• 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!

74% of U.S. Afghan Casualties Came After Obama Ordered Troops Increased

Dont surges "work so good"? Now the Taliban is back and is gonna be in serious political business here pretty soon. All this worthless bloodshed for what? The unwinable "war on terror"?

that happens with half assed leadership
 
It's not actually a "surge" if you're not allowed to fight. :roll:

I think that's what former Sec. of Defense Robert Gates mentions in his soon to be released book. Obama never had any intentions on winning in Afghanistan.

And Obama's politically correct rules of engagemnet only favor the enemy and has caused American and coalition troops to bleed and die.

Shades of Vietnam: Spike in U.S. troop deaths tied to stricter rules of engagement

>" The number of U.S. battlefield fatalities exceeded the rate at which troop strength surged in 2009 and 2010, prompting national security analysts to assert that coinciding stricter rules of engagement led to more deaths..."<

>" But it is clear that the rules of engagement, which restrain troops from firing in order to spare civilian casualties, cut back on airstrikes and artillery strikes — the types of support that protect troops during raids and ambushes.

“In Afghanistan, the [rules of engagement] that were put in place in 2009 and 2010 have created hesitation and confusion for our war fighters,” said Wayne Simmons, a retired U.S. intelligence officer who worked in NATO headquarters in Kabul as the rules took effect, first under Army Gen. Stanley M. McChrystal, then Army Gen. David H. Petraeus.

“It is no accident nor a coincidence that from January 2009 to August of 2010, coinciding with the Obama/McChrystal radical change of the [rules of engagement], casualties more than doubled,” Mr. Simmons said. “The carnage will certainly continue as the already fragile and ineffective [rules] have been further weakened by the Obama administration as if they were playground rules.”..."<

Read more: Spike in battlefield deaths linked to restrictive rules of engagement - Washington Times
 
I think that's what former Sec. of Defense Robert Gates mentions in his soon to be released book. Obama never had any intentions on winning in Afghanistan.

And Obama's politically correct rules of engagemnet only favor the enemy and has caused American and coalition troops to bleed and die.

Shades of Vietnam: Spike in U.S. troop deaths tied to stricter rules of engagement

>" The number of U.S. battlefield fatalities exceeded the rate at which troop strength surged in 2009 and 2010, prompting national security analysts to assert that coinciding stricter rules of engagement led to more deaths..."<

>" But it is clear that the rules of engagement, which restrain troops from firing in order to spare civilian casualties, cut back on airstrikes and artillery strikes — the types of support that protect troops during raids and ambushes.

“In Afghanistan, the [rules of engagement] that were put in place in 2009 and 2010 have created hesitation and confusion for our war fighters,” said Wayne Simmons, a retired U.S. intelligence officer who worked in NATO headquarters in Kabul as the rules took effect, first under Army Gen. Stanley M. McChrystal, then Army Gen. David H. Petraeus.

“It is no accident nor a coincidence that from January 2009 to August of 2010, coinciding with the Obama/McChrystal radical change of the [rules of engagement], casualties more than doubled,” Mr. Simmons said. “The carnage will certainly continue as the already fragile and ineffective [rules] have been further weakened by the Obama administration as if they were playground rules.”..."<

Read more: Spike in battlefield deaths linked to restrictive rules of engagement - Washington Times


Heya Apache.....then that part on our Troopers getting shot in the back came to play.....lets not forget how that came with those Stricter ROE and under the Obama watch too.
 
The generals who planned the operation, obviously. :roll:

They wanted 50,000 to 80,000 men and possibly more, not 30,000 hamstrung by all sorts of ridiculous political concessions.

Your correct. The generals requested something like 60,000 troop surge. It took Obama months to make up his mind. Once he made up his mind he signed off on half the numbers that was requested and it wasn't even a surge but a slow trickle of troops that didn't start showing up in-country until six months after the request was made.
 
Your correct. The generals requested something like 60,000 troop surge. It took Obama months to make up his mind. Once he made up his mind he signed off on half the numbers that was requested and it wasn't even a surge but a slow trickle of troops that didn't start showing up in-country until six months after the request was made.

Say, how many of those troops were busy protecting the poppy fields and making sure the product got to market?
 
Say, how many of those troops were busy protecting the poppy fields and making sure the product got to market?

I would have to drive across the Orange Curtain into Santa Anna or Los Angeles and ask the junkies. But I don't want to do that. It takes weeks to get the stench out of my car any time I go into L.A.
 
Say, how many of those troops were busy protecting the poppy fields and making sure the product got to market?

None Monte.....as not Karzai's Brother nor his Enemies trusted us, to allow us around their operations.
 
The bigger question is, where are your typical lefty anti war activist ? They all seem to have gone into hiding when Obama took the oath of office back in January of 2009.
 
The bigger question is, where are your typical lefty anti war activist ? They all seem to have gone into hiding when Obama took the oath of office back in January of 2009.

You big kidder you! I'm not a lefty or an activist but I'm anti-war and right here!
 
But I thought everybody knew about that!?!?

U.S. Marines protect Afghan’s poppy fields

Yeah I guess you were Right.....I thought those Marines were burning those fields up.


Jason Striuszko a journalist embedded with the U.S. Marines in Garmser, reports that many of the leathernecks are scratching their heads at the apparent contradictions — calling in airstrikes and artillery on the elusive Taliban while assuring farmers and drug lords that they will protect the poppies

It’s kind of weird. We’re coming over here to fight the Taliban. We see this. We know it’s bad. But at the same time we know it’s the only way locals can make money,” said 1st Lt. Adam Lynch, 27, of Barnstable, Mass.

Richard Holbrooke, the Obama Administration’s top envoy in Afghanistan, says that poppy eradication - for years a cornerstone of U.S. and U.N. anti-drug efforts in the country – has only resulted in driving Afghan farmers into the hands of the Taliban.....snip
 
Yeah I guess you were Right.....I thought those Marines were burning those fields up.


Jason Striuszko a journalist embedded with the U.S. Marines in Garmser, reports that many of the leathernecks are scratching their heads at the apparent contradictions — calling in airstrikes and artillery on the elusive Taliban while assuring farmers and drug lords that they will protect the poppies

It’s kind of weird. We’re coming over here to fight the Taliban. We see this. We know it’s bad. But at the same time we know it’s the only way locals can make money,” said 1st Lt. Adam Lynch, 27, of Barnstable, Mass.

Richard Holbrooke, the Obama Administration’s top envoy in Afghanistan, says that poppy eradication - for years a cornerstone of U.S. and U.N. anti-drug efforts in the country – has only resulted in driving Afghan farmers into the hands of the Taliban.....snip


Yeah, it's chapped my ass since the beginning, just another point in my long list of criticisms of US foreign policy. There's a war on drugs here in America, and yet my tax dollars are paying Marines to gaurd the A-Stan poppy fields. Cultivation was at an all time low at the end of Taliban rule in 2001, and under US military protection has soared to an all time record high in 2013!! Is the CIA scrapping money off the top, the Pentagon, who. It's reasons like this that I am a huge critic of US foreign policy. Gettin the job done in Afghanistan, yeah.
 
Yeah, it's chapped my ass since the beginning, just another point in my long list of criticisms of US foreign policy. There's a war on drugs here in America, and yet my tax dollars are paying Marines to gaurd the A-Stan poppy fields. Cultivation was at an all time low at the end of Taliban rule in 2001, and under US military protection has soared to an all time record high in 2013!! Is the CIA scrapping money off the top, the Pentagon, who. It's reasons like this that I am a huge critic of US foreign policy. Gettin the job done in Afghanistan, yeah.


Well, I have brought up before about money that's not counted when playing with the Big Boys.....course being the CIA. Then you know it.
 
The article is from 2009 and the author is a fringe rightist. The US does not protect poppies.:peace

While there is no law protecting the California poppy specifically, California Penal Code Section 384a requires written landowner permission to remove and sell plant material from land that a person does not own, and removing or damaging plants from property that a person does not own without permission may constitute trespass and/or petty theft.
 
True. Also true regarding Bush II and the left.

I think if Bush ordered all troops back from Iraq and Afghanistan the left would be ecstatic and i including minds would of been blown
 
In 2000, the Taliban banned opium production in Afghanistan, making it illegal to grow poppies. Any farmer caught cultivating the cash crop would be severely punished, usually by death. By the middle of 2001, there was basically no opium produced in Afghanistan, though that nation ordinarily led the world in production of the drug. However, since the start of the U.S. led invasion, the poppy fields began growing again and the opium trade is flourishing as never before.


Are we still in Afghanistan just to protect the opium industry? - Virginia Beach Conservative | Examiner.com



Afghanistan has been the greatest illicit opium producer in the entire world, ahead of Burma (Myanmar), the "Golden Triangle", and Latin America since 1992, excluding the year 2001.[1] Afghanistan is the main producer of opium in the "Golden Crescent". Opium production in Afghanistan has been on the rise since U.S. occupation started in 2001.


Opium production in Afghanistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


A November 13 press release issued by the UNODC — the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime — stated that opium poppy cultivation in Afghanistan rose 36 percent in 2013, which is a record high. Additionally, opium production amounted to 5,500 tons, up by 49 percent since 2012.


Opium Crop in Afghanistan Up 36 Percent, Says UN Report



OPIUM PRODUCTION IS ALIVE AND WELL UNDER THE PROTECTORATE OF THE US OCCUPATION.
 
Last edited:
I think if Bush ordered all troops back from Iraq and Afghanistan the left would be ecstatic and i including minds would of been blown
I think the left would have criticized him for not finishing the job and thus wasting the lives of those who died up to that point.
 
In 2000, the Taliban banned opium production in Afghanistan, making it illegal to grow poppies. Any farmer caught cultivating the cash crop would be severely punished, usually by death. By the middle of 2001, there was basically no opium produced in Afghanistan, though that nation ordinarily led the world in production of the drug. However, since the start of the U.S. led invasion, the poppy fields began growing again and the opium trade is flourishing as never before.


Are we still in Afghanistan just to protect the opium industry? - Virginia Beach Conservative | Examiner.com



Afghanistan has been the greatest illicit opium producer in the entire world, ahead of Burma (Myanmar), the "Golden Triangle", and Latin America since 1992, excluding the year 2001.[1] Afghanistan is the main producer of opium in the "Golden Crescent". Opium production in Afghanistan has been on the rise since U.S. occupation started in 2001.


Opium production in Afghanistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


A November 13 press release issued by the UNODC — the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime — stated that opium poppy cultivation in Afghanistan rose 36 percent in 2013, which is a record high. Additionally, opium production amounted to 5,500 tons, up by 49 percent since 2012.


Opium Crop in Afghanistan Up 36 Percent, Says UN Report



OPIUM PRODUCTION IS ALIVE AND WELL UNDER THE PROTECTORATE OF THE US OCCUPATION.

I have no doubt that opium production has gone up since Taliban was overthrown. That's a natural consequence of liberation from theocratic tyranny.:peace
 
I think the left would have criticized him for not finishing the job and thus wasting the lives of those who died up to that point.

Ehhh doubtful saying the lefts whole position was get the hell out ASAP...
 
(CNSNews.com) - Seventy-four percent of the U.S. military personnel who have given their lives serving in the Afghan War died after Feb. 17, 2009, when President Barack Obama announced his first increase in the number of U.S. troops deployed in Afghanistan, according to CNSNews.com’s database of U.S. casualties in the war.

In the more than twelve years that have passed since U.S. troops first entered Afghanistan with the aim of removing al Qaeda from its sanctuary there, 2,162 U.S. service personnel have given their lives in and around Afghanistan in support of U.S. military activities in that country.

1,593 of those 2,162 U.S. casualties—or 73.7 percent—have occurred since Feb. 17, 2009, when Obama announced the first of his multiple increases in U.S. military personnel deployed to Afghanistan.

74% of U.S. Afghan Casualties Came After Obama Ordered Troops Increased | CNS News
How many of these deaths are a result of the rules and regulations Coalition soldiers have to follow. Having our hands tied has not helped the situation at all there. It's become quite political. The time has come for us to leave, however I am very concerned on what will happen when we do
 
Back
Top Bottom