• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama "very close" to Afghan troop decision: TV report

When you're putting troops lives on the line you want someone making the right decision, not someone saying you have thirty days to come up with a plan.

Look how Iraq panned out, the invasion went like clockwork, as a matter of fact we almost outran our supply line….but it wasn’t thought out what we would do when we overthru Saddam and defeated what was left of his so-called army. It was a great big capital WTF moment for awhile there.

So Obama not listening to the commanders he put in place makes sense to you?
 
I think we should get out of Afghanistan. We can't win there, no matter how long we stay... not by any humane means, anyways. Besides, if we continue to stir things up in the area, we might anger China. They do share a border.
 
I think we should get out of Afghanistan. We can't win there, no matter how long we stay... not by any humane means, anyways. Besides, if we continue to stir things up in the area, we might anger China. They do share a border.

Thats not what Obama said in 2008.
 
are you disputing that JFK is only popular because he was assassinated?

are you saying JFKs presidency was so great he should be remembered as he is, than maybe you could enumerate his many accomplishmenst, aside from being a junkie and a whore of course

Wow, is seems that you changed the central point of you post didn't you?:rofl
 
So Obama not listening to the commanders he put in place makes sense to you?

They have to listen to him too. He's their commander-in-chief. He has the final say in the matter.

Those commanders may have experience on the ground, but similarly, they do not consider the geo-political implications of what they are doing. They have specific missions and they carry them out.

Obama has a much wider, if less detailed, view of the issue.
 
Thats not what Obama said in 2008.

I know. He's been backpedaling on just about every issue since he got elected. I'm not a big fan of him.
I certainly prefer him over anything the Republicans have to offer.
That's basically the whole reason I even support the Democrats.
It's all about the "lesser evil" to me.
 
They have to listen to him too. He's their commander-in-chief. He has the final say in the matter.

Those commanders may have experience on the ground, but similarly, they do not consider the geo-political implications of what they are doing. They have specific missions and they carry them out.

Obama has a much wider, if less detailed, view of the issue.

It should not take 3 months for a decision that is a no decision, delaying, lack of leadership commander.
 
So Obama not listening to the commanders he put in place makes sense to you?

He is listening to his commanders. Where do you get the idea that he isn’t listening to them?


I,ll catch you tomorrow time for this ole man to hit the bunk,didn't know it was so late.
 
Last edited:
It should not take 3 months for a decision that is a no decision, delaying, lack of leadership commander.

He could delay for 3 years. It does not matter.
This war has already lasted longer than WWII.
Regardless of what decision he makes, given the current options, we're going to lose in the long term.
There are only two solutions:

1. Withdraw and let the Taliban take the country over.
2. Put all the civilians in concentration camps, establish a big-brother state, and hunt down anyone who does not comply.

The current path:

-Play an endless game of whack-a-mole and make the "world's greatest army" look silly running around chasing goat herdsmen while spending billions of dollars and getting soldiers killed.
 
Sorry but weeks is not close days is close. He is still far away and hurting our troops if it is weeks away.

We can only hope whatever he comes up with works better than the failed war we have been carrying out for the last 8 years that has put our troops in harms way and been counter productive.
 
It is my considered opinion that there is only one reason it could take this long and that is the time it's taking has less to do with making up his mind and everything to do with the reaction that he anticipates will come in the form of a huge backlash.

We know Obama claimed before the election that the Afghan war was worth fighting or words to that effect.

We know Obama is a consummate liar.

We also know Obama has to have the " Obama I Don't Care About Your Health Plan" pass to stay on course to the destruction of the economy required under the Cloward & Piven guidelines for Socialism.

His decision will come after the Senate passes the Bill and the bad decision will not be able to effect it.

I am truly astonished now after Obama's sending the GITMO 5 to NY for dismissal of their charges & release, that people still think Obama is a doing thing.
 
You actually believe Obama wants to destroy the economy?
What would anyone win from that?
 
He is listening to his commanders. Where do you get the idea that he isn’t listening to them?


I,ll catch you tomorrow time for this ole man to hit the bunk,didn't know it was so late.

It has been3 months since they asked for troops and still no decision. How is he listening? He needs to make a decision, not go on for months saying he is close to decision.
 
He could delay for 3 years. It does not matter.
This war has already lasted longer than WWII.
Regardless of what decision he makes, given the current options, we're going to lose in the long term.
There are only two solutions:

1. Withdraw and let the Taliban take the country over.
2. Put all the civilians in concentration camps, establish a big-brother state, and hunt down anyone who does not comply.

The current path:

-Play an endless game of whack-a-mole and make the "world's greatest army" look silly running around chasing goat herdsmen while spending billions of dollars and getting soldiers killed.

Obama can't downsize to success in Afghanistan -- latimes.com
 
We can only hope whatever he comes up with works better than the failed war we have been carrying out for the last 8 years that has put our troops in harms way and been counter productive.

The surge worked and we have been able to downsize in Iraq. We need to give the military what it needs in Afghanistan to win.
 
You actually believe Obama wants to destroy the economy?
What would anyone win from that?

The end of capitalism and the start of a socialist economy that would fit in with a one world economic system.
 
There are only two solutions:

1. Withdraw and let the Taliban take the country over.
2. Put all the civilians in concentration camps, establish a big-brother state, and hunt down anyone who does not comply.

Modern COIN strategy (COIN = counterinsurgency) is similar to your #2. Instead of placing civilians in concentration camps and establishing a big brother state, you instead establish security zones around towns. Place checkpoints to control traffic in and out. You take biometric readings (fingerprints, retinal scans) of everyone and issue id cards. You develop intel resources in the general population of civilians. Anyone that comes in that doesn't have an ID card, you figure he's an insurgent.
 
The end of capitalism and the start of a socialist economy that would fit in with a one world economic system.

And the benefit of that would be what?
 
It has been3 months since they asked for troops and still no decision. How is he listening? He needs to make a decision, not go on for months saying he is close to decision.

How can you say he isn’t listening, when he had this to so say in answer to Cheney’s accusation of ‘dithering’?

< "They tend not to be folks who I think are directly involved in what's happening in Afghanistan. Those who are recognize the gravity of the situation and recognize the importance of us getting this right.">


I don’t know what Intel he is looking at, more than likely neither done the former Vice President. In my opinion and its just an opinion, that he is trying to put the squeeze on Afghan President Karzai,trying to get him to get some of the corruption out of the government.

Probably whistling at the wind, as his brother, from what I have read has one of the biggest drug operations in the country.
 
How can you say he isn’t listening, when he had this to so say in answer to Cheney’s accusation of ‘dithering’?

< "They tend not to be folks who I think are directly involved in what's happening in Afghanistan. Those who are recognize the gravity of the situation and recognize the importance of us getting this right.">


I don’t know what Intel he is looking at, more than likely neither done the former Vice President. In my opinion and its just an opinion, that he is trying to put the squeeze on Afghan President Karzai,trying to get him to get some of the corruption out of the government.

Probably whistling at the wind, as his brother, from what I have read has one of the biggest drug operations in the country.


Obama is playing politics with our troops lives. Obama is trying to figure out the best way to further his political agenda by using Afghanistan.
 
Obama is playing politics with our troops lives. Obama is trying to figure out the best way to further his political agenda by using Afghanistan.

The only ones playing politics are the Obama haters on the right. They don't care about the troops, just hurting Obama.
 
The only ones playing politics are the Obama haters on the right. They don't care about the troops, just hurting Obama.

That's a pretty moot statement considering groups like Code Pink are "left" leaning...Let's be honest...Both 'sides' are guilty of furthering their own agendas.
 
The end of capitalism and the start of a socialist economy that would fit in with a one world economic system.

What is capitalism? It is an economic and social system in which capital, the non-labor factors of production (also known as the means of production), is privately controlled; labor, goods and capital are traded in markets; and profits distributed to owners or invested in technologies and industries.

What is socialism? It refers to various theories of economic organization advocating public or direct worker ownership and administration of the means of production and allocation of resources, and a society characterized by equal access to resources for all individuals with a method of compensation based on the amount of labor expended.

Most of the world, indeed all of it, is based on capitalism. The "one world economic system" is capitalism. Elements of socialism exist, but they are minimal.

We've had elements of socialism in our country for a very long time and they cause no harm. Indeed, they help.

Do you drive? You've been using the socialist road system.
Do you use the internet? Of course. You've been taking advantage of a service invented by the government's DARPA. (socialism)

Obama has not made anything socialist. In socialism, people get rewarded based on how much they work. Obama has given money to people that don't work, such as bankers and other shills.

Please, stop throwing "socialism" around like some sort of hot potato. This is not the McCarthy era. If you're gonna talk about socialism, please, at least be aware of what socialism is.

General rule: Socialism DOES NOT necessarily equal big government.

Read up on anarcho-communism. It is small-government socialism.

In this country we have big-government capitalism and Obama is doing a lot to make it even more so.
 
Back
Top Bottom