argument argue about share argue how
 
argue for



pros and cons   against

 
All TopicsGovernment & PoliticsPolicies

Arguments for and against

Obama's Afganistan Strategy

Is 30,000 more troops and 18 more months enough to fix the country?

started by juszczak on 12/3/09.

Obama
For Against
 
arguesreason
Obama is not committing the United States to nation building. He said that in his speech and he said that these plans. So, to "fix the country" should be taken off the argument. The objective is to dismantle, and disable Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The link is only part of the speech.


by JackCNewell (51.52) on 12/7/09.

10
argumentsreasons

 
 
argumentsdebate
One solid principle of warfare is that it is best to bring overwhelming force to bear. Why in the world is the president playing games with numbers. if the commanders think that more numbers are required then why not give them AT LEAST what they're asking for? It's a hedge that stinks of politics when people's lives are at stake.

by egorz13 (63.54) on 12/4/09.

10
argumentargue

argumentsdebate
While it's valid to set some timetables, I think it is ridiculous and politically hackish to broadcast them. If we should be there, then make the case for achieving the goal. Then use your discretion as far as a timetable. If we shouldn't be there, then get em all out. Again, the president is playing politics when people's lives are at stake.

by egorz13 (63.54) on 12/4/09.

10
argumentargue

argumentsdebate
This is an argument against the technical nature of this very topic.

The subtitle "Is 30,000 more troops and 18 more months enough to fix the country?" is a loaded question. No single number or action is capable of "fixing the country," whatever the hell that means. This topic is skewed from the very beginning by the personal politics of the original poster.

by Katzwinkel (69.39) on 12/4/09.

02
argumentargue

 
Obama
 
         
argue   for
© 2009 13 Guys Named Ed, LLC   •   About   •   Feedback   •   Sitemap
against   argues