General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAgnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)his pants.
Bring home our people and deman Congress end the AUMF. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ40/pdf/PLAW-107publ40.pdf
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)What does that have to do with this?
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Nope! Maybe we should ask the soldiers if they would like to trade places.
Aside from the fact that they should ALL be home, your comparison of Rome to Kabul is ridiculous
uhnope
(6,419 posts)m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)unfuckingbelievable.
uhnope
(6,419 posts)neverforget
(9,436 posts)as opposed to the German and Japanese who surrendered and the shooting stopped. There was no insurgency in those countries.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)It occurred to me that there are troops stationed in a lot of places where there are no wars. I didn't think it was a particularly bizarre thought.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Good fucking God, this place has become ridiculous. A casual observation that "presence of troops" does not mean "continuation of war" is taken as if it is an observation looking for a fight.
I have no clue when everyone on DU got on such a fucking hair trigger over every casual comment.
Response to jberryhill (Reply #18)
Jeff Rosenzweig This message was self-deleted by its author.
former9thward
(32,019 posts)It seems there is a difference between Afghanistan and those countries.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)So, if that question really puzzles you, perhaps you might ask someone who knows.
In Korea, it pretty much looks like a staring contest.
But I would imagine that the troops stationed in Afghanistan might have something to do with the agreement between the US and the government there which the US recognizes.
former9thward
(32,019 posts)And N. Korea is not killing U.S. troops regardless. People in Afghanistan are trying to kill American troops and they have been successful at it. You really think being stationed in Afghanistan has the same danger level as Germany? The so-called agreement by the Afghan government means nothing outside of Kabul and not even there. That agreement does not stop bullets, IEDs or anything else which will kill Americans.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)No. Nor did I suggest any such thing.
I hope your argument finds someone who is on the other side of it.
former9thward
(32,019 posts)Your post. You are implying the situation in those countries are the same as Afghanistan. The posters replying to you know it.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)The observation that there are troops stationed somewhere where there is not a war strikes me as facile.
Beyond that, I am impressed with the gathering of psychics here to tell me what I think.
We didn't have ANY troops in mainland Japan until after that war was over, come to think of it.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)Perhaps also that the Axis Powers were defeated 70 years ago. That's probably what they say.
UTUSN
(70,706 posts)Last edited Sat Jan 3, 2015, 10:30 PM - Edit history (2)
quadrature
(2,049 posts)Skittles
(153,169 posts)KG
(28,751 posts)KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)"Taliban" has not ended the war it wants to fight (to drive out the foreign occupation and defeat collaborators). The Afghan Resistance's spring offensive of 2015 may mean that we finally admit defeat in the war the Resistance is fighting and pull the remainder of our occupation forces out.