Comments for http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html en-gb 30 Wed 06 May 2015 14:19:57 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=99#comment107 "Why is it that some Christians seem to think that it's okay to hate and sometimes kill Muslims simply because some Muslims seem to hate and sometimes kill non-Muslims?"never figured that out. it is like the guy in Afghanistan that said "if they come here we will kill them all" to which the "Christian broadcast network"s commentators response was "we should invade ,they threaten to kill us if we go there."No Christianity is not int he mix at all. Tino I have watched the Christian shows in the USA. they are scary to unbelievers.Again I ask what were you before becoming Atheist, or were you brought up that way? Wed 02 Dec 2009 15:03:01 GMT+1 Tino http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=98#comment106 "you live in america . have you not heard that there is a debate on evolution that even the vatican doesn't subscribe to anymore. one that says the world is 3000 odd tears old and evolution never happened and don't you dare teach my kids about any other way."What is your point? Yes they are stupid. No, they are not killing thousands of people who say evolution happened. I mean, I disagree with them but as long as they aren't going crazy who cares?#94 _marko"1) Muslims in general are NOT morally equivalent to Christians in general2) Muslims in general ARE morally equivalent to Christians in general3) Can't answer because..?"Probably 3. I mean they have different ideas of right and wrong I don't think there is a universal 'morality' standard. To me, personally, Islam is wrong. Sharia is terrible. The impossibility of reform is terrible. Death for apostates is terrible. But in their eyes, these are good things."Christians have a very very bloody track record.Unfortunately, most folks don't like looking in the mirror in order to discover the blood we have on our own clothing, the planks in our eyes, whatever."They certainly do...in the past. There aren't even anti-abortion murders in any substantial numbers anymore. Last one was may 09, but between then and 1998 there were ZERO. The only religion causing global problems on a massive scale - EVERYWHERE they can be found - is Islam. It is that simple stop pretending the two religions do everything the same. Tue 01 Dec 2009 18:09:29 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=97#comment105 195 Philly ;)good on ya. I'll take some Turkey Hash if you got it. Leave the turkey out even better;) Tue 01 Dec 2009 17:44:48 GMT+1 Philly-Mom http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=96#comment104 50. At 5:51pm on 30 Nov 2009, fluffytale wrote:"I would add that the Lord resistance army are Christians. that there are many christain acts of terrorism against Gay people around the world."Oi Vey - Agreed. Christians have a very very bloody track record. Unfortunately, most folks don't like looking in the mirror in order to discover the blood we have on our own clothing, the planks in our eyes, whatever.You know - the theological mud-slinging that some folks can throw is rather disappointing.Why is it that some Christians seem to think that it's okay to hate and sometimes kill Muslims simply because some Muslims seem to hate and sometimes kill non-Muslims? The lack of logic is amazing. The lack of tolerance is overwhelming. I need to go to my happy-place now. I think I'll eat some left-overs... Tue 01 Dec 2009 17:27:14 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=95#comment103 but you mention them guys over there. it is easier than looking in your own back yard. Tue 01 Dec 2009 17:24:32 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=94#comment102 "The biggest reason, I believe, is that Christians - excepting a small number of Protestant denominations - do not take the Bible as the literal word of God." certain Protestants give more credence to the old testament than the new as an excuse to spout hate (I claim) but really . It did take a fair amount of time for the Vatican to accept the basis of evolution and say "yea but god started it"(which i won't argue with or for). and them that do take it literally are the same ones that say the "end times are coming" and they are not a small number in the USA. you belittle your own countries efforts in fundamentalism.Did you hear on the coral ridge hour. I linked them last week I think www.crm.com. well funded and all over the states.Christian and VERY literal.Small number of Protestant denominations but ones that just had the pres and VP as members;)then there is "the family"http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106115324As to throwing out the healthcare bill because it includes abortion , an American catholic organisation bishops issue, but not religioon having an effect on americans. Ii as one who will get left out for sure see that as religious fundamentalists ruining my nation. "terrorising" my nation, indeed. Saying "suffer if you do not do it the way Our God says" Tue 01 Dec 2009 17:23:59 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=93#comment101 92 faeyth those points about the conduct of the war , the troop levels set by the politics of underestimation.the body armour, vehicle choice and procurement were very real issues as to why nothing went well.a lot of it seems to have been so some could profit directly and others indirectly. Tue 01 Dec 2009 17:13:07 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=92#comment100 " I happen to love Mid-Eastern cuisine for example "I eat curry so I ain't racist. OMGwatch it tino they might know what you think and add some extra's Tue 01 Dec 2009 17:10:48 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=91#comment99 Tino as to set in stone. young boys can have a part removed (older to) for religious reasons. that was not advisable in much of europe where it was seen as a sign that one was jewish or muslim .Not traditional in the catholic church.nor other christians. So at time those people even if not practising were marked for their religion. and could little escape it .What is more many people assume that a person is of a certain religion because of how they look.or how they dress even if they have it totally wrong.none of which takes away from the basic FACT (gherky where are you. licking wounds or reading up all them condemnations by muslims;) that not all people of any religion are fanatics and no religion seems to have a monopoly on having strange weird folk follow them occasionally. and even stranger ones preaching for them. have you seen who was responsible for Katrina recently;) Tue 01 Dec 2009 17:07:28 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=90#comment98 These people are prisoners of their own narratives..9 yrs ago, they were given the simplest form of narratives by their leaders and spread with crussade like PR campaign by their media, which sidelined every person who disagreed with this narrative that islam, the religon is the cause of everything..from oppossing occupation to opposing an invasion..they are now unable to think outside of this little box...The idea that if it wasnt for islam, neither the palestinians nor the iraqis or the afghans would have resisted any form of occupation is simply absurd.. Tue 01 Dec 2009 16:57:57 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=89#comment97 90 "Doesn't even make sense. Religion had no relevance in this (on our side anyway, certainly it does for the Muslims)."GEORGE BUSH and TONY BLAIR nothing to do with religion. my you are as unperceptive or receptive as anyone we have had on here.and do not understand the meaning of religion that the rest saw but as an american you are so used to Christian fundamentalists you miss. I'm not saying you are one but you have been inoculated to it. perchance were you always an atheist? Tue 01 Dec 2009 16:53:52 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=88#comment96 Tino"Yes, the Bible has bad portions but Islam hold their holy texts as the *literal* word of God and is therefore less open to change.you live in america . have you not heard that there is a debate on evolution that even the vatican doesn't subscribe to anymore. one that says the world is 3000 odd tears old and evolution never happened and don't you dare teach my kids about any other way.There is a debate over abortion and gay rights (not related(obviously);) (though I am a firm believer t hat gay couples can raise kids as well as any straight couple. and should be allowed to by law in all states that prevent it.) that is a result of peoples literal readings of these ancient texts.There was the lack of response to the situation and the vilification of aids sufferers as a result of christian "leanings".There was dear Mother Theresa saying no to condoms.(PS I won't go into her contribution which on the face of it was positive and with love. she tried her best and did a lot and yes it would be better for abstention from sex (from her POV)but the reality is it didn't help CHECK the spread of HIV)73 Curious george"Which is why liberals and Europe especially have ZERO understanding of people of faith from any religion.""Liberals " living in america meet people every day with as much religious zeal as any jihadist.So a capital ZERO is really inappropriate. Tue 01 Dec 2009 16:50:12 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=87#comment95 the new fascists. "being against all of a religion is not racist"what do they say to the common use of the word anti semiteism.it seems that being "anti semetic" is racist. but not being anti Muslim.Sure muslims include all ethnic groups and can convert. so can th e catholics. in one hand the arabs are racist for targeting catholics but were not racist in targeting muslims. the contradictions of the new fascist argument are abundant. Tue 01 Dec 2009 16:36:50 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=87#comment94 Doesn't even make sense. Religion had no relevance in this (on our side anyway, certainly it does for the Muslims).------------------------------------------------------------------------Your side is full of christian warriors..they believe in christiniaty. Its a war of the beliefs..just because you dont believe in G-d, doesnt mean that you dont have any beliefs...the neo-atheists have their own agenda, and right now, their agenda is being fullfilled by the christian wariars.. Tue 01 Dec 2009 15:30:59 GMT+1 _marko http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=86#comment93 To Tino #72RE: "Do you believe that Muslims in general are not morally equivalent to Christians in general? Why?"Perhaps I wasn't clear, I am asking a question, not saying what you're saying.1) Muslims in general are NOT morally equivalent to Christians in general2) Muslims in general ARE morally equivalent to Christians in general3) Can't answer because..?which? Tue 01 Dec 2009 15:27:26 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=85#comment92 Maybe this is a matter of symantics..."bad" can mean different things."Bad" may mean - having undesirable or negative qualities, or below average in quality or performance."Bad" may also mean - characterized by wickedness or immorality, or fraudulence.You may choose to see the policy decisions in Afghanistan as Bad#2, but I think Bad#1 is more accurant and appropriate to the situation that NATO faces. -------------------------------------------------------------------------Then change the Nato faces...if you think that bad2 is the case...Only then you can confirm that its actually Bad 1..However, to a tom ,dick and harry person in afghanistan and who suffers because of american's repeated mistakes, the so called mistakes are diliberately done because the intentions are not good..When you occupy a country claiming to set them free and then support someone who doesnt have any credibility, then all your claims are and will be interpreted as just lies...Just because you can have liars as your leaders doesnt not mean that you have to impose that on the afghans..they would rather have an honest dictator, than a dishonest democratically elected leader forced on to them from thousands of miles away.. Tue 01 Dec 2009 15:26:45 GMT+1 faeyth http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=84#comment91 I think there is plenty blame for the leaders of Congress during Bush Administration,who at the time controlled the money,remember the whole body armor thing? Bush should never have played favorites with his picks for positions and should have kept business out of war affairs and other government positions remember Katrina.Decisions should have been made based of effective and intelligent choices not whether you like people or not or if their family gave your family money(Black Water)and the Devos family.Both Bush and Cheney gave contracts to people connected with their family and business interests.They were poor a President and VP President,once you take an oath you need to do what's best for all Americans not just your friends and business interests that is why not just Both Iraq and Afghanistan were a train wreak but everything they touched from Katrina to Banks and the entire Economy. Tue 01 Dec 2009 13:38:53 GMT+1 David http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=83#comment90 I don't read some posts (honestly) because that could result inBad Karma ..yours (Bienen..) was nice. Tue 01 Dec 2009 03:36:35 GMT+1 Tino http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=82#comment89 "Anyone who claims to be atheist these days and then did not oppose bush and blair, two christian warriors in the same is pathetic, and not atheist"Doesn't even make sense. Religion had no relevance in this (on our side anyway, certainly it does for the Muslims). Tue 01 Dec 2009 02:11:42 GMT+1 Al from BR http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=81#comment88 88:"systematic bad decisions are the first sign of bad intentions."Maybe this is a matter of symantics..."bad" can mean different things."Bad" may mean - having undesirable or negative qualities, or below average in quality or performance."Bad" may also mean - characterized by wickedness or immorality, or fraudulence.You may choose to see the policy decisions in Afghanistan as Bad#2, but I think Bad#1 is more accurant and appropriate to the situation that NATO faces. Tue 01 Dec 2009 01:39:19 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=80#comment87 You, your, your, yourselves, your, you...You, sir, do not know what you are talking about.What are our lies? Describe them, provide legitimate examples to back your claims.If our intentions are not good, then what are they? Explain how they are bad. Remember, bad decisions are not the same thing as bad intentions.------------------------------------------------------------------------If you had been this forceful when your leaders were lying to you, i would not be saying, me, my or mine...People who believe in their leaders lie, should be careful telling others that they dont know what they are talking about...You lost the previlage to say that..If I was punked the way you are by your leaders, I would have died of shame..or atleast kept quiet in shame..systematic bad decisions are the first sign of bad intentions..and for past 9 yrs now, we and you have been hearing about the bad decisions... Tue 01 Dec 2009 00:59:44 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=79#comment86 Yes, President Karzai is supported, but it is hardly because he is corrupt; that's nonsensical, especially when it was obvious that the US practically forced a runoff down Karzai's throat only to be embarrassed by the challenger's self educed exit from the election.------------------------------------------------------------------------Karzai is supported just because he is corrupt..he was hand picked because of his this valuable ability..As far as the so called opposition leader is concerned, he is no better than karzai, both being tested and rejected by afghanistan last century..My bet is that opposition leader is created by the americans out of northern alliance to haraness karazi. Only karzai knows in the so called opposition leader, america is sending him a message that, he can be exchanged for abduallah abduallah, any time..the corrupts are paying the corrupts to do their dirty work..If you are american or a brit, you have the responsiblity to ask your government their amazing ability to always get attracted to the corrupts and what is in your leaders that makes the corrupts attract to them. Tue 01 Dec 2009 00:52:55 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=78#comment85 There's nothing wrong with atheism, just as there's nothing wrong with Islam. Now we can criticise atheists for not being real atheists, but calling them the most pathetic beings of this present age is something else.-------------------------------------------------------------------------Anyone who claims to be atheist these days and then did not oppose bush and blair, two christian warriors in the same is pathetic, and not atheist..Atheist does not mean being anti islam...its neo-atheism..Christiniaty still dictates the extremism of your beliefs. Like I said, atheism is not just wishing happy holidays instead of merry christmas. Tue 01 Dec 2009 00:44:45 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=77#comment84 colonel artist, if you look for bad, you will find bad. If you look for the whole picture of the USA, which is good and bad both, you will discover that the people of the USA are a lot like you in their hopes, dreams, desires and loves. Please look at the good and bad both, rather than just at the negative, because that is only half of the painting. There is a whole other half to also look at. Unless of course, you only see what you what to see.-------------------------------------------------------------------------Why would I look for the whole picture of the USA? I see what what america shows to me by coming all the way to our backyards..If you were concerned with the repution of usa, you should have sent the so called good people.. Tue 01 Dec 2009 00:36:38 GMT+1 Tino http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=76#comment83 "There is nothing in the Koran that doesn't sound just as archaic, creepy and violent as some of the misinterpretations and mistranslations of the Christian Bible."Those aren't mistranslations. I read through a lot of the Qur'an on a college website with 5 separate translations side by side. They were all relatively close on most things. I do, however, agree with you that the Bible has equally terrible passages (stoning your own children for disobedience anyone?). Nonetheless, who cares? What I mean by that is, no Christians are *doing* these things. The biggest reason, I believe, is that Christians - excepting a small number of Protestant denominations - do not take the Bible as the literal word of God. It is seen as man's work and while the essential message must hold constant, reinterpretation is thus possible. Islam regards the Qur'an as the direct literal word of Allah. In addition, (If I remember correctly, feel free to correct me) the Bible calls for obedience to the laws of man and loyalty to authorities that are not religious. Islam has its own laws which are above all others and loyalty to the Ummah is *commanded* above all others. These differences manifest themselves in what I think are fairly obvious ways. Mon 30 Nov 2009 23:49:37 GMT+1 Tino http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=75#comment82 "Well, you wouldn’t see racist comments would you dear? Consider the last sentence of the above quote of your post. I think I’ve told you before: there is no such thing as race. Yet you believe in race. Ergo that makes you a racist. Racism goes hand in hand with xenophobia. Why do you fear the foreign? New things enrich our lives.""I think I’ve told you before: there is no such thing as race."Yes, and I know I agreed with you that genetically there is little difference. Nonetheless, little genetic changes make a huge difference. A mutation in the gene for HGPRT, for example, causes Lesch-Nyhan syndrome. It causes self-mutilation and loss of control essentially. Frighteningly, sometimes they can speak and have been known to ask for restraints (in other words, this mutilation is not desired, but is beyond their control). Back on topic: to pretend that small genetic difference (between races) doesn't result in a PHENOTYPE difference, you would need to be blind. I don't think it makes any other differences, but certainly races are different enough to visually identify. And you cannot change them, set at birth, etc.I also don't 'fear the foreign'. That is a pretty big jump from any of my comments. I happen to love Mid-Eastern cuisine for example (I love food I am sorry lol). I still don't like the tenets set forth in Islam. That should be an acceptable position...like I said I even like Arab culture in general. Just not a fan of the religion."Well, you wouldn’t see racist comments would you dear? "Wasn't that my point? That complaining about racist comments was foolish as there were none? Mon 30 Nov 2009 23:38:59 GMT+1 carolinalady http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=75#comment81 #72 Tino: ...and I answered you; I have read the Koran. You just didn't read the rest of my post. There is nothing in the Koran that doesn't sound just as archaic, creepy and violent as some of the misinterpretations and mistranslations of the Christian Bible. So, let's put that one to bed. There are stupid people of all religious stripes willing to believe they know the one and only truth because it's printed in their holy book. Truth doesn't always come in a book and monotheist religions with holy writings are not necessarily the wisest things humans ever thought up. NOW, I suppose all the religious fanatics will be on my case, too! Young Tino, you are a trouble maker. I try to get along with everyone -- including our squirrels -- and point out places in our discussions where points have been missed or the logic seems thin, circular, fuzzy or non-existent. Yes, I admittedly lean left on the political spectrum but that doesn't make YOU a bad person.Namaste Mon 30 Nov 2009 23:15:42 GMT+1 Al from BR http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=74#comment80 77:You, your, your, yourselves, your, you...You, sir, do not know what you are talking about.What are our lies? Describe them, provide legitimate examples to back your claims.If our intentions are not good, then what are they? Explain how they are bad. Remember, bad decisions are not the same thing as bad intentions.Yes, President Karzai is supported, but it is hardly because he is corrupt; that's nonsensical, especially when it was obvious that the US practically forced a runoff down Karzai's throat only to be embarrassed by the challenger's self educed exit from the election. The US intends to have a stable, independant, and legitimate government in Afghanistan that will not fall to Talibani and Al Qaeda insurgents. Tell me how that is not a good intention for the people of Afghanistan. Mon 30 Nov 2009 22:13:31 GMT+1 dceilar http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=73#comment79 #74 ColonelThere's nothing wrong with atheism, just as there's nothing wrong with Islam. Now we can criticise atheists for not being real atheists, but calling them the most pathetic beings of this present age is something else. Have you grasped the word being on your own terms? What it means to be without being told what it means? One type of being, the human being, believes all of Being exists for it. Human history has been an egotosical rampage in the mistaken belief that we humans are special, that the world exists for us. If that was the case then there is nothing we could do to the world that'll harm it. But this is clearly not the case. There is no heirarchy of Being. Mon 30 Nov 2009 21:58:29 GMT+1 LucyJ http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=72#comment78 colonel artist, if you look for bad, you will find bad. If you look for the whole picture of the USA, which is good and bad both, you will discover that the people of the USA are a lot like you in their hopes, dreams, desires and loves. Please look at the good and bad both, rather than just at the negative, because that is only half of the painting. There is a whole other half to also look at. Unless of course, you only see what you what to see. Mon 30 Nov 2009 21:56:35 GMT+1 Al from BR http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=71#comment77 63 MagicKirin:You are right on target. Too many uninformed people or outright liars continue to spread such nonsense. Of course Republicans have offered solutions, it's just that the ruling party in the White house and in Congress doesn't care about solutions from the other side that aren’t outright pledges of support for the Democrat's current agenda. And much of the media isn't interested for the most part either because it's the Democrats who currently have the power.1 McJakome:"I agree with these points and the inevitable conclusions. The Neocons will probably defend the Bush decisions...The right-wing of the GOP, led by Rush Limbaugh, will reiterate a hope that Obama fail, despite that meaning that America fails."Yes there will be some defending their own butts, but defending the previous administration is exactly what Obama hopes the GOP does because it plays into the current administration's hands by distracting all the right people; it could keep the Republicans in defense mode and turn the anti-war left's attention back on the past actions of Republicans while Obama makes the necessary step of sending more troops to Afghanistan.I predict that the left will be satiated by Obama's exit plan and their stoked anti-Bush passions, while the Republicans will gripe about the speed of the decision making process, but never-the-less support the decision to send more troops. And if I'm wrong, and the left pitches a fit, the President can ironically count on Republican and moderate support for his troop increases. Mon 30 Nov 2009 21:53:52 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=70#comment76 This will be a fresh start for the USA at ending this war, with a new President at the helm and a different strategy onboard. The USA is not out of this yet, but we still have a chance to finish what we started and to end this war in a responsible way. It is not too late for the USA, because it is never too late to do the right thing. We know we can't take every single terrorist out. But the ones we can get, we will try our hardest to do so. This decade is almost over. Hopefully, this war will responsibly end in the next one. President Obama, you have my full support.-------------------------------------------------------------------------What you started is the enslavement of the whole nation through your northern alliance...Your strategy is to keep the weak as weak by allying yourselves with the criminals and corrupts..Your purpose with cooperating with the corrupts is twofold.. they keep the people weak, and in return you can blame those corrupt for your so called lies that your intentions are good, but the people whom you work with are corrupt. You support karzai not because he is sincere to afghans, you support him because he is insincere to the afghans.. Mon 30 Nov 2009 21:42:52 GMT+1 LucyJ http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=69#comment75 Islamic terrorism threatens many other countries just as much as it threatens America. It is time for others to step up their fighting against Islamic terrorism, which justifies religious and racial killings. This includes killing anyone who critizes Islam or converts to another religion. In other words, it is the opposite of freedom. Islamc terrorism is a cult of slavery and power/control over others. If Europe and America do not fight against Islamic terrorism, then who will?Are other countries brave enough to add more troops and step up the fight against Islamic terrorists? Mon 30 Nov 2009 21:40:24 GMT+1 dceilar http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=68#comment74 #72 TinoI have yet to see one *RACIST* comment on this board. Islam is a religion. Arab != Muslim. I am sorry you do not understand that, but criticism of a voluntary-held belief set is not racism. Being Muslim is not, in fact, something that is set in stone (contrast this with race which is set at birth and cannot be changed).Well, you wouldn’t see racist comments would you dear? Consider the last sentence of the above quote of your post. I think I’ve told you before: there is no such thing as race. Yet you believe in race. Ergo that makes you a racist. Racism goes hand in hand with xenophobia. Why do you fear the foreign? New things enrich our lives. Mon 30 Nov 2009 21:35:58 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=67#comment73 You clearly do not understand what I said. I don't say happy holidays, EVERYONE here does because of the PC crowd. Hence why it is weird you would call this the 'Christian World'. Is that clearer?------------------------------------------------------------------------Atheiests are the most pathetic beings of this present age..the atheiests of the west...Eastern athiests, majority are still truely atheiests and not the..hate the religon ergo athiest...Western athiest are either pathetic or great liars because both george bush and tony blair who started this war against the muslims, were very much practising christen, one communicated with his G-d, and the other was busy changing his own sect, keeping it all secrets as long as he was the prime minister...I am sure son of G-d doesnt want such people, who hide their faith for the sake of prime ministership, as his followers. Mon 30 Nov 2009 21:33:45 GMT+1 CuriousAmerican http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=66#comment72 I think you are missing the point....Muslims take their religion seriously...The secular west doesen't, its more of a cultural tradition to them...Which is why liberals and Europe especially have ZERO understanding of people of faith from any religion. "you will know them by their fruits"...its just good old fashion common sense. Talk is cheap. We are all judged by our actions and the company we keep. Mon 30 Nov 2009 21:23:07 GMT+1 Tino http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=65#comment71 "Do you believe that Muslims in general are not morally equivalent to Christians in general? Why?"No, that is not what I am saying. What I am saying, however, is that Islam is predisposed to behavior the west finds disagreeable (honor killings, wife beating, stoning, amputation for punishment, terrorism). These things are set forth in their Qur'an. Yes, the Bible has bad portions but Islam hold their holy texts as the *literal* word of God and is therefore less open to change. "How about the frequent racist comments about Arabs on this blog? Denying Iran its legal right to possess nuclear energy? Believing that Muslims want to take over the world (you say that about people who follow the Jewish religion and you could be arrested - and rightly too)!"I have yet to see one *RACIST* comment on this board. Islam is a religion. Arab != Muslim. I am sorry you do not understand that, but criticism of a voluntary-held belief set is not racism. Being Muslim is not, in fact, something that is set in stone (contrast this with race which is set at birth and cannot be changed).I also didn't say Muslims want to take over the world. Their terrorist groups, however, do. They say so themselves."How many Iraqi civilians are estimated to have been killed during its invasion by Christains?"Not sure on the exact number, but I do know more were killed by Muslims than Christians."When the atheist becomes ally with the christians, he or she no longer remain an athiests..Now, start saying Merry christmas, athtiesm is much more than saying happy holidays instead of merry christmas..Personally to me, the neo athiests look quite pathetic wishing everyone happy holidays when the christians are busy greeting each other with merry christmas...Do the atheists get so over excited at all the holidays, summer, winter, spring holidays, or their wish of happy holidays is restricted to the merry christmas??"You clearly do not understand what I said. I don't say happy holidays, EVERYONE here does because of the PC crowd. Hence why it is weird you would call this the 'Christian World'. Is that clearer?"don't bait me into insults, dear."I didn't. I asked you a simple question: Have you read their holy texts? Mon 30 Nov 2009 20:58:08 GMT+1 dceilar http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=64#comment70 #69 IllinoisanThere is only one way this war is going to end - a defeat for NATO. The USA may be exceptional, but not to the weight of history. Mon 30 Nov 2009 20:37:03 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=63#comment69 http://www.religioustolerance.org/islfatwa.htmhere's a start in your educationnow don't counter with any they are american or anything THEY ARE MUSLIMS CONDEMNING TERRORISM.http://www.juancole.com/2005/07/friedman-wrong-about-muslims-again-and.htmlnote the friedman is not exactly portraying the truth here and hence I sometimes say what a useless reporter I find him to be;)http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/10/17/195606.shtmlhttp://www.sullivan-county.com/identity/bin_laden.htmlhttp://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php Mon 30 Nov 2009 20:19:13 GMT+1 LucyJ http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=62#comment68 This will be a fresh start for the USA at ending this war, with a new President at the helm and a different strategy onboard. The USA is not out of this yet, but we still have a chance to finish what we started and to end this war in a responsible way. It is not too late for the USA, because it is never too late to do the right thing. We know we can't take every single terrorist out. But the ones we can get, we will try our hardest to do so. This decade is almost over. Hopefully, this war will responsibly end in the next one. President Obama, you have my full support. Mon 30 Nov 2009 20:10:26 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=62#comment67 "I noticed you could not given answer to when they have condemned terrorism."No gherkin I didn't specifically address that issue I dealt with it ,however, when I said you or I don't speak ANY of the languages that they may have used to condemn terrorism.so you and I would not know that the local mosque in where ever said" terrorism is disgusting and against the faith of Islam"and that bill was not bipartisan, it was a kow-tow to the GOP;)Carolina lady. at what stage do excuses become a reason.How many family members have to die before an excuse becomes pure revenge. something tino and all seem to forget. I say 9/11 was an excuse to go to war in Afghanistan. America generally says 9/11 was a reason to go to war with Afghanistan. Mon 30 Nov 2009 20:06:13 GMT+1 carolinalady http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=61#comment66 #51, Tino: don't bait me into insults, dear. I am a tough old woman who has been around the block, traveled in the Middle East (yes, even IRAN!!! oh, horrors!), read the Koran, made friends with Jews, Muslims, Christians, Ba'hai, Wiccans, Pagans and Atheists...and I won't tell you which I am. The point is: YOU (and a goodly portion of America's adult population) have been scared by your leaders and your religious teachers, for their political gain. The attacks on 9/11 were horrendous indeed, but we neither fulfilled our mandate nor took advantage of world support by bringing the perpetrators to justice expeditiously. It looks to the Muslim world like we're terrorists too, when we send drones to bomb villages and hit wedding parties. That sort of footage, played endlessly on Al Jazeera, recruits more terrorists than Osama started out with. I repeat: don't give them excuses. Mon 30 Nov 2009 19:45:38 GMT+1 Andy Post http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=60#comment65 And the decision is...30,000 more U.S. troops for Afghanistan.I want to know more about the strategy before I decide for myself whether that's justified. Mon 30 Nov 2009 19:31:42 GMT+1 MagicKirin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=59#comment64 colonelartist wrote:but I am an atheist and its my 'world' too.-------------------------------------------------------------------------When the atheist becomes ally with the christians, he or she no longer remain an athiests..Now, start saying Merry christmas, athtiesm is much more than saying happy holidays instead of merry christmas..Personally to me, the neo athiests look quite pathetic wishing everyone happy holidays when the christians are busy greeting each other with merry christmas...Do the atheists get so over excited at all the holidays, summer, winter, spring holidays, or their wish of happy holidays is restricted to the merry christmas??_________________________When Atheists look pathetic is when they insist on putting up a display whose purpose is to insult the faith of others.A creche, Mehnorah, Kwanza exhibit and others do not do that. Mon 30 Nov 2009 19:28:44 GMT+1 MagicKirin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=58#comment63 ref #56Gherkinevery time you ask"where are those Muslims saying stop murdering stop war etc" you forget that YOU don't speak their language.If they are preaching to their people in some land where English ids not the language used then they are unlikely to say that to their audience.They might say the same thing in another language, but you and I wouldn't get it.and the reporters at fox won't either._____________-I noticed you could not given answer to when they have condemned terrorism. Mon 30 Nov 2009 19:26:56 GMT+1 MagicKirin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=57#comment62 ref #62For those following US politics you may have noticed that the Republicans do not participate on much of anything. They have decided to be critical yet offer no solutions. With their record of the recent past that may be the best thing to happen. It is either their way or no way, not much at the art of compromise. ___________________Entirely untrue a bipartsian bill was presented to Obama who refused to look at it. Harry Reid broke faith with Olympia snowe and included a public option which she stated publicly she would not support. Mon 30 Nov 2009 19:23:51 GMT+1 ghostofsichuan http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=56#comment61 For those following US politics you may have noticed that the Republicans do not participate on much of anything. They have decided to be critical yet offer no solutions. With their record of the recent past that may be the best thing to happen. It is either their way or no way, not much at the art of compromise. Wars are a messy business and things always happen that are not anticipated. Anyone who believe that one can engage in a war and not have civilians die has no knowledge of war. Most of the current generation of terrorist are ignorant people from poverty used by cynical leaders to blow up people for no apparent reason but terror. The tactic doesn't work yet they have no other options because they are a small minority in these populations and would be eliminated against any trained armed forces. Al-qaeda has run candidates in Pakistan elections and never received more than 11% of the vote.If the Kerry report is from the Democrats, what do you expect, they won the election and have the right by that fact to implement their agenda. Bush/Cheney thought that lying to the UN and American people was a better strategy. Al Qaeda was not in Iraq, yet that is where they decided to go. Afghanistan is an ancient trade route populated by highwaymen since Alexander the Great. Until they stablize and are subjected to the ruthlessness of bankers, things will not change. Mon 30 Nov 2009 19:13:41 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=55#comment60 colonel there are strange conspiracy theories in the USA that would say that GW and Dick were talking to Bin Lad and arranged this all. Conspiracy theories they are. but if they were true and Obama was to capture Osama then Osama might be able to relate the truth of those days;) just being provocative.Dceiler Syria already got liberated from their power efforts.in an unilateral attack on another state by the state that does it the most. Mon 30 Nov 2009 19:03:41 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=54#comment59 we'll start two wars over deaths in the USA but not think to say "How many of their innocent will get killed" bit like the other topic. Mon 30 Nov 2009 18:59:33 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=53#comment58 dcieler, yep tosh. but he never stops. it seems the other discussion has been shut down by the Mods because no one watches them when threads get old. . Mon 30 Nov 2009 18:58:08 GMT+1 dceilar http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=52#comment57 #38 TinoWhat major Christian intolerance issues you seen lately?Where to begin! How about the frequent racist comments about Arabs on this blog? Denying Iran its legal right to possess nuclear energy? Believing that Muslims want to take over the world (you say that about people who follow the Jewish religion and you could be arrested - and rightly too)! How many Iraqi civilians are estimated to have been killed during its invasion by Christains? 650,000? What do Christains call this invasion? Oh! That's right a 'liberation'! Who is next for liberation? Iran? Syria? How about liberating Muslim women from their clothing so 'we' can see their faces and bodies? Because that's what they want isn't it?What tosh you speak? Mon 30 Nov 2009 18:15:40 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=51#comment56 Actually, the "Kerry Report" does not "claim to represent the Foreign Relations Committee" (from post #39). It is a report by the "Committee majority staff" and is described on its title page as "A Report To Members of the Committee On Foreign Relations, United States Senate" (quotes from the report). It is exactly what it claims to be: a report by the Democratic staff to the Committee, not by the Committee to the Senate.Here is a link to the committee, where the report can be found: http://foreign.senate.gov/-------------------------------------------------------------------------Kerry report has no other function but to give obama reasons to once again use military to find ben laden..Otherwise everyone, those who didnt want to know about tora bora, and ben laden's so called escape...Rumsfeld told everyone before going to iraq, that ben laden wasnt as harmful or important anymore..Now, the americans once again want to fan the flames of the war by going after ben laden.. Mon 30 Nov 2009 18:10:17 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=50#comment55 Gherkin every time you ask"where are those Muslims saying stop murdering stop war etc" you forget that YOU don't speak their language. If they are preaching to their people in some land where English ids not the language used then they are unlikely to say that to their audience. They might say the same thing in another language, but you and I wouldn't get it.and the reporters at fox won't either. Mon 30 Nov 2009 18:09:31 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=50#comment54 48 yep he's afraid.Personally I am no more afraid of them than the Christian terrorist organisation the IRA.Yes Tino the IRA who really are about Catholics, not even accepting of the Anglicans.Certainly not Muslim.Definitely Christian.But they were all charity workers to you guys in the states. Give em some money for the cause. don't agree to extradition to the UK (another example).intolerance goes a long way. Mon 30 Nov 2009 18:06:39 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=49#comment53 but I am an atheist and its my 'world' too.-------------------------------------------------------------------------When the atheist becomes ally with the christians, he or she no longer remain an athiests..Now, start saying Merry christmas, athtiesm is much more than saying happy holidays instead of merry christmas..Personally to me, the neo athiests look quite pathetic wishing everyone happy holidays when the christians are busy greeting each other with merry christmas...Do the atheists get so over excited at all the holidays, summer, winter, spring holidays, or their wish of happy holidays is restricted to the merry christmas?? Mon 30 Nov 2009 18:05:27 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=48#comment52 46 UMM the motivation for the war was GW qand Tony being evangelical and storming while at it.Really cause the evidence was not for war. we'll find out a bit more on this in the UK where they have a trial of sorts.Your dismissive comment about Irans Nuke ambitions is further proof you can't see both sides. Why should they not want nuke power(both types). Every one else is.No one mentions Israel(sorry) no one ."man walks into mall" what bull.The islamophobia that you show is what allowed so many to accept that we should go to war when police actions were necessary.that islamophobia led many to say" Attack Iraq " their fear of Saddam writing really really bad poetry was so much, they invaded.;) Mon 30 Nov 2009 18:00:49 GMT+1 _marko http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=47#comment51 Tino,Do you believe that Muslims in general are not morally equivalent to Christians in general? Why? Mon 30 Nov 2009 17:59:38 GMT+1 Tino http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=46#comment50 "You're afraid of 'em, son. Like Cheney and Rummy and all the rest of the tough talking, draft dodging ilk who sent us down the shoot-'em-first-and-accuse-anyone-who-disagrees-with-you-of-being-unpatriotic path. The terrorists win if you let them scare you into violent reactionary methods on their own level: into what I called, in an earlier post, excuses for further recruitment. Don't give them excuses and they will turn upon themselves."I wouldn't say afraid but certainly very concerned. Have you ever even read the Quran and Hadith - or are you simply repeating popular PC positions? Perhaps you should look at the primary source first? Mon 30 Nov 2009 17:58:05 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=45#comment49 I would add that the Lord resistance army are Christians. that there are many christain acts of terrorism against Gay people around the world.Jamiaca,ugandahttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1232081/Gordon-Brown-caught-gay-rights-storm-Uganda-debates-death-penalty-homosexuals.htmlthis guy ,President Yoweri Museveni , is a born again christian."major Christian intolerance "I would say. how about you. want to dig any deeper? Mon 30 Nov 2009 17:51:55 GMT+1 GH1618 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=44#comment48 Actually, the "Kerry Report" does not "claim to represent the Foreign Relations Committee" (from post #39). It is a report by the "Committee majority staff" and is described on its title page as "A Report To Members of the Committee On Foreign Relations, United States Senate" (quotes from the report). It is exactly what it claims to be: a report by the Democratic staff to the Committee, not by the Committee to the Senate.Here is a link to the committee, where the report can be found: http://foreign.senate.gov/ Mon 30 Nov 2009 17:46:52 GMT+1 carolinalady http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=43#comment47 #38, Tino: You're afraid of 'em, son. Like Cheney and Rummy and all the rest of the tough talking, draft dodging ilk who sent us down the shoot-'em-first-and-accuse-anyone-who-disagrees-with-you-of-being-unpatriotic path. The terrorists win if you let them scare you into violent reactionary methods on their own level: into what I called, in an earlier post, excuses for further recruitment. Don't give them excuses and they will turn upon themselves. Mon 30 Nov 2009 17:46:32 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=42#comment46 45 and so much more. The way tino comes on spouting that Muslims are the terrorists sounds like Gherkin and Co. The fact that it is there at all shows that there is some problem with thinking. After all the repetition of those comments in the press seems to suggest that it is considered not to meet the criteria of"is defamatory or libellousis racist, sexist, homophobic, sexually explicit, abusive or otherwise offensive" under the BBC rules. Mon 30 Nov 2009 17:44:10 GMT+1 Tino http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=41#comment45 "Invasion of two muslim countries and a hiden war in the third."Nice try, but the motivation of the war was not Christianity. It was....wait for it.....A MUSLIM TERRORIST ATTACK. Never seen one of those before..."intolerance against iran's nuclear plants"Lol, not even worth seriously responding to."On one had the christian world talks about alternative energy and nuclear power plants to reverse the climate change, Iran's attempt to build such energy is pathologically and deliberatly being projected as an attempt to build weapons.."They have had many offers which would allow them to have nuclear power without weapons grade material. They have rejected them. They want a bomb. And stop calling it the Christian world. Most people here can't even say Merry Christmas - it is Happy Holidays. Call it the west, call it whatever - but I am an atheist and its my 'world' too.You are trying very hard to draw parallels that are not there:1. Muslim walks into a crowded mall, shouts "god is great" and "death to the infidels"2. Timothy McVeigh (hes a popular straw-man for you guys).You see, the first case has religion as the DIRECT AND ONLY motivation for the attack. In the second, his religion doesn't even enter into the equation. He committed the act IN SPITE OF his religion (he was raised Roman Catholic, but seems to reside somewhere in agnostic land). Totally, totally different. Mon 30 Nov 2009 17:40:59 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=40#comment44 What major Christian intolerance issues you seen lately? -------------------------------------------------------------------------Invasion of two muslim countries and a hiden war in the third.Intolerance against pakistan's nuclear weapons and intolerance against iran's nuclear plants...On one had the christian world talks about alternative energy and nuclear power plants to reverse the climate change, Iran's attempt to build such energy is pathologically and deliberatly being projected as an attempt to build weapons.. Mon 30 Nov 2009 17:18:04 GMT+1 Lord Nathan http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=39#comment43 "Majik, You are even more obtuse and opaque than usual._________________Why because I question a democratic only written report claiming to represent the foriegn relations commitee?"Q.E.D. Mon 30 Nov 2009 17:17:34 GMT+1 MagicKirin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=38#comment42 ref #32Carolina Lassie, "Ending the "Islamic terrorist" threat once and for all is a pipe dream and a political slogan. The best thing we can do about Islamic terrorists is to quit providing reasons for them to recruit. Stop doing stupid things like the Swiss just did in forbidding the construction of minarets. Assist in educational, financial, agricultural and international sporting ventures -- bring the Islamic world INTO the world instead of excluding them." _______________-When do the moslem nations reciprocate like denouncing terr0rism against non moslems? When is the last time the Saudi Prince or the leader of Indonesia has come out and condemned Hamas or Hezbollah? Mon 30 Nov 2009 17:16:00 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=37#comment41 This is a difficult one for me, too. I'm with KCcurmudgeon (I've asked before...are you SURE you're not my dad?). When we first invaded Afghanistan in the wake of 9/11 -- with the stated purpose of rooting out Osama bin Ladin, Al Qaeda and Mullah Omar's Taliban thugs -- I supported that action, along with most of the rest of the civilized world.-------------------------------------------------------------------------You should have stopped the support the day you heard that northern alliance was being provided military uniform, complete with belts and boots to be the american infantory...that was the day, majority of afghans stopped supporting the american plan for occupation, no one liked the idea of taliban being replaced by the northern alliance..when they were in power, they had done nothing but killed, killed and killed..And all those years in which they just killed, and killed and killed, usa did not interfere. And all of a sudden, in the year of your lord Jesus christ, 2001, the same war lords became your best buddies.. Mon 30 Nov 2009 17:12:18 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=37#comment40 lol andy gherkin.If they decided to let it happen, to get another war going cause he wanted vengeance and lied about it on the way there saying "we are doing our best" and further endangering both the soldiers and civilians as well as damaging the economy by bankrupting it , financially and wold standing wise they screwed it up. and Blackwater a division of Halliburton made out like bandits, Dick having been for halliburton, the no bid wars of profit that fuelled the GOP coffers. None of that is suspicious. I'm with Carolina lady we don't have them trials cause it gets messy. But only cause the rabids would fight to prove their innocence . and nothing would get done. first fix the country then get on. But part of me says that the truth and reconciliation hearings that other nations have had to get over such divisive crap might be worth considering.or we could wait 50 years for the truth to be discussed when it makes no difference.(hopefully) Mon 30 Nov 2009 17:04:04 GMT+1 HabitualHero http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=36#comment39 #10 "They (Americans) are the only ones that try."And every time they "try" they end up causing catastrophic civilian casualties. For God's sake, stop trying. Mon 30 Nov 2009 16:58:02 GMT+1 MagicKirin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=35#comment38 ref #32, Lord Nathan wrote:Sciurus, I second your assessment of the Kerry report - convenient.Majik, You are even more obtuse and opaque than usual._________________Why because I question a democratic only written report claiming to represent the foriegn relations commitee? Mon 30 Nov 2009 16:56:13 GMT+1 Tino http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=34#comment37 #18 Carolinalady "Ending the "Islamic terrorist" threat once and for all is a pipe dream and a political slogan. The best thing we can do about Islamic terrorists is to quit providing reasons for them to recruit. Stop doing stupid things like the Swiss just did in forbidding the construction of minarets. Assist in educational, financial, agricultural and international sporting ventures -- bring the Islamic world INTO the world instead of excluding them."These things are already being done (and to no benefit, but some economic loss)! In addition, most terrorists are from middle class or richer with at *least* a high school education. They recruit based on the religion - it really is that simple. We don't need to make excuses for them. Especially when those excuses are proven false by actual facts. Leave it to fluffbrain to make a foolish comparison:"ending the "threat" of" Islamic terrorists" is as you say a pipe dream, the same as ending Christian intolerance."What major Christian intolerance issues you seen lately? Any Christians doing some suicide bombing? Nope, just Muslims. Any threaten some cartoonists with beheadings (preferably in the name of their god)? Nope, just Muslims. Stop acting like every religion is equal - they are different."But america doesn't like trying its own."Lol."Yes it is hypocritical IF they were the ones spouting on about freedom for religion and being more tolerant.generally I don't see them claims."Wow, just wow. You do realize that if a system is so tolerant it accepts (especially violent intolerance, as would be the case with Muslims) intolerance, then it BECOMES intolerant! You expect a country to be suicidally tolerant. Come to think of it though, I do expect such an idea from you. Mon 30 Nov 2009 16:56:07 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=33#comment36 CIA Worldbook places the number of Christians and Others in the West Bank at 8%. In Gaza though it states that 0.7% of the population are Christian, so according to the CIA I would go to the West Bank for that Nativity Scene.-------------------------------------------------------------------------Palestinians are palestinians, this christian and muslim division emerged after PLO was allowed back to tackle Hamas..thats the narrative of the occupiars so that palestinians wish, attempt and attacks to end this disgusting occupation are seen as the evil acts of some muslim extrimists who have nothing to do with occupation... Mon 30 Nov 2009 16:42:17 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=32#comment35 30 Colonel well said. Mon 30 Nov 2009 16:39:21 GMT+1 Andy Post http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=31#comment34 Ref. 21, MagicKirin:"(I think you need to define treason..."U.S. Constitution, Article 3, Section III:Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.That's the only definition that matters in this particular instance. It's not identical, but it looks to me to be in line with yours.I agree with your conclusion. Mon 30 Nov 2009 16:35:38 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=30#comment33 Thirdly, it illustrates the unreliability of paying drug smugglers and warlords to do a bit of fighting in which their only interest is the profits they can make. (A lesson which, it appears is yet to be learnt.)-----------------------------------------------------------------------You are looking for a wrong lesson to learn..Some lessons are not to be learnt, and this one is one of those..CIA and previous american administrations, had dealt with the war lords, the same ones...and everyone in the cia and adminstration is aware of the the war lors past track..Its not as if americans met them for the first time after 2001..they met him after 2001 because they knew that in order to use them, they have to be paid and they knew that these warlords had done the same to CIA, during the soviet union war..Dostum was notorious for swtiching sides during soviet war, so was now dead Masood..Ask your government why it did not involve itself when these war lords,karzai and abdullah abdullah, the new oppostion leader, thanks to americans, wer in power before taliban.. Mon 30 Nov 2009 16:24:53 GMT+1 David Murrell http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=29#comment32 CIA Worldbook places the number of Christians and Others in the West Bank at 8%. In Gaza though it states that 0.7% of the population are Christian, so according to the CIA I would go to the West Bank for that Nativity Scene. Mon 30 Nov 2009 16:23:11 GMT+1 Lord Nathan http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=28#comment31 Sciurus, I second your assessment of the Kerry report - convenient.Majik, You are even more obtuse and opaque than usual.David, "When Tony Blair is questioned, that should reveal some interesting tidbits if he actually tells the truth."[my emphasis] Any reason we should expect such unprecedented behaviour?"But this in no way excuses Obama's caper in Afghanistan. Vietnam,Iraq,now Afghanistan... Americans never learn."Nor, it seems do the British (Balfour, Palestine Mandate, Suez,...) though they did have the sense to stay out of Vietnam (having had a hand in the start of the trouble in te immediate post WWII period)I'm with the Curmudgeon on this, "What would a victory in Afghanistan look like? How could such an event come to pass?"A very pertinent question, and there have been no credible answers here or elsewhere. If anyone has one, please illuminate us all.Carolina Lassie, "Ending the "Islamic terrorist" threat once and for all is a pipe dream and a political slogan. The best thing we can do about Islamic terrorists is to quit providing reasons for them to recruit. Stop doing stupid things like the Swiss just did in forbidding the construction of minarets. Assist in educational, financial, agricultural and international sporting ventures -- bring the Islamic world INTO the world instead of excluding them."Hear! Hear!Colonel, "I personally believe the third..the americans had no intention of catching ben laden.."Me too!I too, shall pay little attention to predictions and await Obama's actual words. Mon 30 Nov 2009 16:18:24 GMT+1 dceilar http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=27#comment30 It seems that Obama is going to increase troop numbers instead of withdrawing them. IMO he's making a mistake - a whooping big one. Afghanistan has the nickname of 'graveyard of Empires' for a reason. It's a war the West will not win. Afghanistan is going to be a heavy weight slowing down Obama's progress. He shouldn't appease the right wing hate mob because they will still hate him regardless - they hate him for a different reason. ;-)Obama should also remind his Generals that he is the boss not them and fire McChrystal for talking to the press trying to preempt the POTUS. Mon 30 Nov 2009 16:15:25 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=26#comment29 BTW - You know, I'd love to pick up a Swiss Chocolate Mosque for the holidays. It'd look great next to my Palestinian Creche. Then, I guess I'd need an Egyptian Menorah... -------------------------------------------------------------------------So much focus on the holocaust have made people forget, or perhaps they didnt even know, that years prior to holocaust europeans used to make fun, just as you have in these three lines, about such open persecution against jews...Such things led to hitler kill the jews in europeans back yards..Because people the so called not anti jews people had for yrs accepted such small anti jewish attitudes of the anti-jewish supporters.. Mon 30 Nov 2009 16:14:18 GMT+1 David Murrell http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=25#comment28 Phily-Mom – How about the Ben Ezra Synagogue in Cairo then? Built, according to legend where baby Moses was found in the rushes.Also about 2% of Palestinians are Christians, so you should be able to find some nativity scenes if you so wished.Magic – In 2006 the US State Department in a report on religious freedom criticized both Israel and the PA on their treatment of Christians, though they did say that the ordinary Muslim and Christian citizens enjoyed a good relationship in contrast to the ‘strained’ Jewish and non-Jewish relations. Ohh that anti-Semitic US State Department! Mon 30 Nov 2009 16:12:43 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=25#comment27 Now, whether a criminal or espionage/treason case is under preparation within the DOJ against Bush or Cheney or Rummy or any other ilk is not something any of us ought to be privy to...and it's not within the President's purview, either. We can only hope but as with all things legal, it takes a lot of time. ------------------------------------------------------------------------Then take that time...No one is in any hurry.If you want others to take responsiblities,and be held accountable then first you have to make yours to take the responsiblity and hold them accountable. Thats the rule of the human beings.. But if you think that the whole world will become attention and go crazy like americans to find out or capture the people who destroyed some buildings and killed a few thousand americans, then you are mistaken... Mon 30 Nov 2009 16:09:25 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=24#comment26 And I want to know, why the americans are still after ben laden or Mullah omer's heads? americans invasion and their war lords in afghanistan for the past 9 yrs have broken records of Taliban five yr of power.And america has captured the mastermind and his helpers..its not as if commander in chief of the american forces or his deputies were held responsible for any atrocity commited by their soldiers...Even though bush and blair came up with the idea of occupation of iraq, its not as if they will ever be put on some kind of trial...In these 9 yrs the armies of bush and blair have managed to kill lot more alqaida people , their supporters and non supporters..The 9/11 have now received more than enough compensation..Officially, now, the victims (americans) have now become the aggressors..They have saturated their sympathy...Now, time to move on.. Mon 30 Nov 2009 15:53:14 GMT+1 carolinalady http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=23#comment25 No, Fluffy, as much as we adore political dirt, we don't like to try our own Presidents. To wit, only 2 in our history have even been impeached and only 1 (Andrew Johnson) was actually removed from office. Richard Nixon resigned rather than face a Bill of Impeachment -- and was pardoned by his successor, Gerald Ford, which probably cost Ford the next election. If you think a moment, you'll see why we tend to avoid Impeachments and trials of Presidents...they lead to the slippery slope and are considered the remedy of very VERY last resort in the case of gross misconduct.Now, whether a criminal or espionage/treason case is under preparation within the DOJ against Bush or Cheney or Rummy or any other ilk is not something any of us ought to be privy to...and it's not within the President's purview, either. We can only hope but as with all things legal, it takes a lot of time. Mon 30 Nov 2009 15:46:34 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=22#comment24 So many military experts on this page. Who too blame? The issue is about consolidating the gains made and the isolation of the terrorist in the region bordering Pakistan. Other countries do not operate like the West. Governments have nominal support in many regions and basically warlord armies control those areas. It is always difficult to ask a government to conduct military operations within its own borders. The politics of corruption in both countries will take a number of years to change.------------------------------------------------------------------------You can not consolidate any gain when you cooperate with the war lords..Remember its americans who chose to cooperate with the war lords, and use them as infantory...The politics of corruption is and was created by the west..Its not the warlords who are asking to be the american allies, its the americans who chose the war lords..And when you hire someone's services you have to pay them..Even your brave soldiers whould not serve for one hour if they are stopped giving their pays..and the other perks... Mon 30 Nov 2009 15:35:31 GMT+1 Philly-Mom http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=21#comment23 Not surprised by the report. It's only what folks have been saying for years.I'm hoping that, with the expected 'surge', there is also a gameplan -- and the strategy of 'crush the opponent' probably ought not be it. Why are we in Afghanistan again? Can someone remind me?BTW - You know, I'd love to pick up a Swiss Chocolate Mosque for the holidays. It'd look great next to my Palestinian Creche. Then, I guess I'd need an Egyptian Menorah... Mon 30 Nov 2009 15:34:11 GMT+1 colonelartist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=20#comment22 One of them was Brig. Gen. James N. Mattis, the commander of some 4,000 marines who had arrived in the Afghan theater by now. Mattis, along with another officer with whom I spoke, was convinced that with these numbers he could have surrounded and sealed off bin Laden's lair, as well as deployed troops to the most sensitive portions of the largely unpatrolled border with Pakistan. He argued strongly that he should be permitted to proceed to the Tora Bora caves. The general was turned down. An American intelligence official told me that the Bush administration later concluded that the refusal of Centcom to dispatch the marines - along with their failure to commit U.S. ground forces to Afghanistan generally - was the gravest error of the war.-------------------------------------------------------------------------Incompetency, error or deliberate act to not catch him, I personally believe the third..the americans had no intention of catching ben laden..their intention started and ended with invasion to get rid of taliban..And G-d only knows why they felt the nedd to get rid of them, when they will have to eventually talk to them, just like they talked to the bathiests after they killed saddan husaian which ensured somewhat peace in iraq and allowed the Ambrits to pull out of the country..As far as the mythology of that uncontrolled border of pakistan, well thats just a myth, never in the history of that border was it so tightly controlled as it was during that time..Its all americans fault..blaming it on to pakistan, or uncontrolled border is just the american attempt to put resonsiblity on to someone else.. Mon 30 Nov 2009 15:29:17 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=19#comment21 21 there is unlikely to be any proof when those involved refuse to testify and no one hold them to the coals.As to the hypocrisy of Muslim countries and churches.Yes it is hypocritical IF they were the ones spouting on about freedom for religion and being more tolerant. generally I don't see them claims. it's not hypocrisy for Muslims in Switzerland or the UK , living in free countries to want to live in a multi cultural society and worship as they wish .They do not live in the states you worry about not accepting Christians. When the world cannot look at us and say "see they show us that tolerance is real, lets emulate that" then we can't complain that they are not getting more tolerant.But I am truly glad that you see the Swiss example as not a good one. Mon 30 Nov 2009 15:26:12 GMT+1 MagicKirin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=18#comment20 ref #19 fluffytale wrote:18 Carolina lady.that move by the Swiss did seem like blatant bigotry to me.Hope they will take down the churches now.broadcasting from minarets is a different issue. but the banning of a steeple on a church would be a fair compromise.;)ending the "threat" of" Islamic terrorists" is as you say a pipe dream, the same as ending Christian intolerance.(We don't usually agree but the banning of the Minaret is a knee jerk reaction but the comments from so on the BBC page on it are hypocriticals. they refuse to acknowledge the intolerance in many moslems countries to alteranitive houses of worship)Andywithout a trial of GW and dick we may never find out if it was treason.If they knew OBL might get away and said 'hey leave him this could work for us" then they are guilty of treason.(I think you need to define treason. Treason would be betraying this country for money or to the interests of another power. And despite Daily Kos and other moonbat groups there is no proof of that) Mon 30 Nov 2009 15:00:33 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=17#comment19 "Sheesh. Where did you crawl out from?"well it wasn't from underneath Bush and Dick where you were hatched. Mon 30 Nov 2009 14:49:04 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=16#comment18 18 Carolina lady. that move by the Swiss did seem like blatant bigotry to me.Hope they will take down the churches now. broadcasting from minarets is a different issue. but the banning of a steeple on a church would be a fair compromise.;) ending the "threat" of" Islamic terrorists" is as you say a pipe dream, the same as ending Christian intolerance.Andy without a trial of GW and dick we may never find out if it was treason. If they knew OBL might get away and said 'hey leave him this could work for us" then they are guilty of treason.But america doesn't like trying its own. Mon 30 Nov 2009 14:41:36 GMT+1 carolinalady http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=15#comment17 Ahhh...back to politics as usual.This is a difficult one for me, too. I'm with KCcurmudgeon (I've asked before...are you SURE you're not my dad?). When we first invaded Afghanistan in the wake of 9/11 -- with the stated purpose of rooting out Osama bin Ladin, Al Qaeda and Mullah Omar's Taliban thugs -- I supported that action, along with most of the rest of the civilized world. Now, here we are, almost 10 years of mission creep later: a whole different war on our hands that NOBODY supports, another country invaded that never did us harm, a different leader toppled, bin Ladin and Omar still on the loose and untold lives and treasure wasted. It is to weep. To finally retrieve the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Neocon blunders, we would actually have to go into still a THIRD country -- Pakistan -- which nobody supports. So, President Obama's choices devolve into choosing the least worst path to getting our troops out of the region safely and soon. Ending the "Islamic terrorist" threat once and for all is a pipe dream and a political slogan. The best thing we can do about Islamic terrorists is to quit providing reasons for them to recruit. Stop doing stupid things like the Swiss just did in forbidding the construction of minarets. Assist in educational, financial, agricultural and international sporting ventures -- bring the Islamic world INTO the world instead of excluding them. Mon 30 Nov 2009 14:23:10 GMT+1 ghostofsichuan http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=14#comment16 So many military experts on this page. Who too blame? The issue is about consolidating the gains made and the isolation of the terrorist in the region bordering Pakistan. Other countries do not operate like the West. Governments have nominal support in many regions and basically warlord armies control those areas. It is always difficult to ask a government to conduct military operations within its own borders. The politics of corruption in both countries will take a number of years to change. As terrorist begin to conduct activities in China and Chinese border states more cooperation will be gained for agressive actions. The US is paying most of this bill and other countries need to be part of the solution. Mon 30 Nov 2009 13:56:16 GMT+1 fluffytale http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=13#comment15 15 lol DC I might have disturbed others in the cinema in those days. Now I don't even eat popo corn13 yep. I'll wait till he says something. then maybe I'll be bitchen. but to start calling him out before he has done anything. that sounds like closed minds. And rick warren told me yesterday they were fundamentalists.;) Mon 30 Nov 2009 13:49:20 GMT+1 David Cunard http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=12#comment14 #11. stellarBeloved: "Obama . . . saved our economy by hook and crook."A little early for that conclusion."Harold and Maude" was a Broadway play and then a film - made in 1971. Before Fluffy ever went to the cinema. Mon 30 Nov 2009 07:28:04 GMT+1 wolfvorkian http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=12#comment13 timjenvey wrote: They are the only ones that try!That "try" what? Incidentally, your "rock" insult has been used at least 50 billion times. Please try to be more creative. And AndyPost-It's not treason, though. It's just poor military leadership.What other possibility is there? Franks had US troops available and he didn't use them - why? He relied on a couple of war lords to catch the world's most wanted man? Makes no sense at all, Bush refused him permission. His war was more important than getting the mastermind behind 9/11. Mon 30 Nov 2009 06:32:49 GMT+1 KScurmudgeon http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=11#comment12 I am generally an Obama supporter - but this time I am in wait-and-see mode.What would a victory in Afghanistan look like? How could such an event come to pass?I will be watching Tuesday night to hear what the man has to say.KScurmudgeon Mon 30 Nov 2009 06:19:26 GMT+1 Andy Post http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=10#comment11 Mark: "This is not new. Several books on the region, including Ahmed Rashid's masterful Descent into Chaos, have made very similar allegations." Yes, this is old news. I knew they screwed up the operation fairly soon after it happened. This was discussed extensively during the 2004 election. Americans know about this.This was the work of Kerry. The President probably knew he was going to produce the report, but I don't see how it helps the White House. It's all water under the bridge. After all, there's no question that Obama wasn't involved, and President Bush can't run again."While there are blogs attacking the suggestion, Rumsfeld has not hit back."What do you expect him to say? Rumsfeld was trying out a new strategy based on using technology and communication as a force multiplier, taking the concept even so far as to eschew armor plating on vehicles believing that the U.S. forces would destroy enemy forces before the enemy even knew they were there. And actually, if you've ever seen a Javelin missile demonstration, it seems like a reasonable assumption.But he failed to adequately address the U.S. military's biggest challenge since Vietnam: identifying the enemy. It's difficult to apply technology to that problem, and those lightly armored vehicles drove into a lot of ambushes because of it. It was a strategic military blunder. It's neither the first nor the last time. Americans have been blessed with some top-notch commanders, but we've had our fair share of failures, too.It's not treason, though. It's just poor military leadership. Mon 30 Nov 2009 05:27:35 GMT+1 David http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=9#comment10 Fluffy,I think Obama is a man who has the US President power and is not afraid to use it his way. He saved our economy by hook and crook,And now, he has the reins of our immediate destiny and the power of setting foreign policy...and this makes others very angry.If he succeeds uh ohhh for those whom dislike him..And to change subjects You might like "Harold and Maude." Look it up somehow and watch it, its so good and very wierd, prescient, and pertinent as far as philosophy (sp?) goes.:) (hoping moderators won't delete this...they "delete as nec.") Mon 30 Nov 2009 05:26:19 GMT+1 TJ http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=8#comment9 wolfvorkian #9. You say"Americans never learn."They are the only ones that try! The rest of the world just gloats on conspiracy theories, the latest media drivel and hides with its head in the sand!!! Stand up and do the job yourselves.Sheesh. Where did you crawl out from? Mon 30 Nov 2009 04:59:31 GMT+1 wolfvorkian http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2009/11/afghan_decision_time.html?page=7#comment8 Bush allowed bin Laden to escape from Tora Bora because if he had captured or killed him there, it would have been impossible for him to have 'sold' the US on invading Iraq.Much of the anger for 9/11 would have evaporated if he had done so.This was an act of treason on the part of George W. Bush and he should be tried for it and when convicted, executed. Why did Franks not use US troops when Gen Mattis offered them? One of them was Brig. Gen. James N. Mattis, the commander of some 4,000 marines who had arrived in the Afghan theater by now. Mattis, along with another officer with whom I spoke, was convinced that with these numbers he could have surrounded and sealed off bin Laden's lair, as well as deployed troops to the most sensitive portions of the largely unpatrolled border with Pakistan. He argued strongly that he should be permitted to proceed to the Tora Bora caves. The general was turned down. An American intelligence official told me that the Bush administration later concluded that the refusal of Centcom to dispatch the marines - along with their failure to commit U.S. ground forces to Afghanistan generally - was the gravest error of the war.http://tinyurl.com/9dkftDoes anyone believe Franks just nonchalantly refused the troops? Of course not, he was told not to use them. But this in no way excuses Obama's caper in Afghanistan. Vietnam,Iraq,now Afghanistan... Americans never learn. Mon 30 Nov 2009 04:35:42 GMT+1