Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 94

Thread: Military Spending Weighs on Obama's Afghan Decision

  1. #21
    Sage
    Gibberish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Last Seen
    12-23-12 @ 09:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,339

    Re: Military Spending Weighs on Obama's Afghan Decision

    Quote Originally Posted by Councilman View Post
    If I remember correctly I think we heard Liberals saying that Iraq was a lost cause and the Vietnam reference came up again.


    As I have said before and a about thousand times, our Military didn't lose the Veitnam War Politicians gave up after restricting targets and putting political considerations ahead Military strategy.

    What was it Obama said about winning? Oh Yes;
    First the dumb ass got it wrong. That never happened anyone who ever studied history knows Hirohito was not on the Missori and that Japanese Foreign Minister Mamoru Shigemitsu signed the surrender in September 1945.

    In Aphganistan Obama first restricted Targets with a policy that requires that our troops not even fight back if the is any possibility of civilian injury or death. Gosh he effectively restricted.

    Gee I wonder if that dumb ass policy gave the enemy any ideas on how to conduct operations?
    In doing this Obama's clear bias favoring of his Muslim brothers became a major political consideration from the start. We have seen his allegiances come to the front when he went to the Middle East earlier this year and make concession speeches and bow to Saudi Royalty.

    We have listened to Obama blame along with his Pastor and others around him blame America for just about every conflict and problem around the world for the last 60 plus years.

    So in review of the facts and comparison to Vietnam.

    1. Political considerations over Military objectives and Stratagy.......Check

    2. Politicians Restricting targets........................................... ......Check

    3. Having no will to Win............................................... .............Check

    4. Cut funding to insure personnel and equipment shortages............Check

    5. Built in excuse for losing. Blame his failures on Bush....................Check

    And with that we see Obama's Plan to lose and give him a political way out. He does everything he can to insure there is no possibility of Victory while claiming to care. Then when he gets his wish he simply blames it on Bush for not winning sooner or for having the wrong plan or who knows. We can only be sure of one thing. Nothing was Obama's fault in the end. He's getting good at that just look at the failed economy strategy.

    Good God I could take few people who's posts I've read here on this site and put together a team that could address all of our present issues and have solutions working to solve the problems almost over night.

    All that is required for victory, which buy the way is about us being more secure at home, is to aloow the Generals do what they are trained to do and stay the hell out of the way.

    To win a War you can not use half baked political ideas or half way measures. War is an all or nothing in it to win it situation. It;s not about National pride it's about Survival of Our Way of Life when we're talking dealing with radical Islamists.
    The problem with this war, the same as Vietnam, is the enemy is mixed in with the populace. There are two trains of thought here.

    1. The military should be able to annihilate anyone and everyone and sacrifice morality. Let the civilians die with the radicals.

    2. Be aggressive but restrictive to save civilian lives and sacrifice timeliness of completing the objective or completing it altogether.

    There will always be radicals and terrorists. If we annihilated every populace group that was shown to have radicals in it this world would be a wasteland and the population cut in at least half. There is no winning a "war on terror" because terror will always exist. All we can do is defend our selves as best we can and make sure that one 1) it's near impossible to succeed on an attack on US soil 2) those that attack receive swift retribution for their act.
    "Gold gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace. Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head."
    - Warren Buffett

  2. #22
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,090

    Re: Military Spending Weighs on Obama's Afghan Decision

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Well, when you're decision on whether, or not to send badly needed troops to a combat theater is determined by a price tag, then it's obvious that someone wants to do for as cheap as possible.
    No. Typical right wing bs. You SHOULD know there is a political and military aspect of any war and unlike Bush, Obama actually has brain to understand both.

    As it stands now the military as always wants more and more troops even though by last count they out number the enemy by 12 to 1. That is the military reality that the commanders have come too, based on their military assessment. There is no guarantee that sending another 40k troops will do anything to help the situation. What will you do if they come back and ask for another 40k? or 500k troops.. give them that too?

    Now the political reality is that you have a very weak corrupt government in place that has very little support outside its government buildings.. and that is even a stretch. This political reality calls into question the present strategy in the whole war.

    This war will NOT be won on the battlefield pure and simple, even the commanders on the ground have said so. So what use is it to send more troops into battle if they will not solve the political situation?

    The Taliban are not going to go away, we will need to not only talk to them but also bring them into the fold again if we are to help Afghanistan. I dont like it one bit, but that is the reality of the political situation we are in and we have to deal with that.

    As it stands now it seems to me the US commanders have not learned from the mistakes of Vietnam and think their limited success in Iraq can some how be repeated in Afghanistan...

    We're not talking about a billion dollar weapons system that the military may, or may not need. We're talking sending support to soldiers on an actual battlefield that is needed.
    Yes we are talking about sending more troops into a meat grinder that has at present has no end in sight. Now the question is, is it worth sending in more troops if you cant win or maybe it is time to find an alternative to the present strategy...

    You see unlike Bush who could not even eat a freaking pretzel without nearly putting Cheney in the White House, Obama has a brain and huge intellect. He is not will to sacrifice the lives of thousands of American men and women if there is not a huge chance of being successful. That is called leadership.

    So I fully understand that he wants to take his time to find the correct solution to the problem and not just put band aids on it by sending another 40k troops into an unwinable war. Like it or not the political situation MUST be solved and another 40k troops wont do a damn thing to help that...
    PeteEU

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Military Spending Weighs on Obama's Afghan Decision

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    At least there is someone in the US political system that does not give a cart blanc to the military. All government spending should be under review including military spending.
    Except "stimulus" bills, bank bail-outs, and health care "reform". That stuff needs to be passed NOW NOW NOW!!!

  4. #24
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,090

    Re: Military Spending Weighs on Obama's Afghan Decision

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Except "stimulus" bills, bank bail-outs, and health care "reform". That stuff needs to be passed NOW NOW NOW!!!
    Yes and no, but that is a whole other discussion. Sending 40k troops into harms way with no political solution on the cards is just another Vietnam.. do you want that?
    PeteEU

  5. #25
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Military Spending Weighs on Obama's Afghan Decision

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Except "stimulus" bills, bank bail-outs, and health care "reform". That stuff needs to be passed NOW NOW NOW!!!
    Could you imagine the effect on the military had our entire financial system imploded?

  6. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Military Spending Weighs on Obama's Afghan Decision

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    Yes and no, but that is a whole other discussion.
    Is it? Why does Obama get to take his time on Afghanistan but none of the left takes him to task on his fear-mongering in passing the aforementioned legislation?

    Sending 40k troops into harms way with no political solution on the cards is just another Vietnam.. do you want that?
    1. The only way this will be another Vietnam is if the defeatist leftist media convinces Americans that we can't win.

    2. America CAN win this war if we have the will to do it. That starts with the President committing in word and deed to victory. Dithering is not the answer.

  7. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Military Spending Weighs on Obama's Afghan Decision

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Could you imagine the effect on the military had our entire financial system imploded?
    Assuming it would have imploded...

    Also, how's that stimulus bill working out? It's a failure by Obama's own metrics.

    It's just another partisan double-standard. Obama gets to fear-monger and pass giant spending bills with little discussion or analysis but when our military commander says he needs troops NOW Obama gets to take his time.

  8. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    10-26-10 @ 06:34 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,978

    Re: Military Spending Weighs on Obama's Afghan Decision

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Assuming it would have imploded...

    Also, how's that stimulus bill working out? It's a failure by Obama's own metrics.

    It's just another partisan double-standard. Obama gets to fear-monger and pass giant spending bills with little discussion or analysis but when our military commander says he needs troops NOW Obama gets to take his time.

    It's no different with any president.
    The president gets to define what the national priorities are.
    The only power we have is to elect him.

  9. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Military Spending Weighs on Obama's Afghan Decision

    Quote Originally Posted by 1069 View Post
    It's no different with any president.
    The president gets to define what the national priorities are.
    The only power we have is to elect him.
    I don't agree that the President gets to "define" our national priorities; that is up to interpretation. Also, this doesn't address the double-standard I mentioned.

    Why does Obama get all the time in the world to analyze the Afghanistan situation while he has no duty to analyze the legislation concerning the bailouts and "stimulus" bill?

    Of course, I already know what the answer is but I'm sure our resident liberals will think of a way to avoid the obvious explanation...

  10. #30
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,090

    Re: Military Spending Weighs on Obama's Afghan Decision

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Is it? Why does Obama get to take his time on Afghanistan but none of the left takes him to task on his fear-mongering in passing the aforementioned legislation?
    Because jumping the gun on Afghanistan will risk the lives of Americans, while pumping money into the US economy due to massive miss management by previous conservative governments and the private sector does not.

    Funny how you are willing to piss a way the lives of your fellow Americans and others for political gain.. Funny how you and your cohorts are more worried about political gain than the lives of American soldiers. Funny how you are willing to spend billions on an unwinable war, and yet do not find your fellow American's worth a dime when it comes to health and safety..

    1. The only way this will be another Vietnam is if the defeatist leftist media convinces Americans that we can't win.
    Okay answer this then.. What is "winning" in Afghanistan?

    2. America CAN win this war if we have the will to do it. That starts with the President committing in word and deed to victory. Dithering is not the answer.
    Again.. What is "winning" in Afghanistan? You have to define "winning" in a war.. what is the definition for Afghanistan?
    PeteEU

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •