• 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

ptif219 said:
Catawba said:
Since Obama took over the opinion of Americans has dropped as far as believing we are winning. Obama is bad for popular opinion and moral because he will not make decision and win the war as he said he would.
Click to expand...

8 years of our "war on terror" that has been counter productive with a 3 Trillion dollar price tag is why American opinion has grown against continuing our war against the Afghanis.

I keep my fingers crossed that Obama has the sense to learn from the mistakes of the last 8 years.
Click to expand...
 
ptif219 said:
Why else does it take more than three months to say yes or no to more troops?
Click to expand...

I hope for developing a strategy that can be productive instead of the failure it has been for the last 8 years.
 
Catawba said:
I hope for developing a strategy that can be productive instead of the failure it has been for the last 8 years.
Click to expand...

Because Politicians in Washington know better than Commanders on the ground in Iraq. How many Liberal Senators have visited Afghanistan btw? How many talk with the Commanders? This isn't some Union worker arbitration, these are real life and death scenarios.
 
ptif219 said:
Sorry but weeks is not close days is close. He is still far away and hurting our troops if it is weeks away.


Obama "very close" to Afghan troop decision: TV report - Yahoo! News

U.S. President Barack Obama said in an interview with CNN on Wednesday he is "very close" to a decision on boosting troop levels in Afghanistan and would make an announcement "in the next several weeks."
Click to expand...

One of the attributes of a leader is being able to make a decision. A decision some time this century would be nice.
 
=ptif

Since Obama took over the opinion of Americans has dropped as far as believing we are winning. Obama is bad for popular opinion and moral because he will not make decision and win the war as he said he would.
Click to expand...

You’re quoting a post that I didn’t make but that’s OK, I’ll run with it.

You state that Obama is bad for moral and popular opinion …whatever popular opinion is. :roll:

What is the time period on the drop in troop moral that you are quoting? :confused:
 
Last edited:
EpicDude86 said:
Because Politicians in Washington know better than Commanders on the ground in Iraq. How many Liberal Senators have visited Afghanistan btw? How many talk with the Commanders? This isn't some Union worker arbitration, these are real life and death scenarios.
Click to expand...

Maybe the commanders should start talking to their soldiers.
Better yet: start talking with the locals.
And I don't mean "local leaders"...

Talk to some women over there. See what the civilians think without the filter of pride and testosterone.

Our senators have nothing to do over there.

Obama needs to get the US out of Afghanistan and Iraq.
 
Neitzluber said:
Maybe the commanders should start talking to their soldiers.
Better yet: start talking with the locals.
And I don't mean "local leaders"...

Talk to some women over there. See what the civilians think without the filter of pride and testosterone.

Our senators have nothing to do over there.

Obama needs to get the US out of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Click to expand...


Alright Armchair General, What's your point? You're suggesting our folks in country don't know what's going on either?
 
TheNextEra said:
Maybe if Bush would have taken longer to make a decision, Iraq wouldn't have seen as many U.S. troops killed. I'd rather him take time then rush and get even MORE troops killed by a dumb decision like Bush did.

Do you ever see a possible upside to anything Obama does?
Click to expand...
Do you ever stop blaming Bush for every problem? NO
 
TheNextEra said:
No, what it shows is the Anti-Obama crowd couldn't give a **** about the troops. They only care about hurting Obama.
Click to expand...
.....who said anything about hurting Obama? Oh and thats right, every single one of us with a star under our names doesnt give a rat's ass about the troops...well said.:2wave:
 
ptif219 said:
He listened to his commanders and did not think he knew more than them. He was not an elitist like Obama
Click to expand...

Really? Care to examine Rumsfeld's role in Iraq?

Care to discuss why retired generals actively came out and said Iraq was failing breaking centuries of precedent of never talking about an ongoing conflict and Bush almost entirely ignored them?

When did Bush not send troops to Afghanistan when requested by the commanders on the ground?
Click to expand...

One must wonder if you can read.

I noticed you utterly failed to address anything I wrote.

Tell me, if more troops alone would work, why aren't the French still in control of IndoChina?
 
ptif219 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Again, more troops alone has never won an insurgency unless that power was willing to wage near genocide.

So are you willing to wage near genocide or are you going to keep avoiding the hard questions?

Tell me, how will it look when we boost troops right after the an openly fraudulent election reinstates an extremely corruption government?

Yeah....good job there.
 
EpicDude86 said:
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.
Click to expand...

It's just that some people here can't see that. It is amusing watching people bash one party without realizing that both are really the same. And you know right off the bat that if their candidate was making the decision, they'd give the slack.

Often this board reminds me why people are scum.
 
obvious Child said:
It is amusing watching people bash one party without realizing that both are really the same.
Click to expand...

not when it comes to health care

Often this board reminds me why people are scum.
Click to expand...

with all due respect, you don't seem to like people very much
 
Catawba said:
ptif219 said:
8 years of our "war on terror" that has been counter productive with a 3 Trillion dollar price tag is why American opinion has grown against continuing our war against the Afghanis.

I keep my fingers crossed that Obama has the sense to learn from the mistakes of the last 8 years.
Click to expand...

Wrong it is the way Obama is hndeling it.


While Obama patiently ponders Afghan policy, impatient Americans are already deciding: poll | Top of the Ticket | Los Angeles Times


Fifty-two percent of the 1,001 adult Americans polled Nov. 12-15 now say the war there has not been worth the cost, down 13 points in the last 11 months.

That's not a good sign for a president heading into a likely decision to increase that commitment -- and facing crucial midterm elections next year.

According to the new ABC News/Washington Post Poll, only 44% now say the war has been worth it, the smallest support percentage in nearly three years. The poll has a margin of error of +/-3.5%.

Once, Obama's war policies were his strongest poll suit (63%). Now, only 45% approve of Obama's handling of Afghanistan; more (48%) don't. His war support among independents, a crucial ingredient in the Democrat's election victory 54 weeks ago, has slipped to 39%.

Support for additional commitments is particularly weak among young voters and women.

Obama, like President Bush before him in both Afghanistan and Iraq, has made a main argument that it's better to fight terrorism over there and deny terrorists safe training and staging havens than endure repeat 9/11 attacks on the homeland.

Ominously, for Obama, however, less than a quarter of Americans now buy that argument. Nearly two-thirds (64%) currently say the risk of terrorism at home is the same whether we continue to fight there or withdraw.
Click to expand...
 
Catawba said:
I hope for developing a strategy that can be productive instead of the failure it has been for the last 8 years.
Click to expand...

By time that happens Obama will no longer be president since he can't commit to a decision.
 
obvious Child said:
Really? Care to examine Rumsfeld's role in Iraq?

Care to discuss why retired generals actively came out and said Iraq was failing breaking centuries of precedent of never talking about an ongoing conflict and Bush almost entirely ignored them?



One must wonder if you can read.

I noticed you utterly failed to address anything I wrote.

Tell me, if more troops alone would work, why aren't the French still in control of IndoChina?
Click to expand...

So you won't answer the question
 
obvious Child said:
Again, more troops alone has never won an insurgency unless that power was willing to wage near genocide.

So are you willing to wage near genocide or are you going to keep avoiding the hard questions?

Tell me, how will it look when we boost troops right after the an openly fraudulent election reinstates an extremely corruption government?

Yeah....good job there.
Click to expand...

Was it genocide in Iraq with the surge?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom