• 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!

43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforcemen

Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

I'll admit that this surprised me at first, until I realized the absolute absurdity of your point.

You, a military man, are objecting to the fact that this general has spoken directly to the President of the United States "only once" in the last 70 days.

Are you seriously expecting me to believe that the chain of command leads directly from McChrystal to Obama? What about the Secretary of Defense? What about the Joint Chiefs?

It is not General McChrystal's job to talk to the President. It is also not his job to step outside the chain of command.

You almost had me for a second, Rev, I'll give you that much. :lol:
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

apdst said:
So, here were go again, with the notion that as CIC, the president, especially Obama, can throw the rules and regulations out the window and do whatever the hell he wants. Sorry, but that's not the way it is out in the real world. If the president fails to give the proper support to soldiers on the battlefield, without damn good reason, it could be considered a dereliction of duty. Unless, you can prove otherwise. Can you?

Dereliction of duty is an impeachable offense. mmm, mmm, mmm
Click to expand...

Using your logic, George W. Bush should have been impeached for:

1. Invading Iraq with too few troops. Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki was ignored for having the temerity to suggest this was the case, and was thereafter, Shinseki's influence on the Joint Chiefs of Staff reportedly waned. Should Bush have done exactly what Shinseki suggested, as you insist Obama should do with McChrystal's advice?

Well, he didn't. Your "impeach him!" logic fails.

1a. On November 15, 2006, in testimony before Congress, CENTCOM Commander Gen. John Abizaid said that General Shinseki had been correct that more troops were needed. Should Bush have listened to Shinseki AND Abizaid and followed their advice, as you insist Obama should do with McChrystal's advice?

Well, he didn't. Your "impeach him!" logic fails.

2. Sending troops into Iraq with insufficient body armor, tank armor, and more. Should Bush have listened to Shinseki's AND Abizaid's recommendations, as you insist Obama should do with McChrystal's recommendations?

Well, he didn't. Your "impeach him!" logic fails.

GIs Lack Armor, Radios, Bullets

Iraq-bound soldiers confront Rumsfeld over lack of armor

Soldiers in Iraq still buying their own body armor


At least you understand that.

:doh
 
Last edited:
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

The top and bottom of it is Afghanistan certainly does need reinforcements. Its a shame we have to look 'too the old reliables' as usual:(
But considering the real support for the war-on a global scale, and i mean real support, not lip service the burden lies with the few.

In answer to the question Obama is wise to consider, consider an achievable goal and get this mess back on track.

Paul
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

gunner said:
In answer to the question Obama is wise to consider, consider an achievable goal and get this mess back on track.

Paul
Click to expand...

I think therein lays the problem. There is no goal in Afghanistan for our military that is remotely achievable.
As far as Obama doing the right thing or not.......I'd much rather have a President who doesn't shoot from the hip or make major decision based on what his "Gut" tells him.I think Obama is trying to formulate an achievable strategy for us over there. Anyone who uses the term "Win" or "Lose" doesn't understand the reality of the ME.
 
Last edited:
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Devil505 said:
I think therein lays the problem. There is no goal in Afghanistan for our military that is remotely achievable.
As far as Obama doing the right thing or not.......I'd much rather have a President who doesn't shoot from the hip or make major decision based on what his "Gut" tells him.I think Obama is trying to formulate an achievable strategy for us over there. Anyone who uses the term "Win" or "Lose" doesn't understand the reality of the ME.
Click to expand...

I was a bit hasty when I said the above. An achievable, realistic goal for us would be the training of Afghan forces & then getting the hell out of there. We can fight Al Quieda with UAV's & small mobile forces that don't require pinning down thousands of our troop as targets.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

He announced that he had a "comprehensive strategy" back in March, which was reached after a "careful policy review."

The White House - Blog Post - A New Strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan

Its goal?

So I want the American people to understand that we have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future. That's the goal that must be achieved. That is a cause that could not be more just.
Click to expand...

Obama's words, not mine.

So, what happened? Why is he taking months to decide what to do now?
 
Last edited:
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Harshaw said:
He announced that he had a "comprehensive strategy" back in March, which was reached after a "careful policy review."

The White House - Blog Post - A New Strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan

Its goal?



Obama's words, not mine.

So, what happened? Why is he taking months to decide what to do now?
Click to expand...

Here's the President's words right from your link: (my emphasis added)
At the same time, we will shift the emphasis of our mission to training and increasing the size of Afghan security forces, so that they can eventually take the lead in securing their country. That's how we will prepare Afghans to take responsibility for their security, and how we will ultimately be able to bring our own troops home.

The new emphasis will be to train Afghan force so they can eventually "take responsibility for their security, and how we will ultimately be able to bring our own troops home."

That's an achievable goal & one I agree with...Training Afghan troops.
But let's do it quickly & with a much smaller footprint than we now have in Afghanistan.
 
Last edited:
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

It doesn't answer the question.

He had a "comprehensive strategy" after "careful policy review."

He was still following that strategy as of his July remarks on it.

Now, he's been publicly indecisive for over a month now.

What happened between July and September which warrants another lengthy review process -- if he had already done that work and formed a "comprehensive strategy"?

How appropriate is it, by the way, that according to yesterday's NYT, this is one of the works of art chosen to adorn the White House for his term?

6fcvwk.jpg
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

TacticalEvilDan said:
I'll admit that this surprised me at first, until I realized the absolute absurdity of your point.

You, a military man, are objecting to the fact that this general has spoken directly to the President of the United States "only once" in the last 70 days.

Are you seriously expecting me to believe that the chain of command leads directly from McChrystal to Obama? What about the Secretary of Defense? What about the Joint Chiefs?

It is not General McChrystal's job to talk to the President. It is also not his job to step outside the chain of command.

You almost had me for a second, Rev, I'll give you that much. :lol:
Click to expand...




Circle the wagons. :roll:


He was asked how many times he spoke to the President, he answered. you all are losing on the facts so attacking the General is the next step.:roll:
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Harshaw said:
He announced that he had a "comprehensive strategy" back in March, which was reached after a "careful policy review."

The White House - Blog Post - A New Strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan

Its goal?



Obama's words, not mine.

So, what happened? Why is he taking months to decide what to do now?
Click to expand...

The answer is so self-evident that the question practically answers himself, but here we go:

3 months into his Presidency, Obama increases troop strength in Afghanistan, no doubt at the request of his general, by 50%.

It has now been brought to his attention that, in the opinion of his general, more troops are needed.

If this is true, I would imagine that he now believes that he needs to rethink the current strategy, since he increased troop strength after a "careful policy review."

If he doesn't think about it and simply repeats what he did back in March, he could simply be throwing more troops at a bad strategy, and I imagine he takes his job seriously enough that he doesn't want to do that.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Circle the wagons. :roll:


He was asked how many times he spoke to the President, he answered. you all are losing on the facts so attacking the General is the next step.:roll:
Click to expand...

Um, no.

I'm saying it dawned on me after a few seconds of consideration, that it doesn't matter how many times he's spoken to the general.

I'm also saying that, as a man with military experience, this should have been painfully obvious to you, rather than looking like a valid point.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

TacticalEvilDan said:
Um, no.

I'm saying it dawned on me after a few seconds of consideration, that it doesn't matter how many times he's spoken to the general.

I'm also saying that, as a man with military experience, this should have been painfully obvious to you, rather than looking like a valid point.
Click to expand...




So how often did Bush talk with Patreaus?


How often does hillary speak to mcchrystal?
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

All of that said, I had an interesting thought occur to me a few minutes ago.

Back during the first Gulf War, President Bush deceived the press so that the press would deceive the enemy, thus granting us additional tactical advantage.

Could that be why the general has gone public in what appears to be an attempt to undermine the President, and yet has not been fired?

I don't think that's likely, but if it's true, it's an excellent strategy for lulling the enemy into a false sense of security so that they make a stupid mistake that we can make them pay for in blood.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
So how often did Bush talk with Patreaus?


How often does hillary speak to mcchrystal?
Click to expand...

I don't know and I don't care.

Chain of command, Rev. It is entirely appropriate for Obama to expect the general to communicate with his superiors, who will communicate with their superiors, until the information makes its way to the top, where the decisions get made.

Isn't that how it works in the military?
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

TacticalEvilDan said:
I don't know and I don't care.

Chain of command, Rev. It is entirely appropriate for Obama to expect the general to communicate with his superiors, who will communicate with their superiors, until the information makes its way to the top, where the decisions get made.

Isn't that how it works in the military?
Click to expand...



This is excuse making. This General is waiting on the one to make a decision. Obama tapped him, he is supposed to brief Obama. Just like patreaus briefed Bush almost daily...
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
This is excuse making. This General is waiting on the one to make a decision. Obama tapped him, he is supposed to brief Obama. Just like patreaus briefed Bush almost daily...
Click to expand...

Considering how badly Bush handled military affairs, you don't want to use him as a shining example of how things should be done.

That said, this isn't excuse-making, this is reality. Why are you refusing to acknowledge, as a man with military experience, that this is how things work in the military?
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

TacticalEvilDan said:
Considering how badly Bush handled military affairs, you don't want to use him as a shining example of how things should be done.

That said, this isn't excuse-making, this is reality. Why are you refusing to acknowledge, as a man with military experience, that this is how things work in the military?
Click to expand...

Just to clarify some claimed bona fides......I'd love to hear exactly what military experience the Rev has?
(many of his statements to me disclose no military background??)
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

TacticalEvilDan said:
Considering how badly Bush handled military affairs, you don't want to use him as a shining example of how things should be done.
Click to expand...


So far he's handled it far better than Obamalama :lol:


That said, this isn't excuse-making, this is reality. Why are you refusing to acknowledge, as a man with military experience, that this is how things work in the military?
Click to expand...


Please link to his "chain of command" and please link to how he violated it. /facepalm
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Devil505 said:
Just to clarify some claimed bona fides......I'd love to hear exactly what military experience the Rev has?
(many of his statements to me disclose no military background??)
Click to expand...




Click my star, I was a FAC.. I also worked as a PMC way before it was cool. :shrug:
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
So far he's handled it far better than Obamalama :lol:





Please link to his "chain of command" and please link to how he violated it. /facepalm
Click to expand...

I disagree but....What military experience do you really have Rev?...Care to be specific/
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Devil505 said:
I disagree but....What military experience do you really have Rev?...Care to be specific/
Click to expand...




If you think you are going to be able to attack my military background, I advise you to think better of it.


USAF TACP FAC, Gulf war vet. I put the "smart" in those smart bombs. I also been to the balkans, and worked as a PMC way before it was cool.


Tread carefully.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

TacticalEvilDan said:
That said, this isn't excuse-making, this is reality. Why are you refusing to acknowledge, as a man with military experience, that this is how things work in the military?
Click to expand...

I think the answer is that the good Rev. really has no military experience. Care to prove me wrong Rev?
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
If you think you are going to be able to attack my military background, I advise you to think better of it.


USAF TACP FAC, Gulf war vet. I put the "smart" in those smart bombs. I also been to the balkans, and worked as a PMC way before it was cool.


Tread carefully.
Click to expand...

Are you saying you were actually in the U.S. Military? ...I'm just trying to clarify what your saying. (I have no clue what TACP FAC are??...care to explain to a civilian?)
 
Last edited:
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Devil505 said:
I think the answer is that the good Rev. really has no military experience. Care to prove me wrong Rev?
Click to expand...




You can come by and see my DD214 anytime you wish. PM me and ill let you know how to find me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom