Congressmembers Speak Out for Getting the US Out of Afghanistan

Today a news conference was held by co-sponsors of HR1666, to prohibit funds for activities in Afghanistan, and the importance of debating the 16-year war in Afghanistan, the longest war in America’s history.

Attending were
Representative Walter B. Jones (R-NC)
Representative John Garamendi (D-CA)
Representative Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO)
Representative John Duncan (R-TN)
Representative Don Young (R-AK)
Representative Thomas Massie (R-KY)
Will Fischer, VoteVets

For additional information, please contact Allison Tucker in Congressman Walter Jones’ office at (202) 225-3415 or Dante Atkins in Congressman John Garamendi’s office at (202) 225-1880.

10 thoughts on “Congressmembers Speak Out for Getting the US Out of Afghanistan”

    1. I noticed neither the Colorado nor Texas representatives attended. They used to scream “Treason!” at any quiet voice of reason. Like, no Afghani or Iraqi people on the 9-11 planes. No attempt at negotiation for bin Laden to be tried or even investigated in the Hague or other neutral courts.

      1. It was very strange how bin Laden was disposed of.

        Very strange how Republicans, and even real conservatives, supported the Patriot Act, trusted our government would only surveil Muslims.

        Yet, today even Hannity now defends the Fourth. And more like Wikileaks.

        Politics is frustrating. I just cheer when I can, expect the worst :)

        Pat Buchanan had the best response to 9/11: Bomb the Taliban in retaliation, and that’s it. What really happened, who was really behind 9/11: It wouldn’t be as big of a deal if we’d just listened to Pat. We never should have gone in.

        1. Mueller is under the microscope, but about Russia. He was the director of the Fibbers when they were busted using the face of a Spanish MP on the Most Wanted website, passing it off as an Age Progression of OBL. Because they had no verifiable sightings, broadcasts etc. No photos especially. They had been using him as a boogy man ever since 9-11. The Patriot Act was on Congressional desks within a week. Nobody writes that many pages in that short a time. They were waiting for an excuse. And according the the PNAC plans, they would manufacture one if one didn’t happen with no prodding. And that Americans would accept it without question or demand for evidence.

          They had many religious groups in their sights too. Seventh Day Adventists, Hindu you can bet your arse Jewish people and it wouldn’t make much difference if the head interrogators were Jews. The books of Exodus,Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Numbers, Judges and the split into four Chronicles of the Kings of Israel and Judah were freakin’ hideous and they were killing their fellow Israelites first and foremost, and their “foreign” policy involved primarily Other Scions Of Abraham.

          The books of Prophecy outstrip the books of History in their sheer hatred for their family. Mostly because they were close by, easy to find and such. Like Germany and France. England and Ireland. Neighbors make really easy to exploit .enemies. Kipling did a story with just that theme, The Man Who Would Be King and starring Afghanistan

          Ignoring morality or ethics you can do the same, get two related groups, religious or political decency, just inflame old feuds and sell weapons to both sides.

          Which they did.

        2. “Pat Buchanan had the best response to 9/11: Bomb the Taliban in retaliation, and that’s it.”

          Why would that have even been a rational response, let alone the best response?

          1. The narrative was the Taliban was behind 9/11. One state attacks another.

            So, retaliate, and be done with it.

            Instead the US occupied Afghanistan, still refuses to leave. The US approach to everything is to transform political opponents. Such is a very dangerous approach.

          2. “The narrative was the Taliban was behind 9/11.”

            First time I’ve ever heard that, and I followed the 9/11 narrative pretty closely.

            The ACTUAL narrative was that al Qaeda was behind 9/11, that the Taliban was hosting and providing protection to al Qaeda’s leader, Osama bin Laden, and that the Taliban refused to hand bin Laden over on demand.

          3. Regardless, it was sold as we needed to hit back. You can’t easily fight a stateless enemy.

            Afghanistan provided a ready target to appease the bloodlust, the calls for revenge. A simple bombing in retaliation would have been far less than what’s been done instead.

          4. The US is so powerful that morality doesn’t really apply to America. The US in a sense is “more equal” due to its power. This is partly why, in my ideal, the US would be economically strong but militarily weak (Canadian Mounties could provide all the defence we need.)

            In an ideal world, perhaps it was best not to retaliate. I know not. 9/11 wasn’t a big deal for me. My inclination has always been to just not meddle, not let in new Muslims. I remember when 9/11 happened: I was shocked mostly at how shocked others were. It was a terrible thing, but bad things happen.

            Americans have some sense that America is special, that bad things never, can never, happen here, that an attack on America is somehow worse than an attack on someone else.

            I don’t really think like that, however. My inclination is towards isolation, not revenge.

          5. Btw, was even Rand against the Afghan War?

            Even most noninterventionists seemed to struggle to argue against entry.

            I’ve followed this site for years, but this is a rather high-level website. I don’t always have every detail correct. I think y’all should release a book explaining the arguments against each intervention. There’s a wealth of data and arguments at this website. One of the neat bits is that FDR likely knew of Pearl Harbour before the attack. An antiwar/anti-police-state handbook.

            But nearly everyone seemed to struggle to oppose war in Afghanistan, bc “they hit us”. That was the perception. I remember many struggling to oppose the war. I don’t recall specifically who supported/opposed.

Comments are closed.