American troops may remain in Afghanistan until at least 2024

[garbon]

I just looked up and today at 7 is the monthly meeting of the New York Young Republicans.

[Berkut]

I GOTTA GO!

[crazy canuck]

I just looked up and today at 7 is the monthly meeting of the New York Young Republicans.

Small room?

[grumbler]

I remember being shot down in flames for suggesting an insurgency was starting and that it was a bad idea to summarily disband the army. 

Fairly early on, if one took off the victory blinkers, it was evident that not a lot of thought had gone into the day after and what would work. 

I remember that pretty much everyone here agreed that disbanding the army was a stupid decision.  If you got shot down in flames during that time period, you probably were shot down for one of your spectacularly silly ideas, not for expressing the consensus of the board.  Though, I suppose, you could have done the latter so poorly that people shot you down in flames for what you said, not what you meant.

[garbon]

I just looked up and today at 7 is the monthly meeting of the New York Young Republicans.

Small room?

Apparently taking place here. Who knew?

http://www.wnrc.org/

[mongers]

I remember being shot down in flames for suggesting an insurgency was starting and that it was a bad idea to summarily disband the army. 

Fairly early on, if one took off the victory blinkers, it was evident that not a lot of thought had gone into the day after and what would work. 

I remember that pretty much everyone here agreed that disbanding the army was a stupid decision.  If you got shot down in flames during that time period, you probably were shot down for one of your spectacularly silly ideas, not for expressing the consensus of the board.  Though, I suppose, you could have done the latter so poorly that people shot you down in flames for what you said, not what you meant.

You should now post your usual bullshit about not engaging in Ad hominem first.

[garbon]

http://news.yahoo.com/afghan-president-delays-signing-us-deal-182049692.html

Afghan president delays signing US deal

President Hamid Karzai cast fresh doubt on the future presence of thousands of American and allied forces on Sunday by rejecting a recommendation by an Afghan assembly of dignitaries to quickly sign a long-delayed security pact with the United States.

Although the mercurial leader did not fully spell out his reasons for deferring its signature until after the April 5 elections, the move was a slap in the face to U.S. officials who had repeatedly asked for a deal by the end of the year.

The U.S. administration has insisted the deal be finalized by the end of next month, warning that planning for a post-2014 military presence may be jeopardized if it is not approved. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel both asked last week that it be signed by the end of the year.

Failure to do so could be the final blow to the Bilateral Security Agreement, leaving the Americans without a legal basis to keep forces in the country for up to a decade to train and mentor Afghan troops who remain ill-prepared to face a persistent Taliban insurgency.

The U.S. has said it will pull all its forces out of Afghanistan without it, as it did when Iraq failed to sign a similar agreement. Most of America's allies have also said they will pull out their troops in without the deal, a withdrawal that could put at risk more than $8 billion a year pledged by the international community for Afghan security forces and the country's development.

After negotiators hammered out compromises on several issues, Karzai had called the 2,500 tribal elders and regional leaders to the capital to debate the draft deal in a consultative assembly known as a Loya Jirga.

The four-day assembly had the option of asking for changes or rejecting the agreement. Instead Karzai added a new wrinkle by announcing on the opening day Thursday that he wanted delegates to endorse the deal but he would not sign it.

He repeated that stance Sunday despite the panel's recommendation that he sign before the end of 2013, laying down a series of ill-defined conditions and promising to continue negotiations with the U.S. in a rambling speech that lasted nearly an hour.

"We want security, peace and we want a proper election. You have asked me that I should sign it within a month. Do you think that peace will come within a month?" he asked the assembly. "I want an implementation period for peace to come, if peace won't come, this agreement will cause disaster to Afghanistan."

He did not elaborate, but his spokesman Aimal Faizi said: "Not before elections. He was clear enough."

Normally, following the Loya Jirga, Karzai or his designee would have signed the document and then parliament would have ratified it. Then Karzai would have to again sign the agreement to make it law. It is now unclear if the deal will even go to parliament if the Afghan leader doesn't change his mind.

The U.S. thanked the Loya Jirga for its endorsement but did not comment on Karzai's remarks.

"We are studying President Karzai's speech. We continue to believe that concluding the BSA as quickly as possible is to the benefit of both nations," U.S. Embassy spokesman Robert Hilton said.

Karzai's relations with the United States have been testy for years, and he often has said one thing only to do another.

"How long he will stay in that mood I don't know, but at the moment our understanding is that he will not go to sign it," said former foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah, who was the runner-up to Karzai in the disputed 2009 presidential election and is the current favorite for next year's poll. "He is a bit unpredictable."

...

[Capetan Mihali]

What do you call the kind of hat the guy at right is wearing?  I like it. 

[grumbler]

I remember that pretty much everyone here agreed that disbanding the army was a stupid decision.  If you got shot down in flames during that time period, you probably were shot down for one of your spectacularly silly ideas, not for expressing the consensus of the board.  Though, I suppose, you could have done the latter so poorly that people shot you down in flames for what you said, not what you meant.

You should now post your usual bullshit about not engaging in Ad hominem first.

Is this an attempt by you to start a non sequitur contest?  If so, it's a fine start.

[Ed Anger]

Dostrum uber alles

[Savonarola]

What do you call the kind of hat the guy at right is wearing?  I like it. 

The Karakul:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karakul_(hat)

Apparently it's a variation of the hat the Brezhnev and Jinnah wore.  Fashion for the discerning Asiatic despot.   

[Capetan Mihali]

Oops, that's Karzai.  :numbnuts:  Of course.  You don't give yourself the #1 sign, it's not dignified.

Thanks, Sav. 

[Ed Anger]

I see Artie Lange in that pic.

[mongers]

I remember that pretty much everyone here agreed that disbanding the army was a stupid decision.  If you got shot down in flames during that time period, you probably were shot down for one of your spectacularly silly ideas, not for expressing the consensus of the board.  Though, I suppose, you could have done the latter so poorly that people shot you down in flames for what you said, not what you meant.

You should now post your usual bullshit about not engaging in Ad hominem first.

Is this an attempt by you to start a non sequitur contest?  If so, it's a fine start.

You certainly do follow don't you, dredging up a three day old post of mine; it's like having my very own internet stalker.

[Viking]

Fairly early on, if one took off the victory blinkers, it was evident that not a lot of thought had gone into the day after and what would work.

This, I was gung ho about the war on the assumption that, like WWII, somebody had thought about keeping the electricity on after the war was over. It turns out nobody was, the whole thing was not only ad-hoc, but partisan ad-hoc. When they first brought in Jay Garner it looked like he was brought in as an afterthought rather than as the entire point of the war. If you are going for regime change you need a regime to change to. Bremer obviously had more support, but still, he was brought in because the first guy was trying to do the whole thing on his good reputation from kurdistan in the last war.

My reasons for supporting the war in the first place - saddam is evil and deserves to be killed - remains valid. I was just shocked by the sheer incompetence of the post war planning.