First Afghanistan, then Iraq, what next?
401887
Iran, Syria, Libya, then Egypt but if Egypt fell, all the Arab countries will fall as well, since we hold half the population of the Arab ppl and we r considered the strongest Arabic military force
732821
I so agree with you bro, I went to Iraq in 2004 and I was in Baghdad for a year. I'm currently in college and I love my country and I love the army, but Iraq was a huge mistake It's a fucking mess over there. I hope american leaders will wake up and realize the sooner we leave the better, because its only gonna get worse over there. I prey that no more of our countrys children will have to endure anymore torture over there because this war doesn't benefit anyone. BRING THE TROOPS HOME, and OBAMA FOR 2008.
977643
Iraq, not to be confused with the War on Terror
264718
When the liberation of Afghanistan was complete, the US Government announced that all satellite imagery from the area had been purchased by the USA for an indefinite period of time. It is not possible for anyone outside of the US Government to have access to satellite photography in Afghanistan.\n\nAlso, physically it is very difficult for independent news sources to actually get anywhere outside of Kabul. The country is extremely mountainous and the road infrastructure is in ruins. The country has literally millions of landmines that were placed with little rhyme or reason. Even if the people who placed them wanted to pay to remove them, there are no maps of where they are because they were simply dropped from helicopters or planted by roving patrols.\n\nIraq, no matter what anyone wants to say, is a relatively modern country with an adequate transportation net except in the Kurdish areas (again, mountainous plus it was heavily persecuted under the Hussein regime). Iraq has extensive open borders with several countries that would not mind the Coalition being embarrassed by reporters who can sneak in just as easily as terrorists can (maybe they carpool together?).\n\nAlso, there just isn't as much interest in the viewing public for information coming from Afghanistan. The US presence is about 1/5 the size in Iraq, and the forces there are largely Special Forces who are not supposed to be photographed anyways. The bulk of the Coalition forces are actually not American, so that would shoot down the whole "Anti-American Conspiracy Theory" that we hear so much about (a French soldier was just killed there the other day, in case anyone cares).
1055753
This is the beginning of the drawdown. It will take a few years at least. Unlike Vietnam, we have never increased our numbers of troops in-country. We have made enormous strides but we need more Iraqis trained as soldiers and police before we can beging a major pull-out.
766528
The US did not abandon Afghanistan, we are dropping millions of dollars into their infrastructure, NATO has taken over the daily operation of all the military personnel from all the nations who are participating, the same as they will in Iraq when it becomes a little more stable. America still has 1,3000 troops in Afghanistan, fighting the Taliban every day and the Afghan military is taking a much larger role in providing security for their Nation. There is no linkage because abandonment has not happened!
1020969
Didn't see too many camels over there, actually.  There's plenty of sheep, but few camels.  There are more camels in Afghanistan.\nBut good luck.  Another fun thing to do is wait for night fall and steal anything that isn't nailed down from the Army.
307924
I think he would have gone into Afghanistan and focused on getting Bin Laden. He probably would also have strengthened security measures within the states (something that Bush still hasn't done, or at least not to an extent where it shows a difference). One thing that he would not have done was go into Iraq for supposed WMDs.
106646
We will come home from Iraq when the Iraqis are ready to take control of their own country and will not slip back into the way things used to be.  Anyone who thinks that as soon as a democrat becomes president, they will just end our efforts in Iraq is very mistaken.  So you people think that after the progress that we have made, we should just pull out now without completing the job?  Anyone ever heard of Vietnam?  The one war we weren't completely committed to?  And how does it compare with the other wars that we have been in and did the right way?  Which war do we look back on now with the most regret?  Vietnam, because we went in half-assed and lost thousands of soldiers for nothing.  Compare that with WW2 where we lost many more soldiers, but finished the job.
662061
Iraq, Iran, or Afghanistan.  They seem to think they know how the world should be run.
496373
Overtly, the US invaded Afghanistan to overthrow the Taliban and find Osama Bin Laden.  Neither of these has yet been completely accomplished.\n\nThe Taliban continues and last month had even made a bit of a comeback.  The conditions, such as the treatment of women, are even worse now than they were at the time of the Taliban.\n\nThe reason is because the Bush administration is full of idoits that don't know how to fight wars.  In Afghanistan, like Iraq, there were far too few troops sent to do the job.\n\nUnlike Iraq, the troops in Afghanistan never intended to occupy the country.  The administration naively believed that the Afghani people would greet the troops as liberators and band together to establish a western-style democracy.  This hasn't happened.\n\nToday, the new Afghani government controls only Kabul.  The rest of the country is in the hands of warlords who are at least as bad as, or worse than, the Taliban.  The Taliban contines to hold some territory as well.\n\nLaws are almost non-existant in Afganistan, and the US has done next to nothing to help.  Kabul still hasn't been rebuilt since the Soviet invasion, and the US has allocated no money to do so.  The "aid" that the US does provide isn't even sufficient to train and maintian the security forces that act as the new government's personal bodyguards.\n\nIf the US left today, it would hardly make any difference.  The number of troops and resources dedicated to Afghanistan is so small that it might not even be noticed of they were withdrawn.\n\nThe handling of this war should be a source of great shame to the Untied States.  The Afghani people were the poorest in the world before the invasion, and now they are even worse off.\n\nAmerica, the richest country on the planet, could easily rebuild the country and could do much to help restore order, but won't.  No reason has been given for this since the American press and people have already forgotton about Afghanistan.
1153959
Um, yeah.  You're right all the way.  We left the job half finished and ran off to start another war we didn't need to.  Now Osama is still out there, terrorists have a new breeding ground in the chaotic Iraq, and druglords and the Taliban are resurfacing in Afghanistan.  I wish I had a better answer for you.
726972
Close to the entire army and Marine Corp is involved in the yearly cycling of troops to Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm not even too sure where they dig up the extra troops they did manage to find after I left the Army a couple of years ago except by screwing troops out of much need rest from duty in Iraq. In other words, the situation can't be maintained indefinitely. \n\nEven if we did have our military up to a point where it could continue indefinite combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, we still don't have the money to do what we're doing for an extended period, especially with the lack of accountability for the funds that have been given to Iraq.
718574
The chances are pretty good. Despite what "duds" and "info morons" like reyi think Iraq is less dangerous than Afghanistan and many US cities. Your odds of being killed in Washington DC, the nations capital, are far greater than they are in Iraq. Of course if safety is your concern, don't do anything.
406211
Some parts of Afghanistan may become more open. When I say open, I mean schools and working women etc. The rest of the country will remain the same. May be marginally better that means little to the world.\n\nNo other country would be in a position to rule it as the Russians did or the Pakistanis wished to do...\n\nThere is a saying that there are three no nos in the world\n\n1. Enemity with Afghans\n2. Drinking the water of Yamuna \n3. Trusting in people of Kashmiri... , but it is just a saying...
597661
For a definition, read the news about Afghanistan and Iraq from sources like:  http://www.alternet.org/ and http://buzzflash.com/\n\nThe US occupation of these two countries is a textbook example of an occupying military and the consequences.
391058
Afghanistan,against Russian invaders.\nthey fought for a full decade!\nwatch out AMERICA.