Page 16 of 68 FirstFirst ... 614151617182666 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 671

Thread: US troops coming home? Obama to say on Wednesday

  1. #151
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: President Obama To Announce Details of Afghanistan Strategy On Wednesday

    Quote Originally Posted by Swizz View Post
    Obama doubled the number of troops there in early 2009....and then added another 30,000 more.
    he sure did

    and by his target date---next year's presidential election---we'll still have 70000 combat troops on the ground in afghanistan

    and that's IF things go according to plan

    OBAMA'S WAR is gonna go on FOREVER

    party on, progressives

  2. #152
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: President Obama To Announce Details of Afghanistan Strategy On Wednesday

    Quote Originally Posted by boo radley View Post
    winning what?
    obama's war

  3. #153
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: President Obama To Announce Details of Afghanistan Strategy On Wednesday

    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    And let the 1500 lives be wasted 900 of which happened under Obama.
    That's a ridiculous justification for anything. Doubling down on a mistake is rarely a good idea. And "not letting lives be wasted" is not a good enough reason to sacrifice even MORE lives. The ship has already sailed on wasting 1500 lives.

    Explain how Obama has had 900 deaths in 2 years and Bush had 600 in 7 years.
    Because Obama's Afghanistan policy is ****ing atrocious, even worse than Bush's?
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  4. #154
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: President Obama To Announce Details of Afghanistan Strategy On Wednesday

    Quote Originally Posted by Swizz View Post
    You and Obama have difference of opinion on way forward in Afghanistan = Obama doesn't care about the troops' lives
    Obama and I have a difference of opinion on financial reform. We have a difference of opinion on taxes. When a president so callously disregards the lives of human beings in order to...what are we trying to do again?...I think that's more than a difference of opinion. Obama doesn't seem to have ANY opinion on the way forward in Afghanistan, as far as I can tell.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  5. #155
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: President Obama To Announce Details of Afghanistan Strategy On Wednesday

    Quote Originally Posted by Gargantuan View Post
    That said, we need to get rid of the troops that are serving in nation building capacity. We don't need to build afghani bridges and railroads and airports and increase their GDP growth.
    yet that's what barack the slasher does

    The hugely expensive U.S. attempt at nation-building in Afghanistan has had only limited success and may not survive an American withdrawal, according to the findings of a two-year congressional investigation to be released Wednesday.

    The report, prepared by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s Democratic majority staff, comes as Congress and the American public have grown increasingly restive about the human and economic cost of the decade-long war and reflects growing concerns about Obama’s war strategy even among supporters within his party.

    The report describes the use of aid money to stabilize areas the military has cleared of Taliban fighters — a key component of the administration’s counterinsurgency strategy — as a short-term fix that provides politically pleasing results. But it says that the enormous cash flows can overwhelm and distort local culture and economies, and that there is little evidence the positive results are sustainable.

    Because oversight is scanty, the report says, the fund encourages corruption. Although the U.S. plan is for the Afghan government to eventually take over this and other programs, it has neither the management capacity nor the funds to do so.

    The report also warns that the Afghan economy could slide into a depression with the inevitable decline of the foreign military and development spending that now provides 97 percent of the country’s gross domestic product.
    Afghan nation-building programs not sustainable, report says - The Washington Post

    the slasher has morphed into one heck of a neocon

    Quote Originally Posted by Gargantuan View Post
    The number can be significantly dropped (from the current 100k) to around 50k
    no, it can't

    the slasher has committed this country to 70000 until at least the next presidential election

    Quote Originally Posted by Gargantuan View Post
    I mean how long do we have to risk American lives and spend our money to get them on their feet?
    a long, long time

    Quote Originally Posted by Gargantuan View Post
    The Taliban are pretty much thrown into pockets along the borders.
    no

    The Afghanistan Analysts Network (AAN) / The Insurgents of the Afghan North

    Quote Originally Posted by Gargantuan View Post
    We have Italians and Germans over there in gigantic numbers.
    hardly

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_...2%80%93present)
    Last edited by The Prof; 06-23-11 at 08:30 AM.

  6. #156
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: President Obama To Announce Details of Afghanistan Strategy On Wednesday

    remember what wapo's watergate wonderboy, bob woodward, wrote in OBAMA'S WARS:

    half obama's security team "doubt his strategy in afghanistan will succeed"

    politics plays a primary part: obama "set a withdrawal timeline because, 'i can't lose the whole democratic party'"

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/22/wo.../22policy.html

  7. #157
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: President Obama To Announce Details of Afghanistan Strategy On Wednesday

    Quote Originally Posted by Gargantuan View Post
    Sure, but I also think that pulling supplies off of a truck can be dangerous in Afghanistan.
    nah. You're staying on Baghram, Leatherneck, or one of its' equivalents. Your worst risk is a random Afghan Police Trainee / Suicide Bomber in the DFAC (chow hall).

    I have no real hands on military experience, but I think that PMCs should be the ones there, not civilian volunteers
    well, these guys are contractors - they handle alot more than just High Risk Personnel Security.

    Those PMCs have a hell of a lot of training, probably more than the average infantryman over there tenfold.
    depends on your job. if you are the guy trained to run a chow hall or the port-a-johns.... then probably no. If you are one of the Personal Security Detachments... then your training is indeed superior to that of the average infantryman.

    As for the PTTs, I do think great benefit was seen in Iraq, but that was more with actually being hands on, training them in police stations on logistics, etc. I don't think that would really work in Afghanistan as you said simply because I doubt a "cop" over there is anything more than another uneducated, untrained, Afghani person.
    well, literacy is actually one of the big efforts. and we are still worried mostly about security in the critical areas. Simple combat effectiveness comes first.

    Good point. I really can't argue that... especially the buy in to the new government part. But still though, we're talking about one of the poorest nations in the world, I mean how long do we have to risk American lives and spend our money to get them on their feet?
    As long as we wish to maintain world security. OBL gave a 1993 interview to ABC News in which he stated that the two events which convinced his organization that the US could be taken on and beaten were our retreats from Somalia and Beirut. Those were relatively small deals. Our perceived defeat by the Taliban would be.... it would be very bad. It would reverse much of the positive effect of the defeat of AQI by providing a success model for Islamist Fundamentalism. The Arab Spring revolts? You will note they weren't waving pictures of Osama, or Zawahiri, or Qutb, or any of those guys. That is because Islamism was discredited by its' defeat in Iraq - and nothing will lose you supporters in the ME faster than losing a conflict with the West. But nothing will win you supporters faster than beating the West. We withdraw, and we are telling an entire generation of young, angry, hopeless middle eastern men with nothing to lose that the way to achieve strength and success is to kill Americans for 10 years plus one. We will be validating the "weak horse / strong horse" motif.

    Are they really that bad that they can't even left seat once?
    it's all area dependent. It's not all Sangin... but some of it is.

    With all the years that we've been there that just cannot be true. I've had even the dumbest, clumsiest new agents take the right seat within a month... can it really, really, be that bad with these Afghanis?
    "all the years that we have been there" is a reference to the country, not the individual area. Remember, people in Nad Ali don't care what happens in Baghram, they care what happens in Nad Ali. But we've only been in that area really for about a year and some change. Furthermore, it's not just a matter of 'presence', it's a matter of 'strategy'. We were there for most of that decade not fighting an effective counter-insurgency. The Army had to figure out how to run one in Iraq first - and those lessons only became solidified (for them) in mid-to-late 2008. The Marine Corps caught on alot faster.... but they've done that before, and had some institutional memory of it.

    I just don't see how a left/right seat policy cannot be already done over there. They have the most powerful nation in the world supplying and training them. What's wrong with a policy of focusing troops in the border regions, along with leaving a minority behind in already gained zones. It's not just the 100,000 US troops. We have Italians and Germans over there in gigantic numbers. Brits I believe have drawn down significantly.
    our NATO allies are generally useless. giving them an area is effectively giving it to the enemy, as they will sit on their base and generally refuse to go out. the "training" that we have to let them provide is atrocious when they bother to show up. They don't go out at night, they don't go out if they might get shot at, they don't go out if it's too hot, they don't go out if it's too cold they don't go out if something good is on TV.... okay, the TV thing is probably a slight exaggeration.... but not by much. NATO is dead. It's America + people who live on our camps and eat our food and then complain about it.

    Right. It's not just the tea party either. We're seeing that with the entire House. Senate republicans who tend to be more older and willing to stick to their guns aren't going for it though.
    Well, Obama should ask for Congressional approval. But they also should give it to him. They also should demand that he actually play to win; instead of this 'let's-see-if-I-can-split-the-difference" angling he seems to have mistaken for "thoughtfulness".

  8. #158
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: President Obama To Announce Details of Afghanistan Strategy On Wednesday

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Obama and I have a difference of opinion on financial reform. We have a difference of opinion on taxes. When a president so callously disregards the lives of human beings in order to...what are we trying to do again?...I think that's more than a difference of opinion. Obama doesn't seem to have ANY opinion on the way forward in Afghanistan, as far as I can tell.
    He would rather have our losses and Afghan losses be made meaningless than lose support from the Democrat Party... what, because he's worried about a primary challenger if he extends surge levels for 12-18 months?

    I think you are bang on the money. He doesn't care about the effort in Afghanistan - doing stuff like that isn't why he became President - and so he will do whatever seems best politically as that serves his actual purposes.

  9. #159
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: President Obama To Announce Details of Afghanistan Strategy On Wednesday

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    That's a ridiculous justification for anything. Doubling down on a mistake is rarely a good idea. And "not letting lives be wasted" is not a good enough reason to sacrifice even MORE lives. The ship has already sailed on wasting 1500 lives.
    unfortunately you are incorrect in your assessment. If you are purchasing an object on layaway, getting to the last payment and deciding not to make it and pick up the item is the waste - making the payment at least gets' you the good. We can make those sacrifices worth it, or we can make them meaningless. We owe it to them, to ourselves, to posterity, and to the Afghans to make it worth it.

    Because Obama's Afghanistan policy is ****ing atrocious, even worse than Bush's?
    actually to give him props where it's due, Obama's Afghan policy is superior to most of what we saw under Bush. That is because to a large extent he took advantage of Bush's Iraq-Surge success.... but it still leaves him with a superior Afghan policy.

  10. #160
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: President Obama To Announce Details of Afghanistan Strategy On Wednesday

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Right, like telling those that attacked us...that we just aren't all that interested in them....we're going to go attack an unrelated country. Glad we agree!
    It's just as stupid as you saying we said it then, so it's okay to say it now. I believe there were many that didn't like it being said then....but don't let me spoil your ridiculous thought process and derailing effort. BTW, Bush never telegraphed that he was pulling out of a war.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

Page 16 of 68 FirstFirst ... 614151617182666 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •