Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

I think you know exactly what I meant by leaving Afghanistan. nm

Posted By: Lurker on 2006-05-11
In Reply to: I am sure the troops in Afghanistan would be interested to know they are not there. - ?

nm.


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Obama/Afghanistan

Obama stated many, MANY times during his campaign that we need to focus on Afghanistan and that he would send more troops there if he was elected president.  He said it was a mistake to put our resources into Iraq when bin Laden most likely was hiding out in the Afghanistan/Pakistan border somewhere.


I am sure the troops in Afghanistan would be interested to know they are not there.
,
That might have worked, if all the terrorists were in Afghanistan. nm
.
CNN video coming out of Afghanistan should

the human cost of war and consequences of our foreign policies.  It is too bad that it took an election campaign to prompt the media to abandon previous censorship of these images.  If we can wage wars and perpetuate policies that bring this kind of unfathomable misery and human suffering down on village civilains(who up until now have carried the monolithic media moniker of "collateral damage") then I believe it is the media's job to report this side of the story and present these images every single time they occur.  


The Vietnam war was the first televised war.  The images that visited our living rooms nightly during the evening newcast compelled Americans with a conscience to oppose that war and call for its end.  Better late than never, I guess, but who knows what kind death and destruction could have been prevented on both sides of the conflict if we had access to these images all along?  


As a postscript observation, the images show us exactly why the tradition why diplomacy matters.  Some of us have been following this side of the story for years now.  For those voters, the war and the absence of EFFECTIVE international diplomacy and alliance building strategies are every bit as focal as the national issue of the economy.   


It will just transfer to Afghanistan. Obama has already said...
we need more troops in Afghanistan. McCain agrees. Obama also says now that to just pull everyone out of Iraq would not be the thing to do. McCain agrees. So as far as the war goes...we are still going to be fighting in both places as we gradually withdraw...and those withdrawn from Iraq are going to be sent to Afghanistan. That is what they are both saying.
Grim Appraisal of War in Afghanistan

National Security Team Delivers Grim Appraisal of War in Afghanistan



by: Craig Whitlock, The Washington Post  


Munich - President Obama's national security team gave a dire assessment Sunday of the war in Afghanistan, with one official calling it a challenge "much tougher than Iraq" and others hinting that it could take years to turn around.


    U.S. officials said more troops were urgently needed, both from America and its NATO allies, to counter the increasing strength of the Taliban and warlords opposed to the central government in Kabul. They also said new approaches were needed to untangle an inefficient and conflicting array of civilian-aid programs that have wasted billions of dollars.


    "NATO's future is on the line here," Richard C. Holbrooke, the State Department's special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, told attendees at an international security conference here. "It's going to be a long, difficult struggle.... In my view, it's going to be much tougher than Iraq."


    Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, head of the U.S. Central Command, said the war in Afghanistan "has deteriorated markedly in the past two years" and warned of a "downward spiral of security."


    In addition to more combat troops, Petraeus called for "a surge in civilian capacity" to help rebuild villages, train local police forces, tackle corruption in the Afghan government and reduce the country's thriving opium trade. He also suggested that the odds of success were low, given that foreign military powers have historically met with defeat in Afghanistan.


    "Afghanistan has been known over the years as the graveyard of empires," he said. "We cannot take that history lightly."


    The White House is conducting a strategic review of the war in Afghanistan and says it will unveil the results before NATO holds a 60th-anniversary summit in early April.


    Obama administration officials have said they expect to send 30,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, bringing the total U.S. deployment there to about 66,000. U.S. allies have a combined 32,000 troops in Afghanistan operating under NATO command. NATO officials have pressed European members of the alliance to send more, but few countries have been willing.


    Germany, which has 3,500 troops in Afghanistan, the third most of any country, has questioned the need for more combat forces. Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung said more attention should be paid to training Afghan forces and to reconstruction projects.


    "We won't win with military alone," he said at the conference. "There will be no development without security. But without development, we won't have security, either."


    The debate over troops has led to a split within NATO. Jaap DE Hoop Scheffer, NATO's secretary general, told conference attendees on Saturday that European members of the alliance needed to do more of the "heavy lifting" in Afghanistan.


    British Defense Secretary John Hutton openly disagreed with his German counterpart, saying the need for more combat troops was the highest priority in Afghanistan. Reconstruction efforts, he said, would fail if the Taliban remains strong.


    "We kid ourselves if we imagine that other contributions right now are of the same value, because they're not," he said. Britain has 8,900 troops in Afghanistan and has said it will probably send more.


    Afghan President Hamid Karzai said his country had made large strides since the U.S.-led military invasion in 2001. He said Afghanistan was home to a thriving free press, 17 universities, and schools for thousands of girls who had been barred by the Taliban from receiving an education. In 2001, he said, Afghanistan had no paved roads; now it has 2,500 miles of new highways.


    U.S. officials said one of the thorniest problems in Afghanistan is its flourishing drug trade, which accounts for an estimated 90 percent of the world's heroin supply. But Karzai, who faces reelection in August, dismissed portrayals of Afghanistan as being run by drug barons.


    "Yes, we produce poppies. Yes, we are insecure because of that," he said. "Are we a 'narco-state,' as we've been called the past few years? No, we are not."


    Karzai said the only way to bring stability to Afghanistan is to eventually negotiate a deal with the Taliban. He also blamed Afghanistan's slow recovery on a lack of coordination among donor countries.


    U.S. and European officials agreed that poor coordination is a major obstacle. "I've never seen anything remotely resembling the mess we've inherited," Holbrooke said.


    But some officials suggested the Afghan government was also responsible.


    Brent Scowcroft, national security adviser to President George H.W. Bush, cited a fumbled attempt by the United Nations last year to name Paddy Ashdown, a British diplomat, as the overseer of international aid projects in Afghanistan. Ashdown's appointment was torpedoed by Karzai, who saw it as an infringement on Afghanistan's sovereignty.


    Holbrooke replied that the Obama administration would revisit the idea of a development czar with Afghan officials. "The Paddy Ashdown fiasco - and there's no other word for it - really set back the international community."


    Last week, in an open letter to Holbrooke published in the Times of London, Ashdown expressed some sympathy for "poor President Karzai" and said NATO members were chasing different goals in Afghanistan, depending on where their forces operate.


    "The British think Afghanistan is Helmand, the Canadians think it's Kandahar, the Dutch think it's Uruzgan, the Germans think it's the Panjshir valley and the U.S. thinks it's chasing Osama bin Laden." He added, "Someone needs to bash heads together out there and if anyone can, you can."


    Also Sunday, Vice President Biden held talks in Munich with Russian Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov, a day after Biden said the White House wanted to "press the reset button" in its relations with the Kremlin. Ivanov praised Biden's speech, telling reporters that it was "very positive," and adding: "It is obvious the new U.S. administration has a very strong desire to change."


No, leaving God out is what has got us
and it is not *time for us to renew our diplomatic initiatives to this end and that we do EVERYTHING HUMANLY POSSIBLE.* It is not HUMANLY possible, it is time for us to renew our FAITH and put our trust in God. It is time for us to stop listening to voices such as yours where we have gone along with and accepted your views for too long. Evidently, you have chosen to leave God out, but do not tell us to any longer.
I'm leaving too...sm
I have never seen a place filled with such immature adults in my life.  You can't discuss anything here without someone screaming about what side you are on and calling you names.  Ridiculous!  This has made for very poor reading and a very low quality discussion.  I've seen a lot of poorly written, unorginal views from both sides.  We inject our opinions and pet peeves into public view, disguise it as objectivity and add a link or 2 for credibility.  No ones mind is ever changed.  This is a discussion site, not a contest for arguments.  Mostly I see a boring rehash of prior debates and then some baby starts name calling because someone disagreed.  I'm too old for the playground.  Have fun everyone!  
They know we are leaving...Isn't this what

Iraq is a Middle Eastern country, Afghanistan NOT..sm
So Obama said correctly, 'I will bring troops home from the Middle East (Iraq) and send more troops to
Afghanistan.
And that is what he is doing, NO LIES HERE.
They forgot to mention what it was for & Afghanistan was part of the trip-a lot for 1 wk

Indeed, in a February 17 article, the ANSA English Media Service reported (accessed from the Nexis database): "Since arriving in Italy on Saturday, Pelosi has visited the American air base at Aviano in northeast Italy and the American military cemetery in Florence and is due at the NATO Joint Forces Command in Naples Wednesday." Further, a February 19 press release issued by Pelosi's office stated: "Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Congressional delegation today were briefed by U.S. Admiral Mark Fitzgerald, Commander of U.S. Naval Forces Europe and Africa, and Commander of Allied Joint Force Command Naples. Admiral Fitzgerald and his NATO staff provided information on NATO activities in the Balkans, the ongoing training of Iraqi Security Forces, and operations against pirates off the coast of Somalia." The release further stated: "On Saturday, Speaker Pelosi and the Congressional delegation visited Aviano Air Base where the Speaker pinned the Bronze Star Medal on Technical Sergeant Phoebus Lazaridis for extraordinary service in Afghanistan. The delegation paid their respects to the more than 4,400 American World War II soldiers buried at the Florence American Cemetery on the outskirts of Florence on Sunday."


On February 21, Pelosi released a statement about her trip to Afghanistan, in which she said, "For the past two days, I have led an eight Member House delegation to Afghanistan to visit U.S. troops," during which the delegation "met with U.S. military leaders, and the U.S. Diplomatic team in Kabul to better assess the best course of action to further our national security interests in preparation for the completion of President Obama's strategic review of the Afghanistan policy" and "met with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who is sending his own advisors to Washington as part of the review process."


Obama did say he would send more troops to Afghanistan while he was campaigning - nm
x
She is not leaving the baby. sm
This is either another Carl Rove bait and switch or McCain is truly demented.  As someone else said, "does not pass the smell test". 
Why are lots of CEO, CFO's leaving
Medquist CFO quitting.  Symantec CEO retiring.  Yahoo CEO quit.  There are some other companies too.  Why?  Because they already know how good they have it and decide to take what is left of the their money and run?
You keep say you're leaving...
I'm tired of you sniping at everyone who doesn't goose-step in tune to your liberal whack job dogma.

If complaining about an inexperienced, unproven, egotistical noob is UN-AMERICAN, then what do you call all the Bush-bashing y'all have been doing ad naueusm?

Perhaps if you can't take it, you should stop shoveling it out. Huh?
Obama on his decision to deploy additional 17,000 troops in Afghanistan..sm
"There is no more solemn duty as President than the decision to deploy our armed forces into harm's way," Obama said. "I do it today mindful that the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan demands urgent attention and swift action."


P.S. The ONLY reason I'm leaving is because you and your friends have

hounded ME off.  It has nothing to do with my convictions.  It has everything to do with my extreme DISTASTE for someone like YOU who does nothing but ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK, who treats her fellow human beings like S**T, who lies every chance she gets and justifies everything she does by saying her Lord Jesus Christ forgives you.  You believe that Jesus, in your skewed mind, has given you the green light to do as many UN-Jesuslike things as you care to do, to be as mean and nasty and hateful as you can possibly be to other people, and all is forgiven, in your twisted mind.


Why on EARTH would I want to stay here and subject myself to the likes of YOU?  I can read what INTELLIGENT Conservatives have to say on another site, and I don't have to get POUNDED INTO THE GROUND BY any of them in order to do it.


You -- especially YOU -- are the worst ever on this entire board.  All you EVER do is project hatred, and then you go on to talk about Jesus.  Why don't you try to be more LIKE Jesus?  Jesus wouldn't ever treat people with such hatred and malice as you do.


As far as your friends leaving, I don't believe that for one nanosecond.  They're still here.  They just invented themselves with new monikers, but the same hatred and rage is there, and so are they.


Goodbye, MT.  I'll miss you.  I had a dental abscess last year.  I miss that, too.


McCain leaving the hall
I don't know why he left without glad-handing his "friends."  I do think it cooked his goose with a lot of people.  How rude.  I doubt Obama cared any more about the "friends' than McCain does but at least he put forth the effort to act like they were "friends"  and he WAS a gentleman, even obviously angry at times, i.e. when he didn't get an opportunity to rebutt something McCain said.  It was of so little substance I don't even remember what McCain said.
No wonder people are leaving the left in droves. nm
/
If it's been so nice, why do you continue to come here? Didn't you say you were leaving?

And didn't you say you were going to Iraq, as well?  I think you'd be an incredible asset to Bush in Iraq.  If you were there, we could win the war immediately.  All you have to do is spread your word to the enemy.  After five minutes of listening to your skewed logic, they'd turn the weapons on themselves.  Masters of surprise terror attacks that they are, this would be a wonderful surprise tactic to use on them.


It doesn't work here any more, though.  The only thing that would surprise some of us is if you actually told the truth about something.


Afghanistan - war on Al Quaeda and Taliban; Iraqi FREEDOM - kill Saddam Hussein
Two different wars based on entirely different premises.........
You're leaving out some pertinent additional info.
Bush's individual net worth doesn't tell the whole story. That can be deparmentalized and pared down at will to appear rather modest as movers and shakers go. But remember, he is one unit in a family dynasty that includes connections to Saudi royal fortunes and the global military industrial cartel by way of black-op daddy Bush and the infamous Carlyle Group, not to mention the money line on his blue blood mother's side. If the shrub needed 600 million for a sure-fire venture do you think he'd have any trouble coming up with the cash? I think not. It'd be there for him. It always has been before. So it's deceptive to simply point at his tax return - that's what the public is dutifully allowed to see. He's got a nearly limitless financial backing at his disposal, simply by looking at the fact of who he's related to and who they do business with. This is true of many of the ultra-wealthy and particularly ultra-powerful families who consider themselves nation-shapers, and he is definitely a member of one of them. Modest wealth, this is not.


Or how about leaving your wife who is sick and dying of cancer to run for President
There! Don't sling mud unless your prepared to get it back in the face.

Palin has a loving and caring family that is backing her and taking care of things - and I doubt very much she is "leaving" her baby. Sheesh! Your trying to make it sound like she's dropping her child off on a cold street corner with nobody to take care of them. If your going to go there then you might as well say and what father would leave his 2 young children to run for President.
I agree people should leaving their freakin QA'ing out of the board
x
Tina Fey said if McCain wins she is leaving the earth. Glad she won't have to. nm
nm
Yeah, yeah, yeah. You've said before that you're leaving, but you and your goons can't sta

What I meant was....
why can we not protect the unborn children first? Are they not as deserving as homeless, poor, etc.? That was my point. I do not see, nor do I ever expect to see, liberals exhorting us to take care of unborn children as a part of taking care of the least among us. I have seen Conservatives exhort to take care of the least among us, including unborn children. Conservatives just want to put a limit on it, and regulate it a little more closely (as far as welfare, etc.). I don't have a problem with that either. And I give privately to Christian organizations that DO take care of the least among us. It does not have to go through the government to be effective. I guess that is where we differ.
What I meant was...

He should have said "no comment" first thing when he addressed the American people - when he said the whole "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" thing.  At that point he was not obligated to comment, and he shouldn't have.


I am not a "Clintonite" or whatever you said.  I just think he was a more intelligent person than Bush.  Although I despise Bush, I really do like his wife Laura.  I think she seems like a very caring, very genuine person.


I do NOT plan to vote for Hilary.  I plan to vote for Barack Obama if he makes it that far.  I think he could really improve the health insurance crisis in America.  I never hear Republican candidates talking about making healthcare more affordable, and therefore I will probably vote for a Democrat.


I meant
In the last paragraph I meant to write posting "false" information, not "fall".
Not quite sure if it is a pub or a dem who meant DNC....lol nm
nm
Sorry that was meant for OP nm
x
I think you meant that some
or maybe even many Obama supporters are educated. Just like McCain supporters.
Meant I wonder......
.
Her's what I meant
Not true meant that I'm not a rabid Republican (I'm a conservative).  That's why the RINOS need to get the heck out of the RNC.  They've ruined it.  Also, they're frauds.
yes, that is what I meant
I have no idea why I typed Otis Small?? Good night GP
Not what I meant.

What I meant was that I hope he has the opportunity to serve out the full four years and/or that this election isn't contested for some reason resulting in the involvement of the Supreme Court.  For example, I see the GOP is filing a lawsuit against Obama, alleging he used campaign funds when he visited his grandmother for the last time.


I hope we can all get along and not be as divided as we have been for the past few years, and I hope that nothing happens that would cause such division. 


Again, I thought the post you wrote was very classy.  Thanks. 


I meant...
As O's father is Muslim and O's mother Christian, they had to decide how they were going to raise O.
That what I meant.
I am roman catholic.
What? Oh, you must have MEANT to say
nm
I only meant where did it come from?
WHY the OP posted it

but aren't you classy

obviously he meant that he wants
to win over the moderates and fight the terrorists with his strategy.
I believe what you meant to say was
the hard working class of people that this entire country was founded on is going by the wayside, instead being replaced by an invasion of another country and their people to add to the already overwhelmed small population of people that work to pay for those who have spent generation after generation mooching off of the working class.

If not being lazy makes me self righteous, then so be it.

That is not what I meant.

Out of all the earmarks in the bill 60% were dems and 40% were pubs.  I didn't mean the whole bill was 100% earmarks. 


Meant what I put
knew such smart people here (I) could just get ......

still going at it, thanks for the snippy response.
I meant to say..
We already have laws in place that work to protect people from being harmed or killed.
You never meant a socialist Jew! sm
What do you think they come up to you and say hi, I am a socialist Jew.  Do you know Noam Chomsky?  How about David Horowitz's parents?  How about the Rosenbergs?  Shall I go on.  Do you wonder why almost all the actors blacklisted in Hollywood way back when were almost all JEWS?!? 
I meant... NOW shoe...nm
But I know you'll stay because you need us to validate yourself. You're not at your best unless you are in your leftist/lib basher mode, eh. Keep it up, and people like you will expose the right brotherhood for what it's worth.
That isn't what he meant but there is no use debating you.

Maybe logical thought escapes you.


Wow, did I say Liar. I really meant sm
deluded liar.  Yes, that's much better.  
It was not meant as an attack, I
that it might not be the wisest idea to go to a *liberal* board and call yourself something that runs counter to their belief system, and then expect to be treated like a long-lost son.

Further, I said the Democrats frustrate me to no end, and it is precisely for the very reasons you stated. They were too afraid of being branded as **unpatriotic** and **unsupportive of the troops**, blah,blah,blah. In their defense, however, sometimes they simply have not had the votes to over ride the president's agenda. Thank goodness for people like Murtha.

I apologize if you felt I was attacking you, as I think we have found some common ground. I think the other thing that happens is that sometimes words, if not chosen extra carefully, can come off sounding what they are not.
I meant I felt like it was an act....
I believe it was theatrics. The Hollywood reference was meant to say they would be proud of the acting job...nothing to do with all of Hollywood being amoral, though I believe a good portion of it is. But that could be said for other areas as well. I am also aware of staunch conservatives in Hollywood and I think God for them.
I never meant to infer that
W should NOT have gone to VT. If that is how you read it, then you misread or I mistyped. Of course he should have been there; it is just that there was SO much publicity about this tragedy and it does not appear (to me) that there is much of that for the American soldiers in Iraq; nothing on a national level.

I also never said that conservatives did not care about the war. What I meant was that in a country where only 50% of eligible voters turn out it is not unusual that so many Americans are disconnected from this war. I remember hearing people talk about WWII and seeing movies (not valid verification but nonetheless) and it seemed that the entire country was aligned behind **the cause.** I don't see that now. I bet you the family farm that I could go down to one of the city high schools or middle schools and ask a group of teenagers what they know about this war, what do they think we should or should not do and I feel certain I would get pretty much blank stares. That is what I mean about Americans not caring...maybe that is not the correct term. Most Americans are not engaged and don't feel a connection or much of an allegiance to **the cause.** No one sacrifices anything for this war but then that is one definition of secularism I have heard **Secularism is a life without sacrifice.

You see staying in Iraq as creating some kind of democracy where the people will live a better life. I don't. I see that the longer we stay, the more people die, both Americans and Iraqis. Altho I did not agree with this war, or any war for that matter, the possibility that Iraq could have been changed for the better did probably exist 4 years ago, but not now. I really believe our being there will make no difference, aside from more death, than us not being there. It is not cut and run to me. It is cut your losses and in my opinion that would be loss of life.

As far as Clinton and Somalia; I don't know much about the details of that situation. He was concerned about bin Laden; a lot of people were for a long time. I don't think this country would have supported a war in the middle east before 9/11 happened and that played a part as well. There is quite enough blame to go around for not foreseeing (sp) 9/11.