Referring to the January raid, tribal chief Sayed Hazratullah Khalilyar said: "When they came, we didn't know they were Americans. We thought they were thieves. Someone fired a warning shot. And then they killed us."Obama seems like a very bright person. Then how are we escalating military involvement in Afghanistan?
this is not intelligent, not to say inhumane.
this is alarming and disturbing.
we had hoped for change.
from an article, written one year ago, by Juan Cole, Pres. of the Global Americana Institute:
I don't know whether Senator Obama really wants to try to militarily occupy Afghanistan even more than is now being attempted. I wish he would talk to some old Russian officers who were there in the 1980s first. Of course, it may be that this announced strategy is political and for the purposes of having something to say when McCain accuses him of surrendering in Iraq.
If the Afghanistan gambit is sincere, I don't think it is good geostrategy. Afghanistan is far more unwinnable even than Iraq. If playing it up is politics, then it is dangerous politics. Presidents can become captive of their own record and end up having to commit to things because they made strong representations about them to the public.
I think Obama has a little bit of a tendency to try to fix his political problems by going overboard.
UN statistics reveals that nearly 1,118 civilians have been killed as a result of the Afghan conflict, most of them due to land and air attacks from the United States and the NATO.
Parliamentarian Shukria Barakzai says she has an innovative amendment to Washington's planned injection of up to 30,000 new troops here.
"Send us 30,000 scholars instead. Or 30,000 engineers. But don't send more troops – it will just bring more violence."
No comments:
Post a Comment