I wish we would just remove the troops from Afghanistan and be done with it. Sure, I know it’s not that simple but it sounds good. I read an article in the NY Times that said President Obama is scheduled to announce his decision next week, regarding how many troops he will be sending to Afghanistan. Although, it wasn’t his decision to start this whole thing and send them in the first place, he is left to clean up the mess. He says that he does intend to “finish the job”. I know it’s necessary to send additional troops over to assist with the withdrawal. I also know that it’s not as cut and dry as a lot of people may think. President Obama doesn’t just make a phone call and say, “Ok, it’s over. Round ‘em up, we’re closing down shop and everyone’s coming home!” Besides searching for answers to the 9/11 attacks, I don’t see why we’re still over there. Does it really take almost 9 years? In other cases, I feel that the U.S. spends a lot of unnecessary time trying to help “fix” other countries’ problems. Some that would otherwise have a negative impact on the U.S., sometimes not. In some cases, these countries will never be “fixed”. They are not “fixable”. All I’m saying is that there has been a LOT of unnecessary bloodshed in Afghanistan over the years. I’m looking forward to hearing the details of President Obama’s “comprehensive strategy” next week to see if we may truly be nearing the end of this long and drawn out war.
On the side-
Let me also take this opportunity to say that it really irritates me that the media refers to President Obama as, “Mr. Obama”!! I found this to be the case in most (if not all) of the political articles and blogs I’ve read online regarding President Obama. It seems a bit disrespectful. You may choose to address your father-in-law by “Mr.”, but not the President of the United States. He has worked hard and has earned the title of President. So let’s show him a little respect. I don’t recall any of the previous presidents being referred to as “Mr. Bush” or “Mr. Clinton”. Why does the media think this is okay? Do they not recognize this as being incorrect? Or, do they not care? I don't get it.
On a blog called, “Get ‘em the hell outta’ there! ”, S. Williams understands that removing the troops from Afghanistan is not easy for Obama. She expressed that she wished that our troops would go home. I found the post to be quite interesting. The author’s post was her opinion based on an article in the NY Times about how President Obama is sending more troops. S. Williams wrote that “President Obama doesn’t just make a phone call and say, “Ok, it’s over. Round ‘em up, we’re closing down shop and everyone’s coming home!” She was looking into President Obama’s point of view. When President Obama decided to run for president he knew that it would not be that easy to end the war and I bet most of the people knew it too. In the public’s eyes it seems that he is not trying to send them home. Let just hope this is part of his plan to get the troops home.
ReplyDeleteI agreed with her that it does feel “the U.S. spends a lot of unnecessary time trying to help “fix” other countries’ problems.” I think we should leave them alone. We have our own problems here. The people in Afghanistan do not want us there to begin with.
I see that this war was unnecessary and I don’t know why we are still there. There has been “a LOT of unnecessary bloodshed in Afghanistan over the years” that could be avoided.
I don’t understand the last paragraph in this post. When she wrote, “It seems a bit disrespectful. You may choose to address your father-in-law by “Mr.”, but not the President of the United States. He has worked hard and has earned the title of President. So let’s show him a little respect. I don’t recall any of the previous presidents being referred to as “Mr. Bush” or “Mr. Clinton”. This is where a little question mark that lights up in my head. I know that this is her opinion and she respects President Obama.
The last paragraph shows that this is bothering her when people “refer to President Obama as, “Mr. Obama”!!” I don’t understand how this relates to President Obama’s decision on sending more troops home or her opinion on getting them out.
On the other hand, she did some research and “found this to be the case in most (if not all) of the political articles and blogs. [She have] read online regarding President Obama.”
I read “Get ‘em the hell outta’ there!” critique written by my colleague Williams. Towards the middle paragraph Williams thinks that sending more troops over to help withdraw is necessary. I completely disagree because I just don’t think we need to be sending more troops over to help withdraw, I think we need to start withdrawing the troops that are over there right now without dragging anymore troops into Afghanistan. But, it is true when Williams says it’s not easy to bring them home all at once because that wouldn’t be possible. I also agree when Williams doesn’t know why were over there right now because I’m wondering the same thing.
ReplyDeleteI think that Williams could have been a little more clear and specific when she states, “In other cases, I feel that the U.S. spends a lot of unnecessary time trying to help “fix” other countries’ problems.” Williams could have given an example as to when the U.S. has helped fix another counties’ problem.
So overall, Williams picks a side that she doesn’t understand why American troops are still in Afghanistan but thinks we should send more troops over to help withdraw those who are there now. Williams’s statement is kind of clear to me but it was difficult to understand some parts of this blog post at times. And, then in the end Williams thinks that President Obama is being disrespected by being called Mr. Obama. I’m not sure what that has to do with the first part of the blog post, but I can clearly see her opinion when she thinks President Obama being called Mr. Obama is disrespectful.
Williams had a good thought out idea about this blog post but I think it could have been a little more organized but other than that Williams picked a side and argued.
Friday, December 11, 2009
ReplyDeleteCritique
When reading the post "Get em' the hell outta' there" I can agree with every statement. I too do not understand why we are STILL at war in Afganistan. Now that we know the decision that President Obama has made, it is very disipointing. I also realize that is not as easy as people may think it is to just send the troops home. I think that the posts hits the nail on the head when it says " these countries will never be fixed, they are not fixable." I honestly think we are there to try and fix their country. It will not happen, people have to be willing to accept change before they will change. This just makes me wonder how much longer this war will last, when will we declare "victory" and say thats enough, and how can we declare victory when it's unclear why we are there fighting, what are we trying to achieve?