Reality check: Who here disagreed when Obama announced his Afghanistan plan pre-election?

[EFerrari]

Is it just me or were there a number of posters who disagreed with that announced plan at the time?

Obama is going to do exactly what he said he would do and, I hope it goes well. But, for the record, who here spoke up against this idea before the election?

[leftstreet]

1. I bitched about it

:patriot:

[SharonAnn]

41. So did I. I didn't think it was the right thing to do, and I still don't.

I'm tired of us using war (military might) as the purported solution to a problem.

[Missy Vixen]

2. My friend's kid leaves next week

This is his second tour of duty in two years. He just came back from a year in Iraq in February.

I am VERY disappointed in President Obama for this, and I do believe I spoke up at the time, too.

[EFerrari]

5. Thoughts, wishes and prayers for him, Miss Vixen.

[aquart]

16. I wish him well.

It may be that we will be able to keep some good, unbelievably poor people alive for longer than they would be if we pulled out right away. (I have a friend who works with them.) I don't know if that's a good enough reason to be there, but I hope it helps.

[librechik]

3. I questioned the wisdom of such a historically disastrous effort

still--why?

It sounds more and more loony.

Nevertheless, Obama just might think he can hook on and make it happen through his own sheer competence.

Too bad there are so many moving parts he can't effect.

[Jeep789]

32. Exactly. Wasn't the USSR failure enough evidence?

Bin Laden learned a lot from it.

[Mari333]

4. against it then, against it now.

almost voted green party but forced myself not to.

[lamp_shade]

6. I didn't.

Neither did many of those disgruntles who ARE disagreeing with him now.

[EFerrari]

7. You've yet to prove that but thanks for being non-responsive.

[MadBadger]

9. When DUers say in response to escalations in Afghanistan: That is not the change I voted for.

Those are the kinds of people that bother me.

[EFerrari]

12. That's reasonable. I'm just talking about the DUers who heard his position

and disagreed with it at the time.

[MadBadger]

14. I know

[Political Heretic]

70. I've yet to hear that in connection to Afgahnistan, but yes that's stupid.

lol

I'm not a single issue voter, so I voted for Obama despite my disagreement with his attitude on War with the hopes that his mind could be changed.

Which is why we aren't going to sit down and shut up now that he's in office, but at the same time we don't have to be dicks about it :D

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. I did. And, I spoke up about BushCo's similar plans before that.

And, I'll continue to speak up against the slaughter in the lost war in Afghanistan.

[datasuspect]

10. i never held any illusions

i always knew he was a politician.

better choice than McCain?

sorry, i don't like being blackmailed into binary choices.

that's why i don't play the game.

they're all "in the pocket," they all will sell us out, and they all are concerned with giving more power to those that have it, more money to those who don't need it, and justice to those who can afford it.

[aquart]

11. Me.

I understood why he didn't feel he could badmouth both wars, but Afghanistan is a no-win and I'm pretty sure I lamented the new beginning of a very bad idea.

[tritsofme]

13. I think a lot of people thought he didn't really mean it.

And that it was just campaign politicking or something.

I'm sure many people opposed to his stated policy on Afghanistan thought, defeat McCain first, worry about Obama's war plans later.

[EFerrari]

15. That's entirely possible. Campaign rhetoric.

But I'm trying to poll DUers who took him at his word.

[scarletwoman]

48. Kind of where I was at. I was hoping it would turn out to be just macho campaign talk. (nt)

[anigbrowl]

50. That would explain a lot, alright...

It's pretty sad to me watching people complain about it and then saying 'well I didn't think he actually meant what he said!' when it's pointed out he held much the same position 18 months ago as he does today. Really, I don't understand what one is voting for, if one doesn't one's preferred candidate to follow through on major policy positions, or at least attempt to do so.

[EFerrari]

51. So, you actually believe what politicians promise?

[ProSense]

17. Here's Obama

March 29, 2009

Obama warns of limit to Afghan troop commitment

WASHINGTON (CNN) — President Barack Obama warned Sunday that while his administration is now increasing U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan, America's military commitment to the troubled Islamic republic would not be open-ended.

"It's not going to be an open-ended commitment of infinite resources. We've just got to make sure that we are focused on achieving what we need," Obama said during an interview on CBS's "Face the Nation."

Friday, Obama announced plans to send another 4,000 troops to Afghanistan, along with hundreds of civilian specialists, such as agricultural experts, educators and engineers. The fresh troops are in addition to another 17,000 the president announced earlier would be sent to Afghanistan, and will be charged with training and building the Afghan army and police force.

"What I will not do is to simply assume that more troops always results in an improved situation," the president said.

"Just because we needed to ramp up from the greatly under-resourced levels that we had doesn't automatically mean that if this strategy doesn't work, that what's needed is even more troops. There may be a point of diminishing returns in terms of troop levels."


Obama also indicated that while previous U.S. pledges to foster a more open, democratic regime in Afghanistan would not be abandoned, they would take a back seat to a mission more "narrowly targeted on defeating al Qaeda."

"The focus over the last seven years I think has been lost," Obama said. "What we want to do is to refocus attention on al Qaeda. We are going to root out their networks, their bases. We are going to make sure that they cannot attack U.S. citizens, U.S. soil, U.S. interests, and our allies' interests around the world."

[EFerrari]

20. You give Obama's view but not your own.

What was yours, ProSense?

[ProSense]

23. End the war, but I have no problem with a strategy to hunt down terrorists.

I listened to Obama during the campaign, and I'm listening to him now. I don't detect any difference between what he's saying now and what he has always said.

[EFerrari]

28. Right. And that wasn't the premise of my OP but thanks

for trying to get us off topic.

[ProSense]

34. My answer to your question is off topic? n/t

[EFerrari]

37. The question is about how you felt about Obama's position pre-election

not in the difference of his positions. So, yeah, it was.

[Sebastian Doyle]

18. I did.

I stopped believing the Bush Crime Family's lies about Afghanistan when they installed a UNOCAL tool as the puppet "President".

I don't believe we have any legitimate purpose there, and history proves we have no chance in Hell of "winning".

[latebloomer]

19. ME!

:hi:

Knew it was a very bad idea, and made me question him as a power of "change."

[xiamiam]

21. i dont approve but what do i know..i also didnt agree when he said he would find and kill obl

but mainly that is because i believe bin laden has been dead for a very long time..

[readmoreoften]

22. I most certainly did. But many fantasized that it was a "brilliant" ruse to win the right.

Some of those folks are now the one's screaming loudest: YOU KNEW, SO WHY'DYA VOTE FOR HIM? I SUPPORT THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN.

I suppose they would be happier if I hadn't've voted for him. I figured I'd give them a chance to be wrong. Next time I'll likely vote for my Dem congressman and abstain on Obama.

[Time for change]

24. I did

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=4128831

Clearly, Barack Obama is tremendously less militaristic and imperialistic than is John McCain. He is far more likely than McCain to give us a foreign policy along the lines of most of his Democratic predecessors since FDR. But will that be good enough? Obama is under the same pressure to appear highly militaristic as his Democratic (and Republican) predecessors have been. That pressure has been reflected, among other ways, in his frequent rhetoric regarding our need to beef up our military presence in Afghanistan. But what good would that do?

To answer that question we need to consider the real lessons of Vietnam and Iraq. If we invade and occupy a country in order to “save” it, we ought to have at least some idea of what that country wants from us. We should recognize that if we kill and torture a fifth of its inhabitants and leave its land and infrastructure in ruins, there is likely to be intensive resistance to our occupation. It is the height of arrogance or ignorance or both to refer to those who resist such an occupation as “terrorists”. What we encountered in both countries was immense hostility to an insensitive and brutal occupying power. This is what the editors of The Nation have to say about escalating our war in Afghanistan:

The United States and its NATO allies are losing the war in Afghanistan not because we have had too few military forces but because our military presence, along with the corruption of the Hamid Karzai government, has gradually turned the Afghan population against us, swelling the ranks of Taliban recruits. American airstrikes have repeatedly killed innocent civilians. Sending thousands of additional troops will not secure a democratic and stable Afghanistan, because the country is not only deeply divided but also fiercely resistant to outside forces. Indeed, more troops may only engender more anti-American resistance and cause groups in neighboring Pakistan to step up their support for the Taliban in order to stop what they see as a US effort to advance US and Indian interests in the region…

Second, securing Afghanistan is not necessary to US security and may actually undermine our goal of defeating Al Qaeda…. American safety thus depends not on eliminating faraway safe havens for Al Qaeda but on common-sense counterterrorist and national security measures – extensive intelligence cooperation, expert police work, effective border control and the occasional surgical use of special forces.

George McGovern succinctly summed up the lesson that we should have learned from Vietnam (and Iraq) when he said “We seem bent on saving the Vietnamese from Ho Chi Minh even if we have to kill them and demolish their country to do it”.

[Jack Sprat]

25. Not only were there a number of posters

who disagreed with Obama over Afghanistan before the war, there were numbers of us who heartily supported Kucinich or any number of other candidates before the election. When it came down to Obama vs McCain, we chose Obama despite his position on the Mideast war. That's nothing remarkable.

If you intend to make us feel guilty for not being sheep, then it doesn't work with me. All I hear from people like you is BAAAAHHHH......BAAAAHHHHH. Yes sir, yes sir, 3 bags full.

[EFerrari]

30. No, I was just trying to see who else spoke up at the time.

:)

[Jack Sprat]

40. My fault. Getting defensive these last few days.

There has been a lot of chastizing of anyone daring to say a negative word about any policy decisions. The surge in Afghanistan and long term plans being approved in the region as a whole are not going to set well with people now, next year, or ever. Recent polling indicates a larger number of people now disagreeing with the initial retaliatory strikes in Afghanistan right after 9/11. I think many of us are completely bummed out over war in general and our national propensity to incite one wherever the CIA finds an opportunity.

[EFerrari]

47. Oh, I hear you. I've been known to get defensive on occasion myself.

lol

Thanks for weighing in. :)

[H2O Man]

26. During the campaign,

I noted that while I strongly supported Obama for president, I believed his policy on Afghanistan was one of the things that progressive/liberal democrats should be prepared to protest.

[EFerrari]

38. Thank you, H2O Man. n/t

[tularetom]

27. Sure I disagreed with him but WTF was I gonna do - vote for McCain?

I was mildly surprised that a student of history like Obama would not realize what a pit of quicksand Afghanistan has always been for outside (particularly western) occupiers.

The invasion and occupation of Afghanistan had a lot more to do with the demise of the Soviet Union than Ronnie ever dreamed of having. I was sure any Democratic candidate would be smart enough not to fall into the same trap that idiot bush did.

I disagreed with his policy then and I still do. But he may have something up his sleeve that I don't yet see. He's pleasantly surpirsed me in the past - it could happen again.

[EFerrari]

36. There's no way an American president could pull us out of two theaters

and not lose face.

Unfortunately, that's not all that will be lost.

[Fumesucker]

29. To speak out against Obama before the election was considered "disruptive" by many here..

We were expected to "toe the line" and "support the candidate"..

I know there were a great many things I wanted to say but kept quiet in the spirit of unity before the election.

What is the point of keeping quiet now? The election is over, Obama won.

[EFerrari]

31. I think a lot of us tried to take the high road. And, maybe that was right

at the time.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

33. I did.

[NeedleCast]

35. I was okay with it

Still am

[TheWatcher]

56. In other news, Water is still Wet.

[uppityperson]

39. I was against increasing troops to do more of the same, pre-election.

However, now, as then, if they were going to do something different, to make a difference, then I am on the fence since it all depends on what is done, and how it is done.

I was against invading Afghanistan in the first place, but hopeful that it would turn out to be helpful for many of the people, esp the women, there. It has been a poor stepchild war, without a whole hell of a lot happening.

I would like to see all the world powers working towards figuring out how to make Afghanistan work better. To get jobs that aren't opium, and education for all, including most importantly the women.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

42. I was against it

I was against the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.

[SammyWinstonJack]

57. Same here. I was against the invasion of Afghanistan.

x(

[MasonJar]

43. I despise war and especially the massive spending on the US military

budget, which precludes financing of more important priorities. However, the Taliban are such despicable, Neanderthal misogynists and al Queda such dangerous, bigoted crazies, that I feel we must extricate Pakistan and Afghanistan of their menace.

[Fire1]

44. Not I. Agreed THEN and agree NOW!

[EFerrari]

46. Thank you for your CAP LOCK!

[scarletwoman]

45. I hated it. I was "hoping" against "hope" that he was just talking tough to appeal to

the Yahoo-Americans in order to get elected, and that once in office he'd take a more sober view and drop the bullshit macho warmongering talk. I mean, he seems to be an intelligent guy -- why would anyone with an ounce of brains think that keeping a foreign occupying army in Afghanistan is anything but the sheerest folly?

Ultimately, what choice was there except to support him, no matter how many misgivings? By election day it was back to the same-old-same-old "lesser of two evils" voting choice. I HAD to vote for Obama to keep McCain and Palin out.

Oh well. (*sigh*)

sw

[slipslidingaway]

49. I do not remember starting a thread, but I probably did kick a few

:)

[Echo In Light]

52. Disliked it enough I voted Nader

[tekisui]

53. I did.

I said he was wrong then, and I think he's wrong now.

[Solly Mack]

54. Never did agree with military action over a criminal act

Didn't on September 10, 2001. Didn't on September 11, 2001. Didn't the day after. Didn't on October 7, 2001. Didn't during the seemingly never-ending election cycle. Don't now. Won't tomorrow.

Some feel it was an act of war. Some don't. I don't.

Nobody has to agree with me. I don't have the need for a feel-good, mutually agreed upon narrative.

[LaydeeBug]

55. right here. I was told not to criticize our nominee. nt

[Djinn]

58. ME

can't understand why anyone would hope he succeeds with entrenching a US puppet government made up of murderous warlords. Apart from it being morally wrong it has a tendency to backfire on you, especially in that region.

What Obama said before the election on furthering US hegemony in the region sucked then and it sucks now.

[EFerrari]

59. It's not at all irrelevant in this context and on this board

but thanks for weighing in.

[Djinn]

61. edited so your post might not make sense to others

but it IS irrelevant whether you want him to succeed, the AFGHANS don't.

[EFerrari]

62. I don't know how to break this to you but my viewpoint is mine

not yours and not that of "the Afghans". Thanks.

[Djinn]

63. did I say it wasn't your viewpoint

but the people you put in quotes are people and the fact that Americans will not force their government to end it's imperial wars (and 30 years of disaster meddling) is killing them. I found your "hope it succeeds" comment more than a little flippant, and I'm ALSO allowed to have an opinion

[EFerrari]

65. You certainly are. You are not, however, entitled to "have your opinion"

all over me. The next time you need to project all over someone, please pick a more deserving object.

[Djinn]

68. what?

how have I had anything all over you? or made any attempt to do that (even if I did know what that meant) what on earth are you talking about?

How is it projecting (are you sure you know what that means) to say it's is irrelevant whether YOU want the puppet government to succeed? It is a fact - if the Afghans do NOT want a complicit puppet government made up of murderous warlords and rapists and will continue to fight it regardless of how many troops you throw there.

Again what on earth am I "projecting"

[Irishonly]

60. Me

I disagreed then and still do. That being said I wasn't surprised when he announced his plans. He said what he would do and has followed through.

[L0oniX]

64. I bitched about it back then and I will still bitch about it now.

War = fail. Bring the troops home and close all our bases and use the money for our countries needs. The war will never succeed, it is only going to enrich the MIC and those who have stock in the MICs. BTW WTF is Osama?

[EFerrari]

66. There's an unreal number of our vets attempting suicide each month --

1800, iirc. And that's only the people that we KNOW about because they somehow managed to get into the VA system. This has to stop.

[Two Americas]

67. always opposed it n/t

...

[Political Heretic]

69. I most definitely did.