Closing In On Defeat

The war in Afghanistan is polling badly, so we assume its status as the central front in the war on terror is in danger of imminent downgrade to something else - Bush's other mistake, presumably.

WASHINGTON — American support for the war in Afghanistan has ebbed to a new low, as attacks on U.S. troops and their allies have hit record levels and commanders are pleading for reinforcements, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll shows.

In the poll taken Saturday and Sunday, 42% of respondents said the United States made "a mistake" in sending military forces to Afghanistan, up from 30% in February. That's the highest mark since the poll first asked the question in November 2001 when the U.S.-led invasion ousted the Taliban government that sheltered al-Qaeda terrorists responsible for the 9/11 terror attacks.

In January 2002, 6% of respondents called the war "a mistake."

Those who said the war is going well dropped to 38% in the latest poll, the lowest percentage since that question was asked in September 2006.

The idea of a Democrat-led Washington attempting to rally public suport for a war would be comic if it weren't tragic.

Comments

[clarice]

I'd laugh if the consequences for the troops and the country weren't so serious.

[kim]

I remember the old Afghani woman who said the prayers to prepare her for death before trekking overland to vote in the first election several years ago.
======================================

[matt]

when there is no one out there building support for our troops, there is no wonder support is dropping. Obama is talking down Afghanistan the same way he did the economy.

Then again, Americans also have very poor memories....

[Pofarmer]

So, how many still think it's important to "Get Bin Laden" 'cause, that surely ain't gonna happen if we don't have any troops in the whole region.

[narciso]

So 42/38 that's within the margin of era, that seems exceedingly off, where's the other 20%. Of course when you have CIC and his wingman who seem unconcerned about fighting the war, go so far as attack the leadership under Karzai, offer to undermine him by negotiating with 'moderate Taliban' what else can be expected. Meanwhile the Publication that in Dr. Strangelove fashion told us to accept Salafism, two weeks ago, argues for censorship one week ago, offers another beaut from one of those querrelsome
expat Yousafsai; Taliban chic in London, LUNed below

[clarice]

Afghanistan was useful to them only for their "over there argument"..Now that we're in Afghanistan the left will find some other place we ought to be in that isn't where we are...

[DebinNC]

The commander in Afghanistan asked for 30,000 more troops months ago, and BO okayed 17,000. CiC Obama is a Black Hawk Downer in waiting. Since our troops are at best mere political pawns to BO, I hope they are removed from harm's way asap.

[Pofarmer]

the left will find some other place we ought to be in that isn't where we are...

Okinawa? South Carolina?

[narciso]

Yet according to Surber, he's employing those 'evil merc' from Blackwater in Iraq, the folks who have become the real villain in '24, not the West African warlords.

[Danube of Thought]

It's gonna haunt this amateur big-time before he's done.

[matt]

What is scary is that this man has less engagement with the military than any democrat politician in living memory. Dukakis can't hold a candle to Obama's complete disengagement from from national defense.

and another thing, let's just hang Somali pirates from the yardarm like the good old days. I'll bet that quiets things down very fast over there.

[joaquin]

Anyone that thinks Obama is serious about Afghanistan is nuts. This guy has the spine of an amoeba.

[kim]

Hey, where's his promise to invade Pakistan? What a pitiful, pusillanimous, ignoramus. He's blowing it for world peace everywhere simply because his leftist beliefs despise any hint of American hegemony. What this stupid child doesn't understand is that the world needs civil order insured by a good cop on the beat. This good cop has been the United States, backed by a variable coalition of the world's functioning democracies. With his mistaken belief in the ability of his forked tongue to tame the thugs of the world he is leading us into foreign policy chaos. Show me the certificate, and the sooner the better.
====================================

[William Teach]

Surrender now, Dorothy, er, Obamateur!

I think we are going back to Bin Laden's paper tiger America again.

[kim]

Dang, it's irritating that a comment shows up on the sidebar before it can be accessed through the thread. Awaiting William's Wisdom....
============================

[kim]

Worth the wait. Note that China isn't yapping about 'Paper Tiger' anymore. They are just expanding the world's second largest navy. They read Mahan with understanding.
==========================================

[glasater]

Perhaps Zero wants to destroy America and the world at the same time so that he can remake all in his image.

[Walter]

The idea of a Democrat-led Washington attempting to rally public suport for a war would be comic if it weren't tragic.

Hmmm. Wilson. Obama's mentor, FDR. Truman. JFK/Johnson.

What could be the connection between those names?

Until George W. Bush*, Democrats started long-lasting major wars. Republicans (usually) supported them from the sidelines. For all that people hang Vietnam around Nixon's neck, he was elected on a promise to end that police action.

---------
* Yes, I know. But the Spanish-American war was two centuries back. And like the first Gulf war, hostilities only lasted a few months.

Lincoln? Hey, they attacked us on our soil and occupied almost half the country. Not really his fault. Self-defense, really.

[narciso]

It was the Phillipine war, and that was going on, just a century ago. The problem is that unlike all those figures, this crew really has a deep seated contempt for those who fight
these wars and those who support them,

[Walter]

narciso,

21 - 19 = 2. Yes, it's facile and misleading. But numerically valid.

::Waving to HnR:: I'm still hoping I can steal away for a bit more time to respond to your email. Soon, soon.

[matt]

the message should really "Which Hegemons do you prefer?" Chinese? Russian? or American?

[narciso]

Right, ask the Jews, Ukrainian Kulaks, and the Chechens in that order, about Russian intentions. Ask the Uighurs and the Tibetans
about China, see the answer you get. Interestingly Amir Taheri, had the same thoughts about US abandonment of allies under Obama as we had; must be tuning to the same wavelength.

[Donald]

Um some might argue that there was a deal in place that any state could leave the union (Look it up). It was a voluntary arrangement. Lincoln violated that agreement. Some might argue that Lincoln was a monster who caused the death and destruction and untold horror in this country. Some might argue this. Not me so much, but the civil war should never have happened, and it was Lincoln's fault.

[kim]

Well, it was a War of Northern Aggression. A great example of the winners writing history. I wonder how the Peace Between the States would have worked out. I doubt that slavery would have survived the Nineteenth Century, anyway. There are better ways to put people to work. And had the South successfully seceded, the two nations might well have worked out like Canada and we do now. Canada, after all, was settled with a lot of the non-secessionists from our 'Civil War' with England.
==========================================