GOP rep: 'Rand Paul is giving the president bad advice' on Afghanistan and Syria

The Hill ^ | BRETT SAMUELS

[Kazan]

No islamic nation could delay us more than an hour or two if we decide to go somewhere full force.

Who wants to bother with that when we can remain in Afghanistan and do pretty much what we want?

There is no reason to withdraw from Afghanistan knowing that it will fuel a rise in Islamic terrorism that will ultimately threat the nation and its interests abroad.

[petitfour]

How about we keep them out of our country.

[petitfour]

Whack a mole.

[Magnum44]

I don’t know if its entirely coincidence, but I also don’t buy into conspiracy either.

We went into Iraq in 91’ because we had a defense agreement with Kuwait, because Saddam was guilty of attacking the USS Stark for no reason as well as being a generally nasty character, world economies depended on ME oil, and because history told us that sitting back while a ruthless dictator invaded neighboring countries would lead to no good.

The years that followed, 911, the attempt to democratize Iraq, Libya, Syria, each has things unique as well as things in common.

It could be argued that certain pols (you point at Bush) had personal interests, but it can also be argued that actions taken were in national interests. Maybe some personal and national interests intersected in one case (ie Bush) where in other cases they were opposed (ie BHO/Clinton).

Each has to be viewed and argued on its own merits. Binning everything into one of two categories doesn’t help.

[Alberta's Child]

In Iraq, the U.S. pissed away thousands of lives and billions of dollars to topple the Ba'athist regime and install a new government where -- get this -- Islam is established as the official state religion.

It's mind-boggling how anyone could ever look back and justify that bullsh!t anymore. I supported Donald Trump because I hoped those days would come to an end here.

... sitting back while a ruthless dictator invaded neighboring countries would lead to no good.

Right. The preferred course of action is to sell arms to a neighboring country like Saudi Arabia that supports civil insurrections among its neighbors.

[DesertRhino]

I very much disagree with the concept that officers have a calling to service almost like the clergy, but enlisted men are only capable of mindless belligerence.

I could make a very solid argument that the opposite is probably true. Enlisted men truly have a calling, and a majority of the officers are career-oriented and selfish....and I’m being polite

[Magnum44]

It's mind-boggling how anyone could ever look back and justify that bullsh!t

Its easy to look back. Its harder when you are in the moment and don't have foresight.

At this point, one could look back and ask 'at what point did we fail?'. Like any accident chain, we might be able to find multiple points where a different action could have brought about better results. Should we have ceded govt back to the Iraqis so soon? Probably not. PC probably bit us there. Should Barry have pulled our troops out years before the Iraqis were ready to defend themselves from Iranian influence. Probably not.

But at the time, both in 91 and later post 911, it was the course of action that was taken, based on what people knew at the time. We did great things, but we clearly need to learn from mistakes as well.

And yes, we should be very aware of the cost in blood and treasure.

[DesertRhino]

Yes there is a good reason to withdraw from Afghanistan. We’re wasting some of the best American Kids who could do good things at home. And it’s an absolute money suck.

[RandFan]

$46 BILLION a year is spent on Afghanistan.

[Alberta's Child]

Its easy to look back. Its harder when you are in the moment and don't have foresight.

I've been consistently saying the same thing since 2003. FR lost a lot of good people who were banned or self-exiled when they didn't toe the GWB line on foreign intervention. We warned that the U.S. involvement in the Middle East was going to be a disaster.

It had nothing to do with our own foresight, either. We had plenty of evidence to fall back on. Case in point:

"I think that the proposition of going to Baghdad is also fallacious. I think if we we're going to remove Saddam Hussein we would have had to go all the way to Baghdad, we would have to commit a lot of force because I do not believe he would wait in the Presidential Palace for us to arrive. I think we'd have had to hunt him down. And once we'd done that and we'd gotten rid of Saddam Hussein and his government, then we'd have had to put another government in its place. What kind of government? Should it be a Sunni government or Shi'ite government or a Kurdish government or Ba'athist regime? Or maybe we want to bring in some of the Islamic fundamentalists? How long would we have had to stay in Baghdad to keep that government in place? What would happen to the government once U.S. forces withdrew? How many casualties should the United States accept in that effort to try to create clarity and stability in a situation that is inherently unstable? I think it is vitally important for a President to know when to use military force. I think it is also very important for him to know when not to commit U.S. military force. And it's my view that the President got it right both times, that it would have been a mistake for us to get bogged down in the quagmire inside Iraq." -- U.S. Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney, 4/29/91

After the U.S. invasion in 2003, Iraq turned out exactly the way Cheney predicted it would in 1991.

The GWB administration was filled with war criminals or incompetent baboons. Take your pick.

I'm no fan of Obama, but nobody who tries to push any blame for Iraq off on him knows what they're talking about.

[robowombat]

The reason careerism flourishes is expressly because the concept that one who is commissioned by the president is to be above such paltry attitudes has been denigrated since about 1960> MacNamara’s officer as manager concept has been the biggest single thing that has destroyed much of the idea a commissioned officer was more than just a paper shuffling bureaucrat who wears a uniform. My personal experience as an EM and NCO was quite the opposite of what you describe. The only calling I discerned was to profiteer to the max and goldbrick when ever one could. Sergeant Bilko, I discovered was truly a very good satire on the US Army and USAF.. Many of the career NCO’s seemed right out of Catch 22. The amount of racketeering was truly amazing. The lower graded EM were no more than one would expect. Shallow caddish, superficially cynical, consumed with the desire for as much cheap sex and cheap liquor (and later drugs) as possible. The experience was fascinating in a sociological sense but depressing to endure.

[robowombat]

Islam will always be the state religion of a 90% Muslim country. The question would be how much willingness to have confessional freedom. The Saddam, regime, interestingly, allowed a wide degree of confessional freedom, except for Jews of course. The number three or so guy in his regime. Tariq Aziz , was a Jacobite Catholic.

[robowombat]

No just Neo-cons who were full of pride in their globalist democracy project.

[DesertRhino]

That office manager concept you mention probably is the beginning. Also, back in those days commissioned officers didn’t see themselves as SETTING national policy as much as faithfully executing it. (With the exception of MaCarthur and to a lesser degree Lemay).

[DesertRhino]

As of today, you can be a Jew or a Christian in Syria, and yes, in Iran.

In Saudi Arabia if you are a Saudi, and a christian, you are basically autodead.

[robowombat]

Yes pretty much true. Before WW2 it was considered bad form for a commissioned officer to even vote. I remember a neighbor who was USMA Class of 1933 telling me that was true when I asked him about that statement in some ones memoirs.

[Kazan]

Yes there is a good reason to withdraw from Afghanistan. We’re wasting some of the best American Kids who could do good things at home.

It's stupid contention. Protecting the nation from Islamic terrorism is not only a necessity, it's something many of those there willingly signed up for.

[Magnum44]

The GWB administration was filled with war criminals or incompetent baboons.

Again, I respectfully disagree, and take umbrage to binning into those two choices. Decisions were made based on what was known at the time. Good people were involved in many of those decisions. I don't think its fair to paint all those who supported the troops during that post 911 time as they went forth to prevent such an attack from ever happening again as either criminals or baboons. As much as I have grown to dislike GWB in years since then, I am still grateful it was a Bush administration in place on 911 and not a Gore administration.

[Alberta's Child]

The weeks and months after 9/11 were the last time the Bush administration had any credibility at all. From that point on, it was a disaster ... a totally unnecessary invasion of Iraq, no clear goals in Afghanistan, a massive new Medicare prescription drug entitlement, the intrusive meddling of the PATRIOT Act, a Federal budget completely out of control, $140/barrel oil, etc.

The best thing I can say about GWB right now is that his presidency ended on such an awful note that he destroyed Jeb Bush's political career on the spot.

[Magnum44]

And I am not completely disagreeing with you, but calling supporters of OEF and IF “at the time” either criminals or incompetents is just wrong and insulting in many cases. Lots to learn from 911, not the least of which was the world wasn’t safe just because the cold war was over. Thank dems like Boxer, DiFi, and Clinton for taking the “peace dividend” out of our military and intelligence services.