, an opportunity to make sure of a Democratic majority for years to come.  But just like in the first two years of the Obama administration, not enough Democrats will stnad up and make a principled stand for what is right.  Constant failure to do so can only lead to concluding that Democratic leadership is not really that different from the corporatists that rule the GOP.  I'm gonna keep fighting, cause there is no other option.  It would just be nice for once for our so called national party leaders to take a political stand on principle and stop playing political theater.

      " why is it that a 3% tax increase for the wealthy is considered "socialism" and an 8% wage cut for the middle class is "doing your part." MartyM on Sun Feb 27, 2011

      by rogereaton on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:22:51 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  To be sure, we've all wanted more FDR like (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        aliasalias, rogereaton

        rhetoric.  Still, if I may simply add, it was the New Deal policies, not the principled stand, that we admire FDR for.

      •  Cont. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        rogereaton, tb mare

        I though the election of Obama was the beginning of a new center/left domestic consensus or hegemony in the US.  Seeing the degree to which the Obama Administration and our national party leadership has shied away from directly taking on Reaganism (neoliberalism)  I am reexamaning my previous position.  

        To wit: I see things in terms of eras of domestic hegemonies.  I see FDR ushering in an center/left dominated era that lasted from 1932-1968, where a conservative Eisenhaur expanded social security.  I see Reagan brining about a center/right era from 1980-2008 where a liberal Clinton gave us NAFTA.   The period between, with Nixon, Ford and Carter, represents an interregnum between these domestic hegemonies.  

        Just as Nixon was a strong right-winger, he still hung onto large parts of the old order: the establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency or in Nixon's (failed) proposal to replace the welfare system with a guaranteed annual income by way of a negative income tax, normalization of diplomatic relations with China and his détente with the Soviet Union. Even Noam Chomsky has called Nixon, "in many respects the last liberal president."

        It looks like Obama is holding onto the old order in a similar way.  If I am correct here, that means we are in a interregnum between the neoliberalism of the past and the a a revived social democratism of the future.

        •  Excellent insight.... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Plubius, tb mare

          I hope you are correct.  I can see the actions of the GOP in Wisconsin being the tipping point of that movement.  I hope a majority of Americans wake up and see what voting GOP really means.

          " why is it that a 3% tax increase for the wealthy is considered "socialism" and an 8% wage cut for the middle class is "doing your part." MartyM on Sun Feb 27, 2011

          by rogereaton on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:55:43 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Thanks for your kind words (0+ / 0-)

            It seems unlikely that the change the we can believe in will come from Obama.  He is very much administering from the center/left and that is kind of the problem. The center, in the WA consensus to be sure,  was shifted so much to the right during the past 31 years...

            Perhaps delving more into the analysis will provide us some clues:, the previous two changes in domestic hegemony occurred differently. Whereas FDR hit the ground running after Hoover's defeat in '32,  it took 12 years between Nixon's victory in '68 and Reagan's in 1980.  [I should point out, though, that while FDR and the Dems really started talking the talk right away, it actually took until 1936 for FDR to really defeat the old order with the whole Supreme Court 'packing' battle...]  Perhaps the level of dislocation and suffering of the Depression is the primary reason for this rapid change from the old to the new at that time.  That is to say, many Americans today have not suffered enough to realize there is a class war and they are loosing...

            If that is the case, it will take a bit longer for a real change to occur.  Regardless, I think it inevitable. While I am highly resistant to making such pronouncements, the demographic change occurring as we speak makes it all but inevitable.  The question is when.

            Seeing as how it took twelve years to bring in Reagan and seeing has how the economic and societal malais of our time is broadly similar as that of the late 1960s,  it is probable that the it will take a similar amount of time this go round.

            So, it may go like this:

            Obama gets re-elected in 2012.  

            The House stays Republican. The Senate ... ?

            A Republican get elected in 2016.  

            2018, Dems shift largely left of center.

            2020, President Grayson.  


      •  Right on!! and lets not forget the enabling MSM (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        provides  to that "political theater."

  •  About time.....................nt (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Churchill, Predictor, Kinak

    Maybe some Democrats would like to get re-elected in 2010.

    Humankind cannot stand too much reality. T.S. Eliot

    by blueoasis on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:04:25 AM PST

    •  Oooops. (6+ / 0-)

      Meant 2012 obviously.
      Just thinking at the same time what happened in 2010.

      Humankind cannot stand too much reality. T.S. Eliot

      by blueoasis on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:08:08 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  too late for 2010, may be too late for 2012 (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        80% of SUCCESS
        is JUST
        showing up

        Christine Taylor Green, RIP
        Gun Control?

        by Churchill on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:20:27 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I think we as a people (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        are at a point where rhetoric and empty theater are not going to work.  People want and need a government and a party that will represent them, fight for them. It's all smoke an mirrors and at a time when people are really hurting globally and here. The machine politics as usual,  sponsored by the by-partisan owners of the place,  are not going to get most people 'enthusiastic' about voting. They would have to deliver results, take actions for the general welfare. that is at odds with their agenda so they will just continue to parse (lie) and  spin and give bait and switch another shot. Hard to do under our present state of the union.  

  •  Maybe it's just me (13+ / 0-)

    or maybe I'm thinking like a military parent, but this just seems like a no-brainer to me.  And long overdue.

    "Ancora Imparo." ("I am still learning.") - Michelangelo, Age 87

    by Dreaming of Better Days on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:04:29 AM PST

    •  You're so calm and reasonable about it (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dreaming of Better Days

      Perhaps it was my atrocious upbringing, perhaps it was the experiences of young adulthood, but I cannot see how the statement long overdue so calmly issues forth regarding this horrifying insanity.

      Arrrrrgghhhh, damn them all to hell, why does it take long to stop the screaming regression?  Gets me spitting, fighting mad. How did we get so mean and stupid?  I'm so lost on all of this again, I'm useless to anyone politically, it's way beyond burnt.  We're supposed to be building a country and a Party with this....this....evil bloodletting lying shit in the background all the time?

      Really?  You're truly fucking serious.  Okay, well I'm with my short fiction for a while, 'cause I'm exhausted with being bewildered at all the pain and death.

      •  Feckless adj. 1) Weak, ineffective (0+ / 0-)

        2) careless, irresponsible
        3) characterized by Democratic congresspersons

        "Always remember this: They fight with money and we resist with time, and they’re going to run out of money before we run out of time." -Utah Philips

        by TerryDarc on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:33:07 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  {{{paradox}}}. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        paradox, filby, Blizzard

        I ♥ you so.  

        Sweetheart, we all exhibit our feelings differently.  I'm more stoic.  But when I lose it, I become a woman possessed and state when I want to say badly.  It becomes a torrent of profanity and accusation littered with raw emotion.  

        While my son was in Sadre City, I learned I had to weigh what I said and how I said it.  His superiors called my home every month to give me the shiny, happy update of all the good that was being done over there and what a good soldier my son was.  

        I knew different.  My son IMed me nearly every day, unless there was a death in his unit - then everything was locked down.  

        I lived for hearing that "knocking-on-the-door" sound prompt telling me he was online and wanted to talk, always weighing his words because everything going out and coming in was monitored.  I had to watch how I said what I said because it was his ass that would've gotten handed to him if I said the wrong thing to him online or to his superiors by phone during their monthly updates.

        You're fine.  Rage on, sweet man.  I feel you.  I just convey it differently.


        "Ancora Imparo." ("I am still learning.") - Michelangelo, Age 87

        by Dreaming of Better Days on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:38:44 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  How about Iraq too? (14+ / 0-)

    What will we have gained have after 10 years+ and trillions of dollars spent on these wars? Nothing.

  •  Rumsfeld never watched "The Princess Bride" (14+ / 0-)

    Or else he'd know the oldest mistake in the book is never to get involved in a land war in Asia.

  •  Way overdue (8+ / 0-)

    the Democratic Party should have spoke out against this a long, long time ago.  Al-Queda's not there.  Osama bin Laden isn't there, only the Taliban, we will never win it. Should have worked on a drawn down in January of 2009.  We're coming on ten years of war there, and for what reason?

  •  The wars will end about the same time (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Churchill, cybrestrike

    as wealth disparity in this country equalizes.  

    We have a long wait.

  •  America will never fix our problems until... (11+ / 0-)

    we start manufacturing something other than GINNED UP WARS and EXCUSES FOR WALL STREET CRIMES!!

  •  GTFO (6+ / 0-)

    that is all

    ... just floating by ...

    by cumulo on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:12:02 AM PST

  •  we SHOULD withdrawal ALL troops this year (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Thomas Twinnings, The Dead Man

    and I mean all contractors, too. This stalemate has went on for 10 years with NO improvement.  It's actually getting worse.

    80% of SUCCESS
    is JUST
    showing up

    Christine Taylor Green, RIP
    Gun Control?

    by Churchill on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:17:52 AM PST

  •  GET US OUT NOW!!! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ex Real Republican, rebel ga

    Quite frankly, we cannot afford it any longer!

    "If you don't do it this year you'll be another year older when you do"-Warren Miller

    by fishgirl26 on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:18:41 AM PST

  •  Will Obama go against the Village Wisdom? (4+ / 0-)

    Stay tuned.  At least the DNC notices the oncoming freight train.

    •  Yes, he is a firm believer that we have "interests (0+ / 0-)

      abroad" and that we should defend then militarily.

      That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

      by enhydra lutris on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:50:53 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  If this is all (0+ / 0-)

      they got to stop it it's going to just roll right over them, like the fierce urgency of now that is barreling down on us all. This time around idle talk won't work. they had the purse strings and the political will of the people to stop these wars but they don't have any intention of doing so.  They need to have endless war to keep the MIC feed and our rights restricted, as we need an enemy other then them.  

  •  Why the doublespeak? (9+ / 0-)

    "Military contractors?"  Call them what they are: mercenaries.

    Framing fucking matters.  If we can learn nothing else from the Republicans, let's learn that.  Death panels.  Death tax.  Welfare queen.  Special rights.  

    Call these bottom feeders what they are.  They are mercenaries.  They kill for pay on behalf of parties too decadent, cowardly, or unpopular to field their own soldiers.  The phrase military contractor cloaks them in the honor of the actual US military and the men and women who serve their country - whether the country is right or wrong, in war or in peace.

    "...the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die." RIP Senator. We miss you.

    by libdevil on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:22:09 AM PST

    •  And it wastes billions. (0+ / 0-)

      See this storyat TPM.

      Link to the original report.

      Of course, both the commission and TPM call them contractors.  About what you expect from the government, but I'd hope TPM could use less euphemistic language.

      "...the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die." RIP Senator. We miss you.

      by libdevil on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:45:11 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  To think (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell, Lost Left Coaster

    We will pull out, the Taliban will be back in power and we will have wasted countless lives and a trillion dollars for nothing. Whether you are for or against the war, that is how it will end.  I just wish that there was some other way, another option.

    Die energie der Welt ist constant; die Entropie der welt strebt einem Maximum zu. - Rudolf Clausius, 1865

    by xgy2 on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:22:27 AM PST

    •  Me too as the Afghan people (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rebel ga, xgy2

      deserve far better than the Taliban but also far better than this endless war.

    •  No one country can hold down the fort there (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rebel ga

      And no one faction in Afghanistan can hold it together, not without external support.

      Other than the British - after a couple of tries - no one's had much luck in the Stan since Alexander.

      The Pakistanis have come closest - with the Taliban. I think they want a second go at it.

    •  This is a war that has already been worth nothing. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      aliasalias, Thomas Twinnings

      Go back centuries, and we'll see what the rest of the Church of the Savvy could not see: no one's ever brought what would be considered 'civilized government' to Afghanistan.

      The United States just joined the USSR, Great Britain, the Huns, the Persians, etc to utterly and completely fail at planting their tattered flag in the ungovernable, corrupt, and tribal Afghanistan.

      They failed to understand one fact: Afghanistan is not a country beyond the boundaries of Kabul Province. It's a place where a group of tribes decided to live where no one would bother them. It's been that way for as long as they remember, and they're well-versed in repelling outsiders.

      And what is 'Afghanistan' now? A primitive narco-state run by a corrupt Karzai and his band of cronies, living off of our tax dollars. And with them, brave soldiers who risk life and limb protecting a system that can never be modernized under any way we recognize as modernized. And on top of that, we've a cabal of the Military Industrial Complex in concert with a mercenary army that answers to no one sucking away even more tax dollars in the form of no-bid contracts.

      It's high time to GTFO, but our current government is willingly incapable of doing so.

      "Deals come after we fight for ideals -- let's do that first." -Rep. Anthony Weiner

      by cybrestrike on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:44:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  known as gamblers' fallacy. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lost Left Coaster

      That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

      by enhydra lutris on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:52:01 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  it's their Country BTW and if they can kick (0+ / 0-)

      the Soviet Union out, and the USA, they can get rid of the Taliban if they choose.

      without the ants the rainforest dies

      by aliasalias on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 12:02:41 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Feckless Dems Take Forever (0+ / 0-)

    To do what they should have done lone ago. All we get in Afghanistan is our asses shot off.

    I would be satisfied if the Dems (now touting jobs, jobs, jobs) could just employ the 94000 GI's in Afghanistan when they come home.

    "Always remember this: They fight with money and we resist with time, and they’re going to run out of money before we run out of time." -Utah Philips

    by TerryDarc on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:26:47 AM PST

  •  After all, he got elected on that one speech (0+ / 0-)

    that was anti war, and which apparently, struck people as so powerful they overlooked a lackluster state senate record of "present," selling his district out to the nuclear interests who were donating to his campaign, and fiscal plan that was borderline republican.

    I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use - Galileo

    by hamm on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:29:58 AM PST

  •  I'm about to go to Afghanistan as a contractor (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Not one of the spooky ones though, as an infrastructure contractor. When I was in the military I was deployed to Saudi Arabia and later to Iraq as a power plant operator, and I'll be doing the same thing on a military base as a contractor.

    But the pseudo-militaristic contractors, the "security professional" types, those are bad. If infrastructure contractors like myself are going to these places (and there have been infrastructure contractors at every deployed location I ever went in the military) to free up bodies for the military mission, then the military should actually be doing the military mission.

    Still, I won't pretend that this exactly jives with my personal politics, or that I'm morally super-comfortable with it, but it will pay off my wife's nursing school student loans and pay for me to go to college to be a paralegal (and for part of a law degree) without having to go into the indentured servitude of student loans.

    "I am for Socialism because I am for humanity. We have been cursed with the reign of gold long enough" -Eugene V Debs

    by jabbausaf on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:30:38 AM PST

    •  I regret that we couldn't retain you (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      METAL TREK, Blizzard

      with compensation worthy of your experience and skills.

      Be safe Jabba.

      •  Isn't that the truth. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Kimberley, aliasalias, melpomene1

        What about our infrastructure?  You'd think we could be employing these people here, but nooo.

      •  I tried to stay in (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        I would have re-enlisted in 2007, but they didn't have enough spaces in my career field and (despite months of efforts on my part to push the paperwork through) they wouldn't let me retrain into another field. Plus I have a mild disability from a foot injury (related to a prior deployment) that basically means I can't run fast or far, which means no military for me.

        So instead there's the civilian contractor world, eager and ready for someone with my unique experience. I had been doing tech support for a credit bureau and collections agency, which also grated on my politics but paid a lot less. Got the call from the contractor, talked to my wife, figured that since we didn't have a kid yet this would be the ideal time for it.

        "I am for Socialism because I am for humanity. We have been cursed with the reign of gold long enough" -Eugene V Debs

        by jabbausaf on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 09:49:50 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Do what you gotta do (0+ / 0-)

      and be safe.

      "The pie shall be cut in half and each man shall receive...death. I'll eat the pie." Homer as Solomon

      by Lost Left Coaster on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:56:27 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Superpower Collapse Soup (0+ / 0-)

    Just add Afghanistan. Serves misery.


    ... just floating by ...

    by cumulo on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 08:50:50 AM PST

  •  Kabuki theater: Obama & DNC war stands (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Current level of US troops still in Iraq: 47,000
    Current level of private military contractors still in Iraq: est. 10,000

    But the most important stat:

    Chances of Obama pulling troops out of Iraq or Afghanistan before he leaves office:  0%

  •  Dear Obama and Dem BFFs: (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis, shaharazade

    Warmongers aren't going to vote for you anyways, so quit burning our money and get the hell out of there!

  •  That's a deficit reduction plan (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis, shaharazade

    I can get behind!  

    Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. --John F. Kennedy

    by Beelzebud on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 10:36:39 AM PST

    •  If so, I'll back it 100% (0+ / 0-)

      I just want to hear the DNC say this loud and clear.

      Maybe just maybe the Dems figured out that they need their base back.  I can't think of a better way than ending the Afghanistan occupation which the base hates.

      "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Rianne Eisler

      by noofsh on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 12:42:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  If we withdrew rapidly from (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis

    Afghanistan, what you would see is a quick incorporation of the Taliban into Karzai's government, which is exactly what is going to happen anyway.  

    Of course if the Taliban is not satisfied to practice their extremism among themselves, any time they want the Taliban will oust Karzai and re-institute their own brand of despotism.  And if that happens, there's not a damn thing we can do about it.  

    Does anyone seriously think that once we have withdrawn we will go back because Karzai was ousted by the Taliban?

    The only way to stop the Taliban is to kill every one of them and all the future Taliban who might be born.  Of course, that is not going to happen.  It's not possible.

    It's time for us to face reality and quit beating ourselves to death for a goal that no one - including Barack Obama - can explain in credible terms how we can reach it.

    In my opinion we should tell Karzai that we will begin withdrawing (substantially) in July, and we will be fully withdrawn by next July, giving him over a year to either form a coalition government or kiss his ass goodbye.  

    I realize even that timetable is not acceptable to many here, but it's the reality of the situation.  Even my idea may be pure fantasy.

    Or we can resume this conversation ten years, billions of dollars, and thousands of lives from now.

    The community of fools might be small if it were not such an accomplished proselytizer.

    by ZedMont on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 10:44:02 AM PST

  •  Interesting (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis

    I'll refrain from buying into this just yet.  If so, it represents a major shift in policy.

    "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Rianne Eisler

    by noofsh on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 12:41:11 PM PST

  •  They're scared of us. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis

    Hence the attempts to pander.


    Will the revolution be easier if we HR each other a lot?

    by JesseCW on Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 12:46:18 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site