Town Square

Post a New Topic

McNerney votes for resolution to pull out of Afghanistan

Original post made on Mar 17, 2011

Congressman Jerry McNerney (Pleasanton, 11th) voted today in favor of the Afghanistan War Powers Resolution, directing the president to remove armed forces from Afghanistan by the end of this year. The resolution, introduced by Dennis Kucinich (D., Ohio) was defeated 321-93.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, March 17, 2011, 3:10 PM

Comments (19)

Posted by Hal, First PsyOPs Viet Nam
a resident of another community
on Mar 17, 2011 at 4:21 pm

Dear Jessica,

What an opportunity to bring out the cadre of pseudonyms that can defame even stone.

Thank you, Jerry, for an obvious reality that a foreign army cannot have impact in Asia. There is no result that a military can create and no invitation for our government to be part of the tribal culture of that area. The USSR and many before learned that lesson as did we quite convincingly in Viet Nam.

We might as well try to solve Japan's earthquake by attacking it with our military. We are not part of the FACE of Asia and only should seek to be support for its people.

Posted by TL Nelson
a resident of Danville
on Mar 17, 2011 at 4:51 pm

Congressman McNerney has finally done something that I actually agree with. The US has no business engaging in foreign wars.

However, this still does not redeem McNerney on other issues such as health care reform, stimulus package and excessive government spending. I continue to consider him District 11's Public Enemy #1.

Posted by Rick Pshaw
a resident of Danville
on Mar 17, 2011 at 8:21 pm

I would much rather see McNee decide to pull out of Washington DC.

Posted by Bill
a resident of Danville
on Mar 18, 2011 at 7:10 am

This is but one reason I worked to get him elected so we could have a congressman who would take principled positions instead of what we had before. We have no reason to be in Afghanistan other than military adventurism. OUr young men sacrafice their lives for what? How sad and angry it makes me that we as a country can allow this insanity to continue.

Posted by Joe
a resident of San Ramon
on Mar 18, 2011 at 9:35 am

Thank You Congressman McNerny.

Posted by Duffy
a resident of Danville
on Mar 18, 2011 at 9:38 am

It pains me to say so but I think for once I agree with McNerney. However, I wouldn't want him to let this endorsement go to his head!

Posted by Joel
a resident of Alamo
on Mar 18, 2011 at 10:10 am

What are you going to do Jerry when the Taliban reestablishes Al Quaeda bases there -send the troops back again?

Posted by spcwt
a resident of Danville
on Mar 18, 2011 at 10:59 am

Thank you congressman McNerney! You and I finally agree on something. Now stop spending so much money everywhere else!

Posted by collins
a resident of Vista Grande Elementary School
on Mar 18, 2011 at 11:33 am

Once again, in my opinion, Congressman McNerney has done the right thing. We should have pulled out of Viet Nam years before we did, I might still have the friends I lost there, and we need to leave Afghanistan.

Posted by Derek
a resident of Danville
on Mar 18, 2011 at 7:04 pm

What would you have us do exactly - spread our troops around in every single country that has an Al Quaeda presence? There must be at least a dozen countries that currently have more (one estimate last year put the number at less than 100, though that seemed pretty low). We should be in Japan helping, and we should have been in Darfur all along (no oil there though). Not to mention keeping much higher levels of pressure on "Li'l Kim" Jong Il since Dubya was in office.

Posted by Farmer Dave
a resident of another community
on Mar 18, 2011 at 7:07 pm

Farmer Dave is a registered user.

The reason we are in Afghanistan at all is to capture/kill Osama Bin Laden and defeat al Qaeda. Since they were allowed to escape from Tora Bora to Pakistan during the Bush era, we seem to be fighting in the wrong country.

I'm not sure how we can defeat al Qaeda and how we can prevent Afghanistan from again becoming a terrorist safe haven, but Pakistan is where the enemy is now. I'm glad I walked door-to-door to help elect Jerry, and I hope he is on the right track here. I'm sure he has more in-depth (classified) knowledge on the subject than I do. I would like to know the details on how he intends to "effectively concentrate our resources on protecting our national security and fighting terrorism".

Posted by spcwt
a resident of Danville
on Mar 19, 2011 at 11:38 am

We shouldn’t “fight terrorists” any more than we should “fight reckless drivers.” Every year, 40,000 people are killed in U.S. roadway traffic accidents. Should we station thousands of troops on our highways to stop reckless drivers? If not, then why spend $3 trillion on wars trying to stop a small group of fanatics who will not be deterred no matter what we do?

Don’t let the horrible tragedy of 9/11 chase away rational thought. We shouldn’t give away our constitutional freedoms and our tax dollars in the pursuit of “security” that will never be.

Posted by Hal
a resident of another community
on Mar 21, 2011 at 5:33 pm

If we are convinced that we can now pull back from the violence and distruction we brought to Libya, might it be logical to simply pull back from all our violence in the world?

Bring our service people home and stop wasting their exceptional talents, expensive hardware and their very precious lives on vague goals with no sustainability.

Are we still refusing to learn the lessons many, including myself, learned in Viet Nam? Do we the people have to make sure the toys of war are out of government hands?

Posted by Miklos
a resident of Danville
on Mar 22, 2011 at 8:57 am

Ironic mcnerney wants to save lives by voting us out of Afghanistan yet has sentenced hundreds of thousands of AMERICANS to an early death with his stupid support of obamacare----which he and other politicians quietly exempted themselves from---

Posted by Hairball
a resident of Blackhawk
on Mar 22, 2011 at 9:16 am

This is a "cost-cutting" measure. By pulling our troops out of Afganistan we will be able to fight the Taliban (aka al Qaeda) on our turf rather than having to travel half way around the world to do it.

Posted by C. R. Mudgeon
a resident of Danville
on Mar 22, 2011 at 10:08 am

I thought that Obama and Congressional Democrat leaders said that we needed to reduce troops in Iraq so that we could escalate the troop level in the much more strategic Afghanistan. Or perhaps that was just campaign rhetoric to convince the electorate of the Democrats' toughness....

I also find it ironic that Obama, who campaigned on a premise of never taking unilateral military action, ordered the Libyan strikes without seeking any form of Congressional approval. He basically mentioned his intentions as he was out the door for his South American trip. Regardless of your beliefs on the "rightness" or value of the Iraq war, Bush did have Congressional approval for a military action.

As for the above post - are you saying that it is better to fight terrorists on our own soil??? To save travel costs???? Ay caramba!

Posted by psmacintosh
a resident of Danville
on Mar 22, 2011 at 3:54 pm

What took you so long, Jerry?
I thought that, once Obama and the Congressional Democrats got back in, that they would ruin us financially from within, BUT that they would, almost immediately, get us out of Iraq and Afghanistan, at least within 3-4 months.
Thereafter, that they wouldn't enter foreign countries, unless attacked.

Why not the quick withdrawal?
Obama and Hillary Clinton have sounded almost like Bush in their slow proposals for greatly delayed withdrawal. ("We've got to finance and militarily support these countries in their supposed movements towards independency and Democracy".)

Why don't the Dems stand behind their Campaign Promises? Stand for what you believe in, get the heck out of foreign countries.

Oh, maybe the Dems don't really want to be out of foreign countries afterall. Maybe they really want to be in charge, to run the entire world, to expand their political philosophies and power realm to the world. (Can you say UN?)

Posted by psmacintosh
a resident of Danville
on Mar 22, 2011 at 3:54 pm

And what about Libya? Has U.S. soil been attacked and a quick emergency response necessitated before Congress can vote on war? Are substantial American lives at stake? Is America's safety being directly threatened? (Hey, maybe the Dems are protecting "oil"? Or their "business buddies." This is the claim that would be made if Reps were doing this.)

What gives Obama the right and authority to send our tax dollars and our sons/daughters to war in and on foreign country? (In the past, both Dem and Rep Presidents have been guilty of allowing the Executive Order power to expand way too far.....sending us to wars/actions without a prior Congressional vote for the U.S. to go to war?)

And WHO are we supporting/helping in Libya anyway? (Sure, Kaddafi deserves to die for his past terrorism. But who are we helping to win a war and then take over a country?)
Let them do guerrilla warfare. The people of any country should fight for their own independence and then govern their own country....and suffer (or enjoy) the consequences of their own political decisions. (Where are their statements of what they believe in, what they are fighting for, and who they are? Where is THEIR Declaration of Independence. Why can't the "news agencies" be clear about this?)

Where are the anti-war demonstrators? Why isn't Berkeley going berserk? Where's the rioting in the streets and flames burning? (Can you imagine if a Republican were ordering attacks upon Libya? What a bunch of hypocrites!)

Posted by American
a resident of Danville
on Mar 22, 2011 at 5:16 pm

PsMac: I agree 100% with you!! Where is "Operation Pink" now, why aren't they protesting Obama's war machine in Libya? Why isn't the Berkeley city council passing an amendment calling for the U.S. to prosecute Obama for war crimes? Obama has a better chance of giving up smoking cigarettes than keeping his campaign promises.

Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.


Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.

Burning just one "old style" light bulb can cost $150 or more per year
By Sherry Listgarten | 4 comments | 1,639 views

Reflecting on lives this Thanksgiving Day
By Tim Hunt | 0 comments | 972 views