• 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 would agree with you with the present (I'm personally on the side of a surge, but wary of its implications in the country itself-seeing as how the people in there would be quite sensitive to an occupation force), but with the decision-making process, sometimes the status-quo is an option.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Gibberish said:
The commander knows of all political talks and/or military talks with Joint Cheifs the President is having involving Afghanistan going on that may impact US or other countries presence in Afghanistan?
Click to expand...

If he doesn't, then he's being cheated by his chain of command. he deserves to know what factors his superirors are using to determine if they are, or aren't going to fill his request. Wouldn't you agree.

What makes you 100% certain the McChrystal strategy is perfectly flawless and requires no type of review or over site?
Click to expand...

I never said that McChrystal's plan is 100% flawless, because, there's no such thing as a 100% flawless battle plan. However, McChrystal's plan is more credible tha anyone else's, because he has first hand knowledge of the situation.




So he's not required to make sure his field commanders are doing their job correctly and efficiently before proving them their every request?
Click to expand...


If they're not doing their job, then he should relieve them of their commands., however that's not a prerequisit to get vital information from the chain of command. They're not trick ponies dancing on their hind legs for a reward.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

apdst said:
What qualifies the president to second guess his theater commander? He's persident? Is that all?
Click to expand...

His appointment as CinC by the U.S. Constitution! (everyone else gets that but you...so I'm done on this thread with you)
 
Last edited:
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Devil505 said:
His appointment as CinC by the U.S. Constitution!
Click to expand...

Um, don't you mean his, "election", to that position? He got elected because he sold a better line of BS in the campaign, not because he's neccessarily qualified to override the decisions of the ground commanders that he appointed. There's a chain of command for a reason.

(everyone else gets that but you...so I'm done on this thread with you)
Click to expand...

Don't let the door hit'cha in the ass on the way out.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

apdst said:
Um, don't you mean his, "election", to that position? He got elected because he sold a better line of BS in the campaign, not because he's neccessarily qualified to override the decisions of the ground commanders that he appointed. There's a chain of command for a reason.
Click to expand...

So your idea of "chain of command" is the requirement of commanding officers to fulfill their subordinates requests without question? I thought the command went down, not up?
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

apdst said:
If he doesn't, then he's being cheated by his chain of command. he deserves to know what factors his superirors are using to determine if they are, or aren't going to fill his request. Wouldn't you agree.
Click to expand...
If they do end of having impact he should be briefed. I don't see a reason the commanding officer should be informed about every discussion that occurs as most of them probably lead to nothing.

apdst said:
I never said that McChrystal's plan is 100% flawless, because, there's no such thing as a 100% flawless battle plan. However, McChrystal's plan is more credible tha anyone else's, because he has first hand knowledge of the situation.
Click to expand...
That's because no one else is in his position. His requests, especially asking to quadruple his current forces in Afghanistan, should rightly be evaluated.


apdst said:
If they're not doing their job, then he should relieve them of their commands., however that's not a prerequisit to get vital information from the chain of command. They're not trick ponies dancing on their hind legs for a reward.
Click to expand...
vital information is much different then asking for a 50% increase in troop levels.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Gibberish said:
So your idea of "chain of command" is the requirement of commanding officers to fulfill their subordinates requests without question? I thought the command went down, not up?
Click to expand...

That's exactly right. Army Regulations say that that is the case.

a. The chain of command assists commanders at all levels to achieve their primary responsibility of accomplishing the unit's assigned mission...

b. Commanders are responsible for everything their command does or fails to do.

AR_600-20
Click to expand...
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Gibberish said:
If they do end of having impact he should be briefed. I don't see a reason the commanding officer should be informed about every discussion that occurs as most of them probably lead to nothing.
Click to expand...

The discussions that do lead to a decision should be passed along to the theater commander.


That's because no one else is in his position. His requests, especially asking to quadruple his current forces in Afghanistan, should rightly be evaluated.
Click to expand...

When you're theater commander, CENTCOM commander and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs all agree, common sense would dictate that you, as president, should listen.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

apdst said:
That's exactly right. Army Regulations say that that is the case.
Click to expand...
Where does it say that? To me that reads that Obama, as McChrystal commander, will be fully responsible for what McChrystal does or fails to do.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Gibberish said:
Where does it say that? To me that reads that Obama, as McChrystal commander, will be fully responsible for what McChrystal does or fails to do.
Click to expand...

You are correct, that is what it says. Nowhere does it say he is obligated in any way to do whatever any subordinate tells him to do.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Gibberish said:
Where does it say that? To me that reads that Obama, as McChrystal commander, will be fully responsible for what McChrystal does or fails to do.
Click to expand...

That's right, PBO is responsible to assist McChrystal in whatever way possible, to help McChrystal complete his mission.

Says it right here:

a. The chain of command assists commanders at all levels to achieve their primary responsibility of accomplishing the unit's assigned mission...
Click to expand...



Redress said:
You are correct, that is what it says. Nowhere does it say he is obligated in any way to do whatever any subordinate tells him to do.
Click to expand...


Tell? No, but it's PBO's legal obligation as CIC to fulfill his ground commanders's requests for the neccessary resources to complete the mission.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

apdst said:
Tell? No, but it's PBO's legal obligation as CIC to fulfill his ground commanders's requests for the neccessary resources to complete the mission.
Click to expand...

No, it is not. It is Obama's responsibility as CIC to make the best decisions based on the information he gets from those subordinate to him. He can overrule those subordinates at any time he chooses is he thinks it is the best decision. Ultimately, Obama is "the decider".
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Redress said:
No, it is not. It is Obama's responsibility as CIC to make the best decisions based on the information he gets from those subordinate to him. He can overrule those subordinates at any time he chooses is he thinks it is the best decision. Ultimately, Obama is "the decider".
Click to expand...

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
 
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...

Can I prove a negative? Of course not. You need to show in law where it would be dereliction of duty. It's not. Obama is the top of the chain of command, and it's up to him to make the final call on strategic matters(within reason of course, he is not responsible to decide all small scale strategic initiatives or tactics).
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Redress said:
Can I prove a negative? Of course not. You need to show in law where it would be dereliction of duty. It's not. Obama is the top of the chain of command, and it's up to him to make the final call on strategic matters(within reason of course, he is not responsible to decide all small scale strategic initiatives or tactics).
Click to expand...

You're not proving a negative if you prove the president's actual authority. I've already proved that he can't just do whatever he pleases and isn't above question simply virtue of being elected president. Certainly, if I'm wrong, there's something that explain's his authority in detail.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

"OBAMA LIED AND AMERICANS DIED"

Hmm, that would look good on a protest sign.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Coronado said:
"OBAMA LIED AND AMERICANS DIED"

Hmm, that would look good on a protest sign.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think you're going to be seeing vets in DC with sings that say,

"Support'em, or Bring'em Home!!!"
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

TacticalEvilDan said:
False dilemma. If we see Obama lobbying for Chicago, that doesn't mean he isn't doing anything else.



Either troop strength isn't the only problem, or it isn't even the problem to begin with, since things haven't dramatically improved since he increased our troop strength there by 50%.

Given that, it would be irresponsible in the extreme for him to simply order that more troops be sent in without taking the time to think about the situation. If he did so simply because his general asked for the men, and in so doing got more Americans killed without any appreciable gains, that blood would be on his hands.

Giving your general on the ground everything he wants isn't your job as President. We have a military which is controlled by a civillian for a reason.
Click to expand...



poop or get off the pot. Troops are dying while he fiddles.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

TacticalEvilDan said:
Which is why, of course, when the 50% increase in troop strength he ordered wasn't enough to put a dent in the situation, he stopped to think about what to do next.

Because he hates the military and wants it to die.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
Click to expand...





Wrong. He added troops, then forgot about Afghanistan. Feel free to prove me wrong.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Troops are dying while he fiddles.
Click to expand...

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Wrong. He added troops, then forgot about Afghanistan. Feel free to prove me wrong.
Click to expand...

Well, since you're the one making the accusation that Obama is doing nothing while our troops die in the field, and that he forgot about Afghanistan, I'd say the onus is on you to prove your claims.

If reading Reagan's Presidential diaries taught me nothing else, it's that the President isn't allowed to forget about much of anything that is on his plate.
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

TacticalEvilDan said:
Well, since you're the one making the accusation that Obama is doing nothing while our troops die in the field, and that he forgot about Afghanistan, I'd say the onus is on you to prove your claims.
Click to expand...



This is more than a debate to me. This is a disgusting lack of leadership shown by the POTUS. My friends, and brothers and sisters are in harms way with no mission.

He is on leno, 50 tv appearances, and losing the olympics.... He has shown to us where his priorities lie.


Do you have any evidence that he is giving afghanistan the same attention he has given his own ego and the olympics?



If reading Reagan's Presidential diaries taught me nothing else, it's that the President isn't allowed to forget about much of anything that is on his plate.
Click to expand...



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

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Do you have any evidence that he is giving afghanistan the same attention he has given his own ego and the olympics?
Click to expand...

Wrong, try again.

You're making the accusation that he forgot about Afghanistan, now you need to pony up the evidence which backs your claim.

The fact that he has had the temerity to (gasp) do other things doesn't mean he's forgotten about Afghanistan or that it isn't important to him or that he isn't spending time on it every day.

Another thing which I learned by reading Reagan's diaries is that the President is only visible to the public for so much of the day, and even if his appearances or his speeches for the day seem to focus on one subject, when he's off-camera he's working on a wide range of topics with his advisors.

At any rate, I look forward to your Earth-shattering expose of President Obama's private schedule, or perhaps a behind-the-scenes transcript of a meeting with his military advisors. :roll:
 
Re: 43 U.S. Troops Have Died in Afghanistan Since Gen. McChrystal Called for Reinforc

1 contact with the guy he tapped for Afghanistan in 70 days. a 25 tarmac meeting when this came to light. What more can I say. :shrug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom