While the outgoing Afghan President continues to denounce the United States and praise China and Iran, the Obama Administration has been pressuring Afghanis to allow it to keep roughly 10,000 troops in the country with the obvious commitment to spend billions and billions more on the war. The agreement has now bee signed. This is being heralded as a long-awaited success for the Administration – a curious achievement for those who want us out of the country and money spent on badly needed domestic programs of education, science, and infrastructure.
President Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai signed the deal.
NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen declared that the United States and NATO “committed to help finance the Afghan security forces through 2017, to help Afghanistan to further strengthen its institutions, and to further develop our political and practical cooperation with Afghanistan through our Enduring Partnership.”
The situation is not without positive news. There was a successful election and a recent defeat of a Taliban surge.
AND the actual reason why no forces were left behind, was that Iraq refused to grant immunity to US soldiers from Iraqi courts. Without that immunity, troop withdrawal began. But Obama failed to mention that he was helpless to negotiate with a country we had just defeated.
Even Obama had tried to leave SOME troops behind, as is normal. But he was too ineffective to do it.
Oh my, Obama being blamed for Bush.
Heartwarming story Aridog. As you know, I’m a baseball lover. I was working in rural Wi. years back. It was toward the end of a long day. I was in an Amish area. I saw a wonderful, pastoral scene of Amish kids playing a pickup game of baseball. I respectfully kept my distance and pulled over to watch for a minute. All of a sudden the scene was RUINED when a kid hit the ball and I heard the Godless “ping” of an aluminum bat hitting the ball. If ANYONE would use wood bats, wouldn’t you think it would be the Amish?? Broke my heart.
rafflaw
Nick,
Aren’t you forgetting the status of forces agreement that Bush signed that mandated we get out of Iraq?
=====================
Can’t forget something never known in the first place.
It is the other side of the revisionist history coin.
Ignoring history is a form of revising history.
Bush Derangement Syndrome is not as dangerous as Ebola, but rafflaw has been afflicted for some time. It has manifested itself twice already this morning. Olly has another diagnosis and I am now seriously getting concerned that I can’t remember the acronym. It’s actually more accurate than BDS.
rafflaw:
Have you forgotten all those video clips where Obama said he would pull us out of Iraq. He said it over and over and over again on the campaign trail.
Then, when ISIS happened, he tried to rewrite history, and claimed that it wasn’t his decision, but that of the Iraqi people.
I can find and post them, if you need.
I just saw a clip from 2007 where Bush prophetically proclaimed that if we withdrew all forces from Iraq too early, it would leave the region too unstable. It would be dangerous for the region, and for ourselves, and we would probably have to return there yet again.
That was a nice story about the soldiers and the kids.
Aridog – if you find out what the differences are with a SOFA, please let me know.
We have troops stationed in bases all over the world, including Germany and South Korea. It is more typical to leave troops at a base than not. After we fought a world war, yet again, in Germany, we absolutely established a permanent base there.
Why do this in Afghanistan? The region is completely unstable and ripe for terrorists. In fact, for years, the Taliban has been cowing citizens with remarks such as that they’ll be right there, waiting to take over again, as soon as the infidels leave, and then there’ll be hell to pay for anyone who cooperated.
Do we want a repeat of ISIS/ISIL in Iraq? (Is ISIL like Prince, who kept changing his name? Shall they be the Terrorist Group Formerly Known as ISIS?)
The posted link calls this a “Bilateral Security Agreement”, rather than a “Status of Forces Agreement” (SOFA), which essentially keeps all US military personal under the UCMJ and not local civilian law, and that concerns me. What is the difference? Such agreements have been called “SOFA” for over 50 years, so what is the difference now?
It might just be a SOFA with a different title, but I’d really like to read the actual test of the document. I’ve served under both SOFA and without one and the difference is stunning.
To cite doglover…
“There has got to be a way to help people in developing countries that does not involve killing them.”
There actually are several ways, but they require trust, or at least hesitation, on both sides. If you’d like, I can post several photos of soldiers doing what they love to do best…make friends with local civilians and especially the children. Among my fondest memories is the day I discovered some kids, far far away, playing baseball in a dirt field with a tennis ball and broom stick for a bat. All of us in my squad found real baseball bats, balls, and gloves (from a PX or from those we knew near a PX) and gave them to those kids…and spent a few afternoons playing with them. I never felt better in my life than when I laid down my M16A1 near home plate and took up a bat to play the game. Not one of those kids went near any of our rifles, not a one, they just played the game…and we tried to make it the better side of who we were.
I hope this comment actually posts.
Nick,
Aren’t you forgetting the status of forces agreement that Bush signed that mandated we get out of Iraq?
O-Bummer……… What a lying sack of SH*T!!!!
Isaac, great comment. We would not have the mess in Iraq if we didn’t bug out so Obama could say he “ended a war” in his 2012 campaign.
Someone convince me that, if all the dust is removed, this and the entire Mid East is not about OIL.
There has got to be a way to help people in developing countries that does not involve killing them.
Biraq Obola is the closer. He is doing his job efficiently for his handlers. The deep state rules. Over and out.
The reason Obama didn’t leave 10,000 troops in Iraq was that Malaki wouldn’t allow it. Now Afghanistan sees what can happen and they, wisely, accept. The 10,000 troops keeps a foot hold in the country from which the US can launch special forces and other surgical strikes. It is a kind of a no brainer, unless of course you have no brain.
Any criticism one way or another is so much ranting and raving. If he leaves the troops, someone will call him on it. If he takes all US troops out someone will call him on it. It is time to stop looking at Obama and look at what he does.
I am sure he really needed to be pressured. I am sure the only pressure he needed was a big check. We are foolish, naive and arrogant. We never learn.