Figures. I prefer people who don't lie their ass off.

The Taliban didn't plan nor carry out the 9-11 event. They oversaw the government of the country where al-Qaeda was holed-up.

Democrats weren't crazy…..of course we had to go after those who killed 3000 Americans. But Bush/Cheney were crazy….and their intent from the beginning was to amass our military resources in close enough proximity to Iraq, so that they would be ready when the ole' switcheroo came.

8 years later, the focus of the discussion should be honed down to "who is the enemy?" And it ain't the Taliban. No reinvention…..reality.

But thanks for cluing me in to the latest liberal reinvention of history.

Now, because of the confusion created by Bush/Cheney over who the enemy is….we are hopelessly bogged down in an ill-defined quagmire of occupation.

Congratulations to Obama for trying to thoughtfully clear up the confusion.

Isn't it interesting that liberals claimed to support the Afghanistan war (the good war) for all this time, and now they suddenly want out ? Such people of conviction. Is there anything liberals won't lie about ?

Some 65% of Americans agree we should end our occupation of Afghanistan.

Okay. Here's McCain in 2008:

"We have to double the size of the Afghan army. We have to have a streamlined NATO command structure. We have to do a lot of things. We have to work much more closely with the Pakistanis."

McCain isn't saying anything different than he's said in the past.

Rev says, " McCain, a proven dunderhead and serial liar"

Why don't you just shut the fuck up ? You're an asshole. Stop it.

Rev says, "If the criteria for militarily occupying a country is the chance that al-Qaeda may find a presence there…..then why don't we occupy Somalia, Yemen, Germany….hell, the entire world?"

Well gee, let's see. Maybe it's because AL QAEDA WAS OPERATING OUT OF AFGHANISTAN ON 9/11. THAT'S WHERE BIN LADEN WAS. How can you be this dense ???????????????

Rev says, "What kind of logical thought processes would lead you to conclude that just because Obama says we're not leaving Afghanistan, in concurrence with McCain…means it's the correct and rational thing to do? I just demonstrated that it's not."

Excuse me, but I didn't see where you demostrated anything at all. But maybe you know more than Obama, McCain, our generals, and all the intelligence capabilities of the U.S. and the civilized world. Yes, I imagine that's possible………..but it's very, very doubtful.

The subject country was Afghanistan…not Iraq. Go find a McCain quote where he chides Bush for "leisurely" leaving Afghanistan….then I'll take your objection seriously.

The "President McCain" snipes were intended to highlight the 13 appearances by McCain on the, you know, "liberal" Sunday talk shows. McCain, a proven dunderhead and serial liar, is the "serious" voice ("we're all Georgians now") of Republicans on national defense, and the Villagers suck-up to that utter foolishness. As I told larry, freedom of McCain speech is not the issue.

And obviously you have difficulty with discernment. The Taliban occupies 80% of Afghanistan NOW….and yet al-Qaeda is down to maybe 100 fighters inside the country. So, McCain's, and your, premise holds no water.

If the criteria for militarily occupying a country is the chance that al-Qaeda may find a presence there…..then why don't we occupy Somalia, Yemen, Germany….hell, the entire world?

What kind of logical thought processes would lead you to conclude that just because Obama says we're not leaving Afghanistan, in concurrence with McCain…means it's the correct and rational thing to do? I just demonstrated that it's not.

Footnote: Libertarians and conservatives are now the "nation-building" liberals.