Why is there no rush for the US to leave Afghanistan?

[pokerbobo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Note I said "as" bad ....and "for the most part" and "as easy".....the media is lazy...and will do what is quickest and easiest to sell. (note the big NY times magazine story from this past weekend) A female soldier claimed being raped twice in Iraq....they worked on this story for a year and printed it. (it turns out she was never even in Iraq) WTF? Any journalisnm 101 student would want to make sure of this fact wouldnt they?....What the hell...just run with the story....its anti Iraq war and thats all that matters.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really?
She never claimed she was raped in Iraq (Mississippi and Guam). Why don't you get your facts straight? It does seem likely she was never in Iraq, even though her personnel file includes a Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, which is only awarded to troops who have served in a war zone. The magazine was remiss in checking out the story (apparently they checked at the last minute).
There were on the order of 30 others mentioned in the article. Care to refute all of their stories?

[/ QUOTE ]

Here is a blurb that goes thru what the NYT did....from fox news...obviously not a reputable source (compared to the NY Times)

The Times admitted it distributed an article in the March 18 edition of its Sunday Magazine, while knowing the story contained some glaring inaccuracies. The article was about women who served in Iraq, the sexual abuse some say they endured, and their struggles in reclaiming their pre-war lives. But one of the women profiled, who said she'd been raped twice and suffered brain damage when a roadside bomb exploded next to her Humvee, was never actually IN Iraq. She lied. And, there was no roadside bomb. Readers were left to wonder if there'd been any sexual assaults.

The newspaper knew about the mistakes on March 12, six days before the magazine was distributed, and 13 days before it published the correction. The magazine was printed on March 9 — three days before the lies were discovered — but there was still plenty of time to reprint it. The cost might've been huge, but wouldn't it be worth it for a paper whose masthead proclaims "All the News That's Fit to Print?"

[AngusThermopyle]

One, it is an article written by a contract writer for the magazine, not the main paper. Still, under the NYT banner.
Two,
[ QUOTE ]

Aaron Rectica, who runs the magazine’s research desk, disputes that. He said that by deadline, the Navy had not given the Times any reason to disbelieve Randall’s claim of service in Iraq. Rectica said the Navy only told the paper that Randall’s commanders believed she’d been in Iraq but that no one in the unit had been in combat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Source: AirForce Times

Not saying the paper was not ultimately responsible, but to suggest that they pull the entire magazine when there was some question about part of one story out of 30 or so?

[pokerbobo]

What if they ran a story on 30 baby raping murderers and you were in there by mistake?

Would you still not want them to pull the article...or be Ok with a week or so going by before they issue a correction?

[Case Closed]

[ QUOTE ]
What if they ran a story on 30 baby raping murderers and you were in there by mistake?

Would you still not want them to pull the article...or be Ok with a week or so going by before they issue a correction?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a strawman argument correct?

[pokerbobo]

just want to know if the same opinion is held if he were personally hurt by a story

[CharlieDontSurf]

wasn't this thread about Afghanistan?

[whiskeytown]

wanna know something funny?

This week Time Magazine had talibanstan as their headline/frontpage about the resurgance of the Taliban in Afghanistan - it ran as the front page on their magazine EVERYWHERE but North America - where they ran a story about trying to get the Bible in Public Schools -

story is here

Afghanistan may be the most overlooked pain in the ass we're dealing with right now -

despite what the vapid tv viewers report to you, there is still a war over there - and in fact, we've done even a more piss poor job on this one then we did on Iraq, as if that's even possible. Taliban are again in control of certain parts of Afghanistan and our "ally", Pakistan, who is an ally in lip service only.

due to political priorities, we have totally failed to apprehend the man responsible for Al-Queda and 9/11 - and the fault rests solely with an administration more incompetent then any other we have known or are likely to know again.

In the case of Osama, it was Rummy who pulled out the Special forces who were to cut Osama off before the retreat to Tora Bora - they were shipped off to Iraq and Osama slipped clean away -

but he was just window dressing for the preplanned invasion of Iraq anyways -

yer doing a heck of a job, bushie.

rb

[MuresanForMVP]

[ QUOTE ]
wanna know something funny?

This week Time Magazine had talibanstan as their headline/frontpage about the resurgance of the Taliban in Afghanistan - it ran as the front page on their magazine EVERYWHERE but North America - where they ran a story about trying to get the Bible in Public Schools -

story is here

Afghanistan may be the most overlooked pain in the ass we're dealing with right now -

despite what the vapid tv viewers report to you, there is still a war over there - and in fact, we've done even a more piss poor job on this one then we did on Iraq, as if that's even possible. Taliban are again in control of certain parts of Afghanistan and our "ally", Pakistan, who is an ally in lip service only.

due to political priorities, we have totally failed to apprehend the man responsible for Al-Queda and 9/11 - and the fault rests solely with an administration more incompetent then any other we have known or are likely to know again.

In the case of Osama, it was Rummy who pulled out the Special forces who were to cut Osama off before the retreat to Tora Bora - they were shipped off to Iraq and Osama slipped clean away -

but he was just window dressing for the preplanned invasion of Iraq anyways -

yer doing a heck of a job, bushie.

rb

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're saying that the war was a F up because the Taliban is coming back in small areas around the country? LOL. That war was a TEXTBOOK special operations war, and was fought extremely efficiently.

[whiskeytown]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
wanna know something funny?

This week Time Magazine had talibanstan as their headline/frontpage about the resurgance of the Taliban in Afghanistan - it ran as the front page on their magazine EVERYWHERE but North America - where they ran a story about trying to get the Bible in Public Schools -

story is here

Afghanistan may be the most overlooked pain in the ass we're dealing with right now -

despite what the vapid tv viewers report to you, there is still a war over there - and in fact, we've done even a more piss poor job on this one then we did on Iraq, as if that's even possible. Taliban are again in control of certain parts of Afghanistan and our "ally", Pakistan, who is an ally in lip service only.

due to political priorities, we have totally failed to apprehend the man responsible for Al-Queda and 9/11 - and the fault rests solely with an administration more incompetent then any other we have known or are likely to know again.

In the case of Osama, it was Rummy who pulled out the Special forces who were to cut Osama off before the retreat to Tora Bora - they were shipped off to Iraq and Osama slipped clean away -

but he was just window dressing for the preplanned invasion of Iraq anyways -

yer doing a heck of a job, bushie.

rb

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're saying that the war was a F up because the Taliban is coming back in small areas around the country? LOL. That war was a TEXTBOOK special operations war, and was fought extremely efficiently.

[/ QUOTE ]

as evidenced by our inability to stablize/secure the region or our inability to capture the man responsible for heading the organization that killed 3K+ Americans on 9/11?

Which stellar part of the Special Operations success are you so proud of?

rb

[CharlieDontSurf]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
wanna know something funny?

This week Time Magazine had talibanstan as their headline/frontpage about the resurgance of the Taliban in Afghanistan - it ran as the front page on their magazine EVERYWHERE but North America - where they ran a story about trying to get the Bible in Public Schools -

story is here

Afghanistan may be the most overlooked pain in the ass we're dealing with right now -

despite what the vapid tv viewers report to you, there is still a war over there - and in fact, we've done even a more piss poor job on this one then we did on Iraq, as if that's even possible. Taliban are again in control of certain parts of Afghanistan and our "ally", Pakistan, who is an ally in lip service only.

due to political priorities, we have totally failed to apprehend the man responsible for Al-Queda and 9/11 - and the fault rests solely with an administration more incompetent then any other we have known or are likely to know again.

In the case of Osama, it was Rummy who pulled out the Special forces who were to cut Osama off before the retreat to Tora Bora - they were shipped off to Iraq and Osama slipped clean away -

but he was just window dressing for the preplanned invasion of Iraq anyways -

yer doing a heck of a job, bushie.

rb

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're saying that the war was a F up because the Taliban is coming back in small areas around the country? LOL. That war was a TEXTBOOK special operations war, and was fought extremely efficiently.

[/ QUOTE ]

they key word in your post is WAS.