43% Americans feel US made mistake by sending troops to Afghan

[Lankan Ranger]

43% Americans feel US made mistake by sending troops to Afghan

After Wikileaks released the leaked classified documents on the Afghan war, 43 per cent of Americans now feel that the US made a mistake by sending troops to the war-torn country, according to a latest poll.

This is slightly up from just before the release of the leaked documents last week, which was 38 per cent, Gallup said in its latest poll.

"While Americans are still more likely to support than oppose the war, the percentage who say it was a mistake to get involved is at a new high," Gallup said in a statement.

The publication of the documents on the website WikiLeaks revealed the struggle the US military is facing in Afghanistan trying to weaken terrorist elements in the region.

But the release of these documents alone does not seem to have changed Americans' assessments of US progress in the war, which were already pessimistic in a Gallup poll conducted early last month.

"In fact, Americans' views of US progress have been decidedly negative since late last summer," it said.

However, Americans generally agree the leaked documents should not have been published on the Internet, with 66 per cent saying it was wrong for the website WikiLeaks to have done so; 25 percent believe the website was right.

"This general assessment holds among those paying high as well as low levels of attention to the story," Gallup said.

43% Americans feel US made mistake by sending troops to Afghan - US - World - The Times of India

 

[Neither Right Nor Wrong]

They feel that now ..I wonder what would they have felt after 9/11??

 

[Spring Onion]

Mistake??? its CRIME. mistakes can be forgiven but NOT crimes,

 

[Dexter.]

They feel that now ..I wonder what would they have felt after 9/11??

Americans were pretty much riled-up and knew someome was going to get their bum kicked. It's pretty uncommon for the US to suffer an attack from a foreign government. I'm not suprised by the results. Public support tends to worsen as a war drags on.

 

[humanfirst]

Mistake??? its CRIME. mistakes can be forgiven but NOT crimes,

If usa hadn't intervened,afghanistan would still be ruled by talibans,where girls would be prohibited from going to even elementary schools,no modern education,no industries..etc.Now atleast the coming generations can have a good future(Especially girls)

 

[CAPTAIN AMERICA]

Americans were pretty much riled-up and knew someome was going to get their bum kicked. It's pretty uncommon for the US to suffer an attack from a foreign government. I'm not suprised by the results.


For some time now some groups and some countries seem to believe they can use terrorism to attack other countries and that they can escape being held responsible for those attacks and not suffer the consequences.

A country is responsiblewhen their citizens or non citizens attacks other countries. Afghanstan was responsible for the attack on the USA because that was the head quarters for the leadership of that attack. If Afghanstan had arrested and or excuted those responsible there may have never been a war between the USA and Afghanstan. Excuses and words dont mean anything.

Pakistan is responsible for the attack on India, if India chooses not do anything that is their choice.

Iran and the Palestinians are responsible for the attacks on Israel, an Israel has the right to do what ever they wish in response to those attacks.. Its their choice.

If a country cant control their citizens they are not a goverment and they have the choice of controlling their citizens or war with the country their citizens attack.

So far the USA war with Afghanstan and Iraq were for replaceing the goverments hopefull they people of those countries will be better off with a new goverment.

If your honest americans have not killed that many people and especially civlians, not compared to previous wars, that does not mean american cant change and this just becomes a war of attrition, the complete and utter destruction of a country.

 

[chauism]

For some time now some groups and some countries seem to believe they can use terrorism to attack other countries and that they can escape being held responsible for those attacks and not suffer the consequences.

A country is responsiblewhen their citizens or non citizens attacks other countries. Afghanstan was responsible for the attack on the USA because that was the head quarters for the leadership of that attack. If Afghanstan had arrested and or excuted those responsible there may have never been a war between the USA and Afghanstan. Excuses and words dont mean anything.

Pakistan is responsible for the attack on India, if India chooses not do anything that is their choice.

Iran and the Palestinians are responsible for the attacks on Israel, an Israel has the right to do what ever they wish in response to those attacks.. Its their choice.

If a country cant control their citizens they are not a goverment and they have the choice of controlling their citizens or war with the country their citizens attack.

So far the USA war with Afghanstan and Iraq were for replaceing the goverments hopefull they people of those countries will be better off with a new goverment.

If your honest americans have not killed that many people and especially civlians, not compared to previous wars, that does not mean american cant change and this just becomes a war of attrition, the complete and utter destruction of a country.

What kind of logic is that?

By your opinion, Singapore should also cane US government for Michael P. Fay's case. China should execute UK's government for Akmal Shaikh's case. Both US and UK's government failed to control their citizens behavior in other countries, and should be hold accountable for their failure.

It is good to see you back on your usual nonsense.

 

[FreekiN]

For some time now some groups and some countries seem to believe they can use terrorism to attack other countries and that they can escape being held responsible for those attacks and not suffer the consequences.

A country is responsiblewhen their citizens or non citizens attacks other countries. Afghanstan was responsible for the attack on the USA because that was the head quarters for the leadership of that attack. If Afghanstan had arrested and or excuted those responsible there may have never been a war between the USA and Afghanstan. Excuses and words dont mean anything.

Pakistan is responsible for the attack on India, if India chooses not do anything that is their choice.

Iran and the Palestinians are responsible for the attacks on Israel, an Israel has the right to do what ever they wish in response to those attacks.. Its their choice.

If a country cant control their citizens they are not a goverment and they have the choice of controlling their citizens or war with the country their citizens attack.

So far the USA war with Afghanstan and Iraq were for replaceing the goverments hopefull they people of those countries will be better off with a new goverment.

If your honest americans have not killed that many people and especially civlians, not compared to previous wars, that does not mean american cant change and this just becomes a war of attrition, the complete and utter destruction of a country.

With that logic, WW3 is just around the corner.

 

[gambit]

What kind of logic is that?

By your opinion, Singapore should also cane US government for Michael P. Fay's case. China should execute UK's government for Akmal Shaikh's case. Both US and UK's government failed to control their citizens behavior in other countries, and should be hold accountable for their failure.

It is good to see you back on your usual nonsense.

Appropriate logic. Criminals act on selfish impulses and/or interests so the Singapore punishment is a separate issue. Afghanistan allowed al-Qaeda, an international organization that has interests that goes far beyond ordinary criminality, and acted with intentions akin to that of a state that has state level interests. For your argument, the more appropriate analogy should be Mexico where criminality have organized itself into organizations, aka 'organized crime', that has a major impact on Mexico's internal politics and whose actions over the Mexico-US border rises in proportionate scale. In this case, Mexico failed to control its territory and citizens, just like Afghanistan's Taliban accommodated al-Qaeda.

 

[CAPTAIN AMERICA]

With that logic, WW3 is just around the corner.

It could be just around the corner, or perhaps it started 911.

 

[chauism]

Appropriate logic. Criminals act on selfish impulses and/or interests so the Singapore punishment is a separate issue. Afghanistan allowed al-Qaeda, an international organization that has interests that goes far beyond ordinary criminality, and acted with intentions akin to that of a state that has state level interests. For your argument, the more appropriate analogy should be Mexico where criminality have organized itself into organizations, aka 'organized crime', that has a major impact on Mexico's internal politics and whose actions over the Mexico-US border rises in proportionate scale. In this case, Mexico failed to control its territory and citizens, just like Afghanistan's Taliban accommodated al-Qaeda.

Our dear Captain American's argument was that if a country can not control its citizens behavior if these citizens act on their own to do something illegal in other countries then the government is responsible for its citizens' actions.

Pakistan is responsible for the attack on India, if India chooses not do anything that is their choice.

Iran and the Palestinians are responsible for the attacks on Israel, an Israel has the right to do what ever they wish in response to those attacks.. Its their choice.

If a country cant control their citizens they are not a goverment and they have the choice of controlling their citizens or war with the country their citizens attack.

His sentence is not that comprehensive as he actually wrote himself, but I think it was what he meant. So China and Singapore's cases are sufficient enough here according to his logic.

His logic would be appropriate if the government is sponsoring, encouraging and protecting its citizens' criminal action in other countries, which is true in Afghanistan case. However, there is no concrete evidence supporting his reference to Pakistan, Iran or Palestinian. Government could also be hold responsible if the government is unwilling to turn over the criminal if there is an extradition agreement between two countries, but those are not cases in his examples.

 

[gambit]

Our dear Captain American's argument was that if a country can not control its citizens behavior if these citizens act on their own to do something illegal in other countries then the government is responsible for its citizens' actions.

Control here does not mean every US citizen is acting ON BEHALF of the US government, in other words, an agent of the government and execute actions that serves the US government's interests. Control also mean the Afghan government has the burden of exercising authority over the territory it proclaimed to the world as 'belonging' to Afghanistan. If either or both conditions are satisfied anywhere then we can hold that government as culpable to any event.

His sentence is not that comprehensive as he actually wrote himself, but I think it was what he meant. So China and Singapore's cases are sufficient enough here according to his logic.

His logic would be appropriate if the government is sponsoring, encouraging and protecting its citizens' criminal action in other countries, which is true in Afghanistan case. However, there is no concrete evidence supporting his reference to Pakistan, Iran or Palestinian. Government could also be hold responsible if the government is unwilling to turn over the criminal if there is an extradition agreement between two countries, but those are not cases in his examples.

Hezbollah and Hamas are creations from Iran in collusions with host countries that surround Israel. Both organizations are in effect Iranian agents executing policies that serves Iranian interests. This make Iran and other countries culpable to varying degrees any event against Israel.

 

[Usama86]

Good debating skills shown by the guys above but sadly not on topic.
After almost 10 years of war the US has almost nothing to show for in Afgh, Osama? Mullah Omer? Taliban? Haqqani network? these were few of the core issues they wanted to settle by means of war. They dont even control much of Afg any way, other then Kabul they cant claim to have complete control of any other major city. The NATO commanders there are admitting that Taliban control more the 60% of Afg. 10 years into the war US army is still asking for more troops and believe me if the American people allow this war to go on another 10 years from now US army will still be asking for more troops. All big armies have this tendency to invest in defeat, it is hard to accept that you are not able to achieve your objectives or are doing so at a painfully slow pace even with superior fire power and man power. The USSR only left after their economy back home started crumbling.
So no surprise that Americans feel that war is a bad idea after all many people there dont have jobs even houses have been lost and that is due to the war their country is fighting. i feel that Wikileaks have served the purpose they were made public for.

 

[CAPTAIN AMERICA]

Good debating skills shown by the guys above but sadly not on topic.
After almost 10 years of war the US has almost nothing to show for in Afgh, Osama? Mullah Omer? Taliban? Haqqani network? these were few of the core issues they wanted to settle by means of war. They dont even control much of Afg any way, other then Kabul they cant claim to have complete control of any other major city. The NATO commanders there are admitting that Taliban control more the 60% of Afg. 10 years into the war US army is still asking for more troops and believe me if the American people allow this war to go on another 10 years from now US army will still be asking for more troops. All big armies have this tendency to invest in defeat, it is hard to accept that you are not able to achieve your objectives or are doing so at a painfully slow pace even with superior fire power and man power. The USSR only left after their economy back home started crumbling.
So no surprise that Americans feel that war is a bad idea after all many people there dont have jobs even houses have been lost and that is due to the war their country is fighting. i feel that Wikileaks have served the purpose they were made public for.

I expect we will leave some group in power, perhaps the present countrys goverment and back them with air power and Predator Drones, the USA has several hundred now and will have hundreds more in the next two years. The USA and the Afghanstan goverment will have hundreds of agents on the ground helping select targets. Its going to hard for the taliban to take over when they have to live underground.

 

[CAPTAIN AMERICA]

USAF tests non-aviators for unmanned air system operations
By Craig Hoyle

The US Air Force is testing a scheme to prepare non-aviators to fly its General Atomics MQ-1 Predator A and MQ-9 Reaper unmanned air systems, with its current use of rated pilots unable to keep pace with an acceleration of demand.

A so-called "beta course" of 10 non-pilots, including two navigators, entered training at Pueblo, Colorado in February. The students will undergo a "check-ride" in a simulator for the Beechcraft T-6 primary trainer before joining the UAS training pipeline, which includes flight instruction at Creech AFB, Nevada.

"We are facing a very high increase in the number of UAS operations," says Brig Gen Richard Devereaux, the USAF's director of intelligence and air, space and information operations. The service's unmanned systems logged 400,000 flight hours in 2008, he says, "double the amount we flew one year before".

Noting that each Predator/Reaper sortie uses seven people on the ground, Devereaux says: "Taking people from the fighter and bomber forces is just not sustainable for the future." He cites the USAF's forecast shortfall of 1,500 pilots over the next 10 years, and notes that this will affect its UAS operations and fleets of manned intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft.

Work has already begun to stream 100 trainee pilots a year to the unmanned community under a three-year project, but Devereaux told IQPC's Military Flight Training conference in London last month that that number is "not nearly enough long term. The numbers mean we have got to figure out how to train UAS operations in a more effective way."

Using non-aviators could be one possible solution, he says, although it raises debate around issues such as whether such operators will be awarded wings and earn flight rates of pay.

The USAF's MQ-1 Predator fleet in mid-February surpassed the 500,000 flight hour milestone during an armed reconnaissance sortie over Iraq. In operational use since 1995, the type completed its first 250,000h only in June 2007, and is now being flown at a rate of 19,000h a month, the service says.


USAF tests non-aviators for unmanned air system operations

I have heard of some new technology that will allow USA to use drones to watch an area of several hundred miles and when something like a road side bomb, or a terrorist incident takes place, they can then somehow go to the event in high definition and follow the terrorist back to their homes kind of like a close up on a VCR tape. That is going to start ruining a lot of peoples day.