They are vowing to put a stop to Obama’s phony Afghanistan withdrawal.
This is how elections work. In 2000, Bush wins promising a more humble foreign policy. He expands the warfare state. In 2006, the Democrats win promising a more humble national security policy. They expand the surveillance state.
In 2008, Obama wins promising to spend less on war than Bush. He triples down on Afghanistan, promising to draw more Afghan blood than the Republicans ever vowed to, and then eventually to let up a bit. In 2010, the Republicans win saying Obama has expanded government far too much. And already they are doing all they can to prevent the killing in Afghanistan to return to pre-Obama levels!
One thing seems clear to me. If I were a warmonger, and understood what was going on, I’d be happy after pretty much every election. No less when a man wins office with antiwar sentiment behind him (see, eg., Wilson, FDR, LBJ, Nixon, Clinton, Bush, Obama). Since I’m a peacenik, you can guess how every election actually makes me feel. Of course, domestic policy generally gets worse too.
cross-posted from the LewRockwell.com blog
No Afghanistan is a good cause since AG seems to value it. It has direct impact on the war on terrorism. Its the closest place where AG seems to want to be and leaving would just embolden them.