Summary: "A new Senate report says billions of dollars in aid go to waste in Afghanistan, where the president is about to make a decision about troop levels. But as Andrew J. Bacevich argues, the question is a distraction from a far more fundamental choice."
A British soldier aims his weapon during a patrol in Nahr e Saraj, Helmand Province, Afghanistan, 06/30/10. (photo: Bay Ismoyo/AFP/Getty Images)
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
You may not be old enough to remember Afghanistan prior to the invasion - with the intent of conquering it - by the Imperialist Soviet Empire. If so, you'd probably remember that it shook President Carter so to the core, that he personally called the Soviet Premier, and threatened him with a preemptive nuclear attack.
Obama simply dances to the tune of perfidious flute players, grossly off key, always out of step.
RSS feed for comments to this post