December 1, 2009
Posted: 1345 GMT

As we await Pres. Barack Obama's announcement about his new plan for the War in Afghanistan, we wanted to know your thoughts. Mr. Obama is expected to increase troop levels by about 35,000 troops. So, here's our question:

Filed under: Afghanistan •Barack Obama •I-Desk Poll

Share this on:
Thot   December 1st, 2009 4:25 pm ET

I wonder if instead of 35000 troops with weapons, we had 35000 anonymous people, from the entire world, that brought their knowledge and willing to help Afghan people rebuilt their country and give them better life conditions, it wouldn’t that be a big slap of the face of the Taliban’s? It may sound like utopian, but it nothing that can’t be put into practice, if there is willing and courage.
As long Afghan people live in poor conditions, more troops won’t help them much, unsless troops start to have a double rolle of protect and get more close to the Afeghan citizians, helping them to improve their life conditions & necessities.

Keira   December 1st, 2009 5:32 pm ET

I'm not sure what to think. I'm hopeful that the additional troops brings good change to the Afghan people, but we're 8 yrs too late increasing the number of troops in Afghanistan. This is where we should've been after 9'11, NOT in Iraq.

Obama has to convince many war-weary people, many of whom are unemployed, have no insurance, are losing their homes, etc. It's a mess he inherited from the previous administration but today it becomes Obama's war. I'm awaiting tonight's speech to cement my decision. I'm weary, cautiously optimistic at times but I applaud Obama for not rushing into a decision, much like the previous administration did.

Mike   December 1st, 2009 6:20 pm ET

I think the impact is mainly the increasing of the profits of the weapon industry. It is very clear that the profits of the weapon and army industries will increase. As I understand a bit of the policy in the USA congress members can be influenced by powerful lobbyists of the related industries.
Remember if u have a weapon industry then weapons needs to be tested and therefore the best test environment is a real war. If not then politicians sometimes seems to be willingly to create a war.
In Afghanistan the cultural differences and the fact that Afghanistan has not a rich history of democratic processes is a risk. Before a country develops a democratic culture and life by this can take centuries.

Farhan   December 1st, 2009 6:20 pm ET

America is walking the path of Soviet Union n destined to meet the same fate!

Johansson   December 1st, 2009 6:33 pm ET

Sending civilians into the region without adequate protection, would be a suicide.

Security is number one priority in unstable regions, but focusing on security alone is not going to solve all problems either. If you are sending anyone, you have to make sure that they are safe. And not to forget, that the average afgan is not going to fight taleban alone, if there is nobody to defend them, they will become the taleban.

nimitz benedicto   December 1st, 2009 7:10 pm ET

I sorta agree with Mike above. the war machines makers will make money.

Johansson   December 1st, 2009 8:58 pm ET

Well, I think Mike is wrong.

It is true that making weapons of war, can be profitable, but not as profitable as developing new weapons.

Supplying an active army, is basically just heavy industry, and I believe the profits are similar to any other heavy industrial business.

Weapons can, and are, tested in US, testing doesn't require war. That is a fact one can read in the history books. Nuclear weapons, submarines, nuclear submarines, huge pieces in the vast arsenals of cold war superpowers, but hardly ever used in any real conflict. Plenty of testing, a lot of manuafacture, but very little or no use at all.

James Dragg   December 2nd, 2009 5:14 am ET

Everyone seems to be missing the point about the President giving a time frame for withdrawal of the troops. In my mind, it is not a situation of the Taliban waiting us out. The time frame is so the government of Afghanistan will work hard to get their act together so we dont have to stay there.

Yusuf   December 2nd, 2009 6:56 pm ET

It is good that President Obama fights to keep his electioneering promises in ending the war in Afghanistan but i hope not for another 30,000 after 18 months. Find the perfect way to have dialogue with Talibans and end the war.

hadiza   December 31st, 2009 11:03 am ET

i agree with Thot. As long Afghan people live in poor conditions, more troops won’t help them much, unsless troops start to have a double rolle of protect and get more close to the Afeghan citizians, helping them to improve their life conditions & necessities.

fady elias roukos   January 27th, 2010 7:09 pm ET

us army they have to win that war because a lote of soldier died there to win the terroriste if they lost there they loset in iraq and every parte of the word keep going us army and we love you just think that you are christian and you have to protecte the christian in the worl d like in lebanon love you and god bless usa and us soldier

Leave Your Comment


Comments are moderated by CNN, in accordance with the CNN Comment Policy, and may not appear on this blog until they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting. Also, due to the volume of comments we receive, not all comments will be posted.

subscribe RSS Icon
About this blog

International Desk brings viewers into the heart of the largest news gathering operation in the world. Viewers don't come here to watch the news; they come here to be immersed in it. To feel the rush of being the first to know what's happening as stories break, and to leave knowing they've gotten the best and latest information available. The show airs Mon-Fri at 1900 CET.

Powered by VIP