Delay In Afghanistan Means American Soldiers Will Die

Yes, I realize that statement is inflammatory, but it is also true.  General McChrystal asked for reinforcements in August; it is criminal to leave troops there without providing the requested reinforcements.

Investor's Business Daily (now Investors.com) posted an editorial yesterday on the need to follow the recommendations of General McChrystal.  The article points out that although the election was far from perfect, the election is not the sole reason we are there.  I would also like to point out that in Iraq, an entire section of the population boycotted the first election.  We continued our mission to bring order to the country, and those people voted in the next election.  To deny our troops the reinforcements they need because of an imperfect election is reckless and puts our troops at risk.  It also emboldens the terrorists we are trying to defeat.

Where was all this concern about honest elections in Iran and Venezuela?

The article points out:

"The delay makes winning more difficult, and it's a betrayal of U.S. troops who are fighting and dying in a war they can't suspend just to let Afghanistan get its electoral act together. The troops need backup, and to them more support is not a political carrot."

If the request for more troops is not granted in a timely manner, we can expect to see more American and civilian deaths in Afghanistan while the President dithers.  We could also see the terrorism against Pakistan increase and the nuclear arsenal that Parkistan possesses fall into terrorist hands.  That would be a horrible nightmare for the free world.