My tin stocks are doing great!

The Bush administration is considering the withdrawal of additional combat forces from Iraq beginning in September, according to administration and military officials, raising the prospect of a far more ambitious plan than expected only months ago.

Cowards! Defeat-o-cans!! Cut and runners!!1!!

The Pentagon has previously signaled that commanders wanted additional troops in Afghanistan - as many as 10,000 more than the roughly 32,000 there now - but with two wars seriously straining the U.S. Army and Marines in particular, officials have struggled to produce the extra forces.

This is an interesting tidbit.

The Bush administration playing political games with the military and their families?

Unpossible!

I get the feeling we're going to be shifting to Afghanistan. Pakistan can't, or won't do anything about the Taliban and Bin Ladin. And you guys thought the war was going to be over soon. The soldiers will be coming out of Iraq alright, just like everyone wants but they will be headed for Afghanistan.

I think Pakistan is in play more than Iran.

/purely flatulent speculation

But if the soldiers are back home, they can put their own vote in the ballot boxes, instead of the military filing out the ballot for them.

GaryPDX: This is an interesting tidbit.

I repeat: they should have spent more effort thoroughly making an example (and civilized country) out of Afghanistan instead of heading for Iraq.

abb3w:GaryPDX: This is an interesting tidbit.

I repeat: they should have spent more effort thoroughly making an example (and civilized country) out of Afghanistan instead of heading for Iraq.

I'd have settled for completely destroying the entire opium growing area. Instead, we built the drug lords new bridges and roads.

abb3w:GaryPDX: This is an interesting tidbit.

I repeat: they should have spent more effort thoroughly making an example (and civilized country) out of Afghanistan instead of heading for Iraq.

They definitely shouldn't have stayed in Iraq. It could have been handled far better and shorter. That's for sure. I think Pakistan is seriously melting down inside into fundamentalism. It's just a feeling, but there's a seriousness going on we're unaware of, I think.

Weaver95:I'd have settled for completely destroying the entire opium growing area.

Why? The government can't win a war on drugs in their own country after four decades. What makes you think they can win one in Afghanistan?

Weaver95:I'd have settled for completely destroying the entire opium growing area. Instead, we built the drug lords new bridges and roads.

That's the stupidest thing I've heard you say today. Try to top it.

Churchill2004:Why? The government can't win a war on drugs in their own country after four decades. What makes you think they can win one in Afghanistan?

The law of numbers. If you open a bunch of wars on a bunch of fronts on a bunch of vague terms(drugs, terrorism, etc), you're bound to see one to completion.

Persepolis:Churchill2004:Why? The government can't win a war on drugs in their own country after four decades. What makes you think they can win one in Afghanistan?

The law of numbers. If you open a bunch of wars on a bunch of fronts on a bunch of vague terms(drugs, terrorism, etc), you're bound to see one to completion.

They really need to call a truce on the drug war and start taxing it. It doesn't make any sense anymore.

Peaceplan, with Honor®

Persepolis:The law of numbers. If you open a bunch of wars on a bunch of fronts on a bunch of vague terms(drugs, terrorism, etc), you're bound to see one to completion.

Very similar to how if I play every roulette wheel at once, I'll make a fortune.

/the war on illiteracy is my favorite.

Weaver95: I'd have settled for completely destroying the entire opium growing area.

What?
How much do you think we're taking in under the table on that?

The desire to move more quickly reflects the view of many in the Pentagon who want to ease the strain on the military but also to free more troops for Afghanistan and potentially other missions.

gggrrrrreeeeeeaaaaaaattttttttt

--------

For the record, I figure they announce a withdraw and remind everybody that the surge worked and everything in Iraq is awesomefuntastic now. Don't forget to vote McCain.

Scienceman123: HowlingFrog: Weaver95: I'd have settled for completely destroying the entire opium growing area.

What?
How much do you think we're taking in under the table on that?

There you are.

I'd bet our own pharmaceutical companies are the majority in on this. As much poppy as they produce, I don't see it all being illegal trafficking.

GaryPDX: I'd bet our own pharmaceutical companies are the majority in on this.

I'd consider that a good possibility.

GaryPDX: They really need to call a truce on the drug war and start taxing it. It doesn't make any sense anymore.

Was there a time when it did make sense? I missed that part.

Persepolis: The law of numbers. If you open a bunch of wars on a bunch of fronts on a bunch of vague terms(drugs, terrorism, etc), you're bound to see one to completion.

They seem to be doing relatively well in the War on Science....
/Nice movie, BTW.

Lionel Mandrake: GaryPDX: They really need to call a truce on the drug war and start taxing it. It doesn't make any sense anymore.

Was there a time when it did make sense? I missed that part.

Late 70's and 80's. It was getting out of hand. Hasn't made sense since.

We should have dropped all of the resources in Afghanistan to begin with. Bin Laden is THERE. The Taliban are THERE. They are the actual people we should have hunted down and killed. Iraq is a total mess and distraction from what the actual target should have been.

big_pth: Bin Laden is THERE.

So, you know he's THERE but you're holding out on telling the CIA?

So is that what this is going to be called? First it was The Surge, now The Hinge? I like it.

Lionel Mandrake: GaryPDX: They really need to call a truce on the drug war and start taxing it. It doesn't make any sense anymore.

Was there a time when it did make sense? I missed that part.

Back when they thought absinthe caused women to have 'the madness', maybe.

DamnYankees: Lionel Mandrake: GaryPDX: They really need to call a truce on the drug war and start taxing it. It doesn't make any sense anymore.

Was there a time when it did make sense? I missed that part.

Back when they thought absinthe caused women to have 'the madness', maybe.

Speaking of absinthe. It's for sale here, we have a local distiller that started making it. I'm thinking of trying some of the Green Fairy.

#1 Absinthe is overrated.

#2 Please don't take away the opium trade, I plan on becoming a junkie when I retire.

jaylectricity: #1 Absinthe is overrated.

If you like black licorice, it's worth trying once. However, I'd say there are better ways to habitually waste your money on booze.

The World Series?

I do not think-a, that this happenstance is of more than passing relevance to my band-a.

Need to rest up for Iran, right?

GaryPDX: They really need to call a truce on the drug war and start taxing it. It doesn't make any sense anymore.

Dammit, Gary... don't you go getting all reasonable and shiat...

Weaver95: abb3w:GaryPDX: This is an interesting tidbit.

I repeat: they should have spent more effort thoroughly making an example (and civilized country) out of Afghanistan instead of heading for Iraq.

I'd have settled for completely destroying the entire opium growing area. Instead, we built the drug lords new bridges and roads.

Then you might insterested in this (new window).

Well, as I see it:

We tidy up Iraq nicely just before the election; McCain loses his major strong point and the major issue will shift to the economy.

Iraq is still a major war-zone; The evidence of Bush's failure in Iraq is obvious and this shines a poor light on McCain by proxy.

Either way, McCain loses.

At this point, I really don't care if they are bringing them home for brownie points in the election. I just want them home. This thing has no foreseeable end. I know we are leaving Iraq in a mess, but we don't have the money to keep them there. We need to think about our own interests.

Indis: Need to rest up for Iran, right?

HAHAHA! My thoughts.
It's like he's playing RISK and needs to move his pieces over.

That headline is straight from July 2004 and 2006. So, I wouldn't read much into it.

Churchill2004: Why? The government can't win a war on drugs in their own country after four decades. What makes you think they can win one in Afghanistan?

because there are fewer democrats there.

It's like there's some event scheduled in the Fall that could hinge on this

I read Fall as Fail, and I'm not specifying whether that's past or present tense either.

/so there.

We could use those pull out troops to lead a surge in Afghanistan...

...Or lead an invasion of Iran.

There will be tens of thousands of US troops
in Iraq and Afghanistan 10 yrs from now, no
matter who gets elected in 2008/12..

Elections. Yay!!

abb3w: I repeat: they should have spent more effort thoroughly making an example (and civilized country) out of Afghanistan instead of heading for Iraq.

I agree. However, I don't think we can completely leave Iraq now -- the U.S. has built quite a reputation on leaving before the job is done. We need to rectify that reputation.

That being said, we need to prevent these invasions in the future. Restriction invasions to wars declared by Congress would be a good start. I'm pretty sure even the jokers in Congress would have declared war on Afghanistan after 9/11, but we wouldn't have invaded Iraq.

Subby: US may begin to withdraw troops from Iraq in September. It's like there's some event scheduled in the Fall that they'll be attending

FTFY

GaryPDX: They really need to call a truce on the drug war and start taxing it. It doesn't make any sense anymore.


Figures. The U.S.A. doesn't do too well when going to war against nebulous concepts like terror, poverty, and drugs.

Now, when in a war against something with a real name and a real army, we have a pretty good batting average.

INTERTRON: Subby: US may begin to withdraw troops from Iraq in September. It's like there's some event scheduled in the Fall that they'll be attending

FTFY

You mean the war in Iran?

yelmrog: The U.S.A. doesn't do too well when going to war against nebulous concepts like terror, poverty, and drugs.

Nobody does, because it's impossible to win.

abb3w: I repeat: they should have spent more effort thoroughly making an example (and civilized country) out of Afghanistan instead of heading for Iraq.

That would've required a more thought-out strategy. For the last couple of decades or so, we've made Afghanistan into Salusa Secundus for guerrila warfare. The Soviet Union poured so much into fighting Afghanistan that it ultimately cost them the Cold War - we're doing the same damn thing, only we were dumb enough to do it on two fronts.

TxRabbit: You mean the war in Iran?

Yes. I should have added "nearby" to it.