• 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!

NATO Disasters Stack Up In Afghanistan

T

The Prof

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,828
Reaction score
1,808
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
la times:

In a disastrous day for the NATO force in Afghanistan, four American troops were gunned down Sunday by Afghan police, a U.S. airstrike killed eight Afghan women foraging for fuel on a rural hillside, and military officials disclosed that a Taliban strike on a southern base had destroyed more than $150 million worth of planes and equipment — in money terms, by far the costliest single insurgent attack in 11 years of warfare.

The confluence of events underscored some of the conflict's most damaging trends: an unrelenting tide of "insider" attacks, in which Afghan forces turn their weapons on coalition allies; the daily loss of civilian lives to war's ravages; and the continuing ability of insurgent forces to inflict disproportionate havoc on the far more powerful Western military.
Click to expand...

NATO disasters stack up in Afghanistan - latimes.com

51 nato soldiers killed this year in greens vs blues, at least 44 american

15% of all coalition casualties caused by our "allies"

obama's entire exit strategy, if you could actually call it such, relies on the successful afghanization of the war obama escalated with his massive 2009 surge

the audacious attack on camp bastion, 28,000 strong, in south helmand was supposed to be way beyond the enemy's capacity, yet they were able to breach the compound, maintain fire for hours, kill 2 americans and do 150 million dollars of damage, including the destruction of 6 jets, by far the most successful attack on an allied installation in the entire duration of the war

general allen, however, assures us that this frightening frequency of green vs blue killings is nothing unusual, mere "stress and personal grievances" and certainly NOT taliban directed

Insider Attacks Don't Threaten U.S. Strategy, Allen Says - Businessweek

no wonder the professional satisfaction of our fighters is at an all time low, no wonder they point to head-in-the-sand denial and political correctness inside the pentagon as their greatest grievance

Internal Army Poll: Only 26% of Officers Say Army Headed in Right Direction--'Political Correctness' Cited | CNSNews.com

and the drone attacks which killed 8 women this weekend are also said to be the motivation behind the attack in benghazi which killed the ambassador---according to seniors at state, according to libyan security officials, according to the chair of senate armed services after being briefed by the secretary of defense

Revealed: inside story of US envoy's assassination - World Politics - World - The Independent

obama's entire foreign policy is in freefall

worry
 
Is it really all that surprising. Besides the US not have a cohesive plan nor a professional occupation force, Bush further screwed it up by inviting NATO to participate. The Brits and anyone that stood by us and helped us from the beginning absolutely deserve to be involved, the rest, they need to haul their semi-socialist dumb asses back to Europe and stay the hell out of it.
 
this afternoon, cbs:

The strategy for getting U.S. forces out of Afghanistan depends on training Afghan soldiers and police to protect the country themselves, but on Monday the U.S. military suspended most joint field operations with Afghan forces because so many Americans are being killed by the men they are training.

Afghan government troops -- our allies -- have turned their guns on NATO forces 36 times this year, killing 51, most of them Americans. That is more attacks than the last two years combined.

The order effectively suspends "until further notice" most of the operations which U.S. and Afghan troops conduct side by side. At higher headquarters, Afghans and Americans will still work together, but in the field small unit operations putting Afghan soldiers alongside Americans -- the guts of the U.S. strategy to turn the fighting over to Afghans -- will be suspended unless an exception is granted by a commanding general.

The order was issued after a long weekend in which four American and two British troops were killed by so-called "insider attacks" -- Afghans turning their guns on their supposed allies.

Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey called the surge in insider attacks "a very serious threat to the campaign."
Click to expand...

U.S. military suspends joint patrols with Afghans - CBS News

very serious threat? where's general allen?

ah, here he comes:

U.S. officials say that somewhere between 10 percent and 25 percent of the insider attacks are the work of enemy infiltrators. The rest are the result of personal insults and just plain cultural misunderstandings.
Click to expand...

obama's entire middle policy is in ruins, and now obama's war in afghanistan has its entire "exit strategy" pulled out like a rug

are you sure this guy knows what he's doing?
 
The Prof said:
this afternoon, cbs:



U.S. military suspends joint patrols with Afghans - CBS News

very serious threat? where's general allen?

ah, here he comes:



obama's entire middle policy is in ruins, and now obama's war in afghanistan has its entire "exit strategy" pulled out like a rug

are you sure this guy knows what he's doing?
Click to expand...

I have always thought the Karzai government was a bad deal from the start. Now, after we have told him we are just going to cut and run and leave him hanging, I believe he has been making a lot of under the table deals trying to save his own skin.

Who ever thought that a democracy run by the locals when they are mostly uninformed, uneducated and illiterate would succeed without longterm intervention was on some very good hallucinogens at the time. Unfortunately, for us and the common person in Afghanistan, nobody in a position to make decisions had a clue of what they were stepping into at the time nor have we changed to someone who has a clue. Even more clueless, IMO.

I still support that it needed to be done, but man, someone should of had a clue of what to do first.
 
Obama announced that we are leaving, the locals know that means another civil war is coming, and they are hedging their bets. If I were an Afghan with no way to escape the country, I'd keep my head down too.

This uptick in violence is a direct consequence of announcing a date certain for us to leave, and would not be there if our departure was dependent on ground conditions and the ability of the Afghan government to control the situation.
 
Shouldnt we be upset that the Commander is campaigning rather ensuring the military is running effectively, as well as communicating to the public how the Taliban manage to get into a military camp, kill marines, and destroy helos and aircraft? Yes, I know he gets breifings and gives order while out campaigning, but theres an opportunity cost. He cant do both at once. Since things are going badly in Afghanistan, why doesnt he tell us why and what hes doing about it? Why isnt the media informing us or investigating?
 
jonny5 said:
Shouldnt we be upset that the Commander is campaigning rather ensuring the military is running effectively, as well as communicating to the public how the Taliban manage to get into a military camp, kill marines, and destroy helos and aircraft? Yes, I know he gets breifings and gives order while out campaigning, but theres an opportunity cost. He cant do both at once. Since things are going badly in Afghanistan, why doesnt he tell us why and what hes doing about it? Why isnt the media informing us or investigating?
Click to expand...

He is out campaigning because if he doesn't, he is unemployed come January. Not that I would be against that, but you can understand him not wanting it. Him being out may actually be a good thing, since he is a unmitigated pain in the ass who doesn't know a thing about how to run a military campaign.

Why don't we see the media informing us or investigating? Duh, you are aware the majority of print and TV media are liberal friendly, don't you? Why in the world would they be bringing up Obama's record on just about anything since it might lead to him becoming unemployed in January and replaced with someone else from the political side they hate?
 
interesting-
a President who leans into military operations is seen as micromanaging. BushII claimed to always defer to his Generals,(as long as they didn't say 200,000 troops would be needed to occupy Iraq after the fall of Saddam.), but Obama should be directing soldiers at the tactical level?

This reminds me of Vietnam and President Nixon. The only real issue Nixon faced was how big a fig leaf could Kissinger get in Paris. The US public was sick and tired of a war that could never be won and 'success' was measured in still hanging on to Saigon. IF there ever was a chance for 'victory' in Afghanistan is was lost as BushII took his eye off the ball and dropped it while thrashing around in Iraq.

Now the course is clear, get us the hell out. Just like Nixon in SE Asia now Obama in SW Asia has few options but to put a brave face on past failure and get us out.

Nixon wasn't blamed for leaving South Vietnam, Ford not for 'abandoning' it. Obama shouldn't be for getting us out of a mess.

The Poll taken of Army Officers brings back memories, seems like Officers/NCOs have always thought the Army was going soft, retention was poor, junior leadership not trained properly before promotion, out of touch generals, nothing new.

The skipped over main reason- Reduction in Forces, RIF, would make many career soldiers a bit down in the mouth, no one enjoys getting a pink slip and anyone who has worked the private sector and had layoffs pending knows how morale goes down- should soldiers be any different?

I don't see where anyone in the service says political correctness- that was the article's opinion.

I'd also say only 38% say the Army is heading in the wrong direction. 62% feel it isn't.

CNS News- 'The Right News. Right Now' might be a tad bias when it comes all things Obama. :cool:
 
The ANSF can be cultivated and made into a proficient fighting force given enough time and energy, and the proper circumstances to allow them to incubate without massive Taliban pressure. We forget that 12,000 of them have already died in battle in the fight against the Taliban and its affiliates.
 
seems like Officers/NCOs have always thought the Army was going soft...

The skipped over main reason- Reduction in Forces, RIF...

I don't see where anyone in the service says political correctness...

I'd also say only 38% say the Army is heading in the wrong direction. 62% feel it isn't
Click to expand...

from cns:

An internal Army survey that was conducted in 2011 and published this year discovered that only 26 percent of active-duty Army officers say yes--and that one of the two main themes cited by those who say no is that the Army is now adversely impacted by "political correctness" imposed by both outside policymakers and senior Army leaders.

The 26 percent who said the Army was headed in the right direction in 2011 was the lowest percentage who gave that response since the Army began conducting this survey in 2005. It was also significant drop from the 33 percent who had said the Army was heading in the right direction in 2010.

The report said that 24 percent of those who believed the Army was not headed in the right direction provided additional comments on why they believed that was the case. "Two themes stood out in these comments," said the report. The first was concern over the downsizing of the Army and the impact it might have on national security.

The second was the impact of "political correctness."

The Annual Survey of Army Leadership, conducted by U.S. Army's Center for Army Leadership, asked 16,800 commissioned and non-commissioned officers to agree or disagree with the statement: “The Army is headed in the right direction to prepare for the challenges of the next 10 years.”
Click to expand...

perhaps general allen's proclamation that the 51 greens on blue this year are NOT taliban directed isn't going over well

perhaps bothersome was the directive at kabul isaf that soldiers were to check their weapons so as not to foment distrust with our "allies" on base, reversed in august by general martin dempsey after the 40th american was killed by a soldier he armed and trained

U.S. Troops Ordered to Be Armed at All Times Following Afghan Attacks - ABC News

perhaps, the pentagon's whitewashing of major hasan is part of the problem

Fort Hood Report: No Mention of Islam, Hasan Not Named - TIME

rif:

Obama outlines defense cuts - POLITICO

Panetta details impact of potentially "devastating" defense cuts – CNN

Bob Woodward sequester book could bolster GOP attack on W.H. - POLITICO
 
It was such a sudden decision, the British and the Afghans heard it on the news.
 
It has been a disastrous week for Obama. After all that bragging at the dem convention about killing bin Laden and successes in the Middle East the whole area is ready to blow. It has never been this unstable. We have always had allies in the area to count on but after 31/2 years of Obama we are left with only Israel and Obama refuses to give Netanyahu 15 minutes of time. He is actually making Jimmy Carter look good. Carter lost Iran and now Obama is finishing the job.
 
jerry7 said:
It has been a disastrous week for Obama. After all that bragging at the dem convention about killing bin Laden and successes in the Middle East the whole area is ready to blow. It has never been this unstable. We have always had allies in the area to count on but after 31/2 years of Obama we are left with only Israel and Obama refuses to give Netanyahu 15 minutes of time. He is actually making Jimmy Carter look good. Carter lost Iran and now Obama is finishing the job.
Click to expand...

lol yes because the GOP have maintained such a open policy on Iran during the last year...


p.s what middle eastern allies has the US had to fall back on in the past?
 
Diogenes said:
Obama announced that we are leaving, the locals know that means another civil war is coming, and they are hedging their bets. If I were an Afghan with no way to escape the country, I'd keep my head down too.
Click to expand...

We can only hope that Jeb Bush sends US troops to Afghanistan after he wins the presidential race in 2016.
 
The Prof said:
until very recently, egypt

Major Non-NATO Ally Information, Videos, Pictures and News

as of 9-11, however, obtuse obama is not so sure

Obama: Egypt not an ally - Boston Globe
Click to expand...

would hardly of said Egypt were ever your ally as such, especially considering America pro-Israeli stance. America has had trade realtionships in the middle east but I wouldnt say they could ever count any of them as friends. If you did count countries like Egypt as your friend then your all being very naive, why not ask the UK what happens to you in the middle east when you think they are your "friends".
 
johnny_rebson said:
Obama had the opportunity to install an Egyptian dictator who would have been friendly to the US, but he blew it.
Click to expand...

and you would of got away with it if it wasn't for those pesky Egyptian's.
 
jerry7 said:
Well according to Obama, Mubarak was a stalwart US ally. Makes you wonder why he helped pull the rug out from under him, doesn't it?

Obama: Mubarak is a "Stalwart Ally ... Force for Stability & Good" - YouTube
Click to expand...

again I think that situation was out of Obamas control! You can be interfering with every countries domestic struggles especially if those struggles involve removing a dictator and trying to replace it with democracy. Granted right now it doesnt look good in Egypt but it wouldnt look good for the US if you were seen propping up dictators considering you history of pushing "freedom" and the last 10 years of toppling dictators.
Be kind of sending the wrong message.
 
Higgins86 said:
again I think that situation was out of Obamas control! You can be interfering with every countries domestic struggles especially if those struggles involve removing a dictator and trying to replace it with democracy. Granted right now it doesnt look good in Egypt but it wouldnt look good for the US if you were seen propping up dictators considering you history of pushing "freedom" and the last 10 years of toppling dictators.
Be kind of sending the wrong message.
Click to expand...
If you don't stand with your allies who will trust you? And bear in mind that Obama owns Libya. Obama issued an executive order describing Libya as an unusual threat to US security and then engaged in an illegal war against them in support of a UN resolution. He never got approval from the US Congress in violation of the War Powers Act. He also ignored the Iranians when they asked for help and attempted to revolt in 2009. His policies in the Middle East have been a disaster.
Prior to this meltdown he and Biden had been doing a lot of boasting on the campaign trail about bin Laden and taking out Al Quaeda. Now they are attempting to place responsibility for all of this on an obscure movie. They are always pointing the finger at someone else.
 
Obama had the opportunity to install an Egyptian dictator who would have been friendly to the US, but he blew it
Click to expand...

that's ok, he apologized
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom