Page 15 of 24 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 234

Thread: 34,000 troops will be sent to Afghanistan

  1. #141
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: 34,000 troops will be sent to Afghanistan

    Let me get this straight...

    Afghanistan is central to our security and if we fail there we値l be in a world of hurt... but if we cannot win in 18 months, its too hard, so we値l leave.


  2. #142
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,763

    Re: 34,000 troops will be sent to Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Enemy View Post
    The US Military would love fro the Taliban and A.Q. to pop back up in a "year or two". They may have a safe haven in Pakistan, but as soon as they cross those borders they'll be exploded.
    Just because we pull out of Afghanistan does not cease operations in combating A.Q. and the Taliban.

    The problem we are facing is that we are trying to Nation build in Afghanistan, as we dismiss the Afghani Government. We cannot stop corruption through military force.

    Also, take note that the military surge is just one facet of the strategy. The most important step, and easily the hardest step, is trying to Westernize Afghanistan; building infrastructure, building schools, etc.

    The Media's criticisms of the Obama address only reinforce that the American mainsteam media is absolutely inept to make any fundamental change in the way we approach the premise of the Afghanistan war.

    N.A.T.O and Europe has spoken; they do not support this war. Sure, they send 5,000 troops, but the best estimates, to duplicate the success we had in Iraq, is to bring the troop total to 600,000.
    I think you've misread what the President said. There will be no nation building, not by U.S. military forces. Now, in the long run we may "partner" with Afghanistan politically to show them a better way to bring about economic and military stability in their nation, but what I gather from the President's speech last night was the U.S. has no intentions of being in Afghanistan indefinately.

    I've said for years now to family, friends and neighbors that the best thing we could do in Afghanistan is to supply them with farming equipment so that they could become an agricultural nation in the Middle East. They've got some of the most fertile soil of all Middle Eastern nations, and there more open land there than pretty much anywhere else that's NOT desert. The problem is they've never been seen as an international exporter; regional maybe, but nothing on an international scale. It stands to reason to try and teach them a better way.

    So, yes, President Obama appealled to the Afghan nation to start thinking and doing for themselves. Because in the short-term, American and coalition troops will leave the region and they'll once again be left to fiend for themselves. And unless they want history to repeat itself and their nation is once again left in a power vaccum where lawlessness is and remains the norm, they'd better wake up and get on the winning side.

  3. #143
    Familiaist


    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Last Seen
    11-16-16 @ 09:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    7,470

    Re: 34,000 troops will be sent to Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Let me get this straight...

    Afghanistan is central to our security and if we fail there we’ll be in a world of hurt... but if we cannot win in 18 months, its too hard, so we’ll leave.

    I think the biggest question that needs to be revisted is whether or not Afghanistan is central to our security. I am giving the Government the benefit of the doubt on this one, and will believe it.

    We mustn't forget the absurdity of this concept that I call "Harvesting National Security". We have our military personnel in Afghanistan in order, allegedly, to keep America safe. This promotes the idea that "Security" is something we can go and get. We must realize that A.Q. is highly capable of large scale destruction, but it is also a parasite; meaning it has to rely on the failures elsewhere for it's plans to be carried out.

    Just a thought.
    "I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation. Whether we would survive Hitler hung in the balance, but there is no doubt that we shall survive al-Qa'ida." -- Lord Hoffmann

  4. #144
    Professor

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Dakota
    Last Seen
    09-02-17 @ 08:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,357

    Re: 34,000 troops will be sent to Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    Erod, drz-400,

    Just what would you have him do? Pull out? Why when clearly extremist are STILL trying to inflect harm upon this country. You'd really be able to claim this was another Vietnam then. We left there before the mission was done as well.

    The FBI/CIA recently arrested a domestic terrorist who allegedly received his instructions (third party) from Al Quaida/Taliban members abroad. We just had a rogue soldier attack his fellow servicemen and women at Ft. Hood, someone who likely also received his instructions from members associated with Al Quaida, and you want the President to order the troops out of Afghanistan? You want him to pull out of the "just" war, the same war former VP Cheney claimed the President was "dithering" over prior to finally making his decision to stay the course with a new strategy?

    I have one word for the both of you: COWARDS!
    While I do disagree with the euphemism, the war on terror, I was simply pointing out that setting a date for the withdrawl of troops hardley shows weakness by the President.
    While I do not agree with this war, I do happen to agree with the presidents plan to strengthen the afghan army and continue to improve realations within the afghan government, as I believe this will benefit our mission and allow for a faster and more pernament withdrawl of troops.

  5. #145
    Sage
    Erod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:43 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,067

    Re: 34,000 troops will be sent to Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    Erod, drz-400,

    Just what would you have him do? Pull out?
    Absolutely not! Quite the opposite.

    But don't tell them, "hey, we're going to send more troops and hang around for a few more months, and then re-evaluate."

    NO, the message should be that we're sending more troops and we will stay at their side no matter how long it takes to win. That is the only thing that could bolster the Afghans resolve to defeat these people that I believe they genuinely want gone but are afraid to commit for fear of us leaving too soon.

    Obama, as he always does, tried to placate both sides last night. "We're sending more troops before we leave." That is just not how you fight a war.

  6. #146
    Familiaist


    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Last Seen
    11-16-16 @ 09:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    7,470

    Re: 34,000 troops will be sent to Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    I think you've misread what the President said. There will be no nation building, not by U.S. military forces. Now, in the long run we may "partner" with Afghanistan politically to show them a better way to bring about economic and military stability in their nation, but what I gather from the President's speech last night was the U.S. has no intentions of being in Afghanistan indefinately.
    He mentions a system of partnering our military forces with this ideal "Afghan National Army" (ANA) in order to increase security, and repel future Taliban attacks. He also mentions the civilian approach that is going to undermine the N.G.Os already set up in the region, and give the aid directly to the citizens (through local ministers, etc, the logistics are not yet solid); a completely different approach than Iraq.

    I gathered, the only way to ensure that these resources reach the civilians will be through our military prescence, as we establish "bases" (of sorts) in the larger populated areas.

    I don't think it will be up to the United States military to teach the teachers who will teach the future generation of Afghanistan (creating a national identity), but I do think we must rely on our soldiers in uniforms to make sure the Taliban isn't skimming off the top.

    there have also been reports of the Kharzi government's willingness to extend a diplomatic, albeit temporary, peace with the Taliban and co-lead the new Afghanistan .

    I've said for years now to family, friends and neighbors that the best thing we could do in Afghanistan is to supply them with farming equipment so that they could become an agricultural nation in the Middle East. They've got some of the most fertile soil of all Middle Eastern nations, and there more open land there than pretty much anywhere else that's NOT desert. The problem is they've never been seen as an international exporter; regional maybe, but nothing on an international scale. It stands to reason to try and teach them a better way.
    It's not Middle Eastern. The most fertile of the land is on the Iranian border, ruled largely by a Pashtun with historical ties to Mullah Omar; the ruler is currently playing the netural role.

    I agree, with you and with Obama's premise, we cannot give American companies the contracts to do what the Afghan people should be doing. We need to give them realistic goals, so that they have something to work towards.
    We do see a significant amount of Wheat and Cereal being produced in areas that once used to produce mainly poppy (namely the Northern regions), but the fact is that the population gets more money from growing poppy.
    Italics: A better way by our standards. We are giving the population a choice, to lose their autonomy to the Taliban or to West/Kabul. This particular statement (italics) smells like some phrase used to justify colonialism-- We must teach the second class how to become first class, like us. (Just an interesting note)

    So, yes, President Obama appealled to the Afghan nation to start thinking and doing for themselves. Because in the short-term, American and coalition troops will leave the region and they'll once again be left to fiend for themselves. And unless they want history to repeat itself and their nation is once again left in a power vaccum where lawlessness is and remains the norm, they'd better wake up and get on the winning side.
    I don't think they want their history to repeat. However what we are asking of them is to trust us, that we have their best interests at heart. And while that may be true, which is going to be difficult to explain to a population whose memories of outsiders are that they will try and destroy you.
    "I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation. Whether we would survive Hitler hung in the balance, but there is no doubt that we shall survive al-Qa'ida." -- Lord Hoffmann

  7. #147
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,763

    Re: 34,000 troops will be sent to Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Let me get this straight...

    Afghanistan is central to our security and if we fail there we値l be in a world of hurt... but if we cannot win in 18 months, its too hard, so we値l leave.

    American and coalition forces effectively have Taliban and Al Quaida forces "contained" to the south-east region of the country leading to the mountains that boarder Pakistan while Pakistan forces have the Taliban/Al Quaida forces "contained" along the south-west boarder region in their country. All that's needed are troop strength large enough to make their push (possibly from the north) and box them in to deliver that crushing blow.

    I think 18 months is a good timeline, but I doubt if it's really set in stone. If a strong resistence force remains in that region or if somehow strong Taliban and Al Quaida forces resistence forces emerge outside the "battle zone", I'm sure American and coalition forces will remain. BUT giving a timeline (which I would have done privately to the State Department, DoD and to Congress and not made public) tells our military, the American people and the Afghan people we have no intentions of staying there indefinately. Moreover, it singles to our military leaders that if they want the troops to come home they'll need to step up their game once reinforcements arrive. But it in no way implies that if the battle isn't won by the summer of 2011 that American forces will just pack up and go home.

    The argument that the Taliban will just wait it out for 18 months...I don't think so.

  8. #148
    Sage
    Erod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:43 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,067

    Re: 34,000 troops will be sent to Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Let me get this straight...

    Afghanistan is central to our security and if we fail there we値l be in a world of hurt... but if we cannot win in 18 months, its too hard, so we値l leave.

    Bingo.

    And what's funny is how "Mr. Polls and his Flying Circus" totally misread what the reaction would be.

    The far left is pissed. The far right is pissed. The middle is confused...and pissed. The troops are scratching their heads. The MSM is completely dumbfounded in how to spin this.

    This is what happens when you give your 8-year-old the keys to the car.

  9. #149
    Familiaist


    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Last Seen
    11-16-16 @ 09:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    7,470

    Re: 34,000 troops will be sent to Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Erod View Post
    Bingo.

    And what's funny is how "Mr. Polls and his Flying Circus" totally misread what the reaction would be.

    The far left is pissed. The far right is pissed. The middle is confused...and pissed. The troops are scratching their heads. The MSM is completely dumbfounded in how to spin this.

    This is what happens when you give your 8-year-old the keys to the car.
    Overraction indeed.

    He gave two addresses in one. One to the Americans and one to Afghanistan. He made some really smart decisions in the address, but people were ready to bitch over every little detail-- I sure as hell was ready.
    "I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation. Whether we would survive Hitler hung in the balance, but there is no doubt that we shall survive al-Qa'ida." -- Lord Hoffmann

  10. #150
    Sage
    Erod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:43 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,067

    Re: 34,000 troops will be sent to Afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    I think 18 months is a good timeline, but I doubt if it's really set in stone.
    Why put a timeline on it? Two months or 102 months, who cares? Just commit to it and get it done.

Page 15 of 24 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... 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
  •