Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Soul Crusher on October 13, 2009, 02:27:47 PM
-
Obama Quietly Authorizes Up to 15,000 More U.S. Troops for Afghanistan
Fox News ^
________________________ ________________________ ____
October 13, 2009 11:50:49 AM by traumer
In an unannounced move, President Obama is dispatching up to 15,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan beyond the 21,000 he announced in March.
The additional troops are primarily support forces -- such as engineers, medical personnel, intelligence experts and military police.
A Washington Post report published Tuesday said Obama dispatched 13,000 additional troops, but an unnamed defense official familiar with the process told Fox News that the number is closer to 15,000.
"Obama authorized the whole thing. The only thing you saw announced in a press release was the 21,000," a defense official, speaking anonymously, told the Washington Post.
But in an interview with Fox News on Tuesday, a defense official refuted that the dispatch was "unannounced," saying the decision to send 15,000 additional troops was part of a larger move to reach 68,000 troops in Afghanistan by year's end -- a move that Defense Secretary Robert Gates cleared with Obama in March, the official said.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
________________________ ________________________ ______
I cant wait to visit DU and Huff Post to see the reaction to this.
-
I can't wait to see the repubs BITCH about this, as you know they will.
-
Isnt that far less than Mchrystal's request? Ofcourse they will bitch!! And they will have every right to.
-
I can't wait to see the repubs BITCH about this, as you know they will.
240, I'm wondering if you're the guy on the couch in this video?
-
the Taliban are a bunch of pricks
true story
-
240, I'm wondering if you're the guy on the couch in this video?
That clip is priceless!
-
skip & 33,
Is obama doing the right thing by sending 15k forces to afghanistan?
-
skip & 33,
Is obama doing the right thing by sending 15k forces to afghanistan?
It depends on what they are there for. If they are there to be targets for the crazies and have to use the updated ROE, then it is a huge mistake.
Its not so much the numbers of troops as it is the ROE. We could blow the joint to smitherines, but we are not doing that.
-
It depends on what they are there for. If they are there to be targets for the crazies and have to use the updated ROE, then it is a huge mistake.
Its not so much the numbers of troops as it is the ROE. We could blow the joint to smitherines, but we are not doing that.
Do you think Obama should pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq or do you think he should stay?
-
Do you think Obama should pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq or do you think he should stay?
It depends on what the task and mission is.
If its nation building - hell no - out of there.
If its targeting terrorists and al quada and going after the crazies, then the military knows what they need.
-
240, I'm wondering if you're the guy on the couch in this video?
;D
-
skip & 33,
Is obama doing the right thing by sending 15k forces to afghanistan?
I believe that this troop increase was set in motion during Bush's tenure?
-
I think the situation is so complicated that we'd have to hear the intelligence of what is really going on in order to make a decision.
My general thinking is either trust your ground commanders and authorize what they ask for (because thats their field and job) or pull most of the troops out and change the mission. Doing something in the middle is not wise in a war.
-
I think the situation is so complicated that we'd have to hear the intelligence of what is really going on in order to make a decision.
My general thinking is either trust your ground commanders and authorize what they ask for (because thats their field and job) or pull most of the troops out and change the mission. Doing something in the middle is not wise in a war.
You send them in there piecemeal and they will get chopped up piecemeal.
-
Obama has done the job of pacifying the anti war left very well.
-
Obama has done the job of pacifying the anti war left very well.
Very true.
-
Obama has done the job of pacifying the anti war left very well.
They are nothing more than lemmings. Their white guilt will not allow them to protest Obama.
-
I pray my 15,000 brothers show up in that hell hole with a dagger in their teeth, a grenade in their hands, and infinite scorn in their hearts and give those infidels a taste of their own medicine.
-
I pray my 15,000 brothers show up in that hell hole with a dagger in their teeth, a grenade in their hands, and infinite scorn in their hearts and give those infidels a taste of their own medicine.
If only the ROE allowed that to happen this thing would be over a hell of a lot sooner.
-
If only the ROE allowed that to happen this thing would be over a hell of a lot sooner.
I will try to find the articles but I've been hearing/reading that the villagers in "that hell hole" have been pressing the commanders etc to take it to the Taliban/AQ more and more instead of not being so aggressive.
-
If only the ROE allowed that to happen this thing would be over a hell of a lot sooner.
do we follow geneva or don't we?
please stop bitching abuot the ROE out of one side of your mouth, while saying 'fvck geneva' out the other side of your mouth.
Either we follow those rules, or we don't. Stop complaining about the rules, while bragging how you don't need to follow them.
I dont care what position you have, but choose one, Mr Kerry.
-
do we follow geneva or don't we?
please stop bitching abuot the ROE out of one side of your mouth, while saying 'fvck geneva' out the other side of your mouth.
Either we follow those rules, or we don't. Stop complaining about the rules, while bragging how you don't need to follow them.
I dont care what position you have, but choose one, Mr Kerry.
Personally, if I am in a war like this, I kill or be killed, period. These are terrorists, not uniformed soldiers fighting for a nation state.
-
Personally, if I am in a war like this, I kill or be killed, period. These are terrorists, not uniformed soldiers fighting for a nation state.
then do we just nuke the whole nation?
Or do we follow geneva?
There is no middle ground. You break geneva, and you're on the same plane as the terrorists and there is no claiming the moral high ground.
-
then do we just nuke the whole nation?
Or do we follow geneva?
There is no middle ground. You break geneva, and you're on the same plane as the terrorists and there is no claiming the moral high ground.
I dont care about the moral high ground. I care about our soldiers coming home alive.
-
do we follow geneva or don't we?
please stop bitching abuot the ROE out of one side of your mouth, while saying 'fvck geneva' out the other side of your mouth.
Either we follow those rules, or we don't. Stop complaining about the rules, while bragging how you don't need to follow them.
I dont care what position you have, but choose one, Mr Kerry.
The "ROE" isn't some static military law that was enacted however long ago by congress or something. There are ROE's for every theater and, as far as I know, they can change from time to time as the situation dictates. Right now our soldiers aren't going to get the support if there is a chance that civilian causalities could be a result, kicking in doors, house to house stuff is also a no-no (as far as I know, correct me if I'm wrong) and the list goes on. We have The Geneva Conventions, correct, but in the terms of the Rules of Engagement in Afghanistan, they aren't the same thing.
The problem is that the enemy knows our ROE's because they were, stupidly, publicized and they know exactly how to fight our troops while they are constrained by the ROE's. Like Operation Rolling THunder during Vietnam, it was a big "showcase" air campaign that while it dropped lots of bombs, it did little to destroy supplies, infrastructure etc...because the "no bombing" zones were plentiful and the communists knew where to keep the important war waging supplies/fuel etc to keep them protected. Compare that to the Linebacker air operations in the early 1970's that took of the gloves and essentially crippled the communist forces.
-
Personally the best way is to just set off a mini nuke in the region.
Then blame it on Al-Q for not being smart enough to handle a nuclear device.
We could even cook up some "found" video tape that survives the blast. Sort of like Atta's passport survived that crash. On the video tape it would be two jackasses in dirty robes and fake beards.
Scene 1 :
*Akbar enters room to find Mohammad peering into a dusty battered suitcase that is on the table*
Akbar - "Mohammad. What is it you have?"
Mohammad - "Allah be praised Akbar, for I have the solution to all woes for Allah's followers."
Akbar - *eyes get big* " Mohammad, you mean you have... are you serious? You have TIVO there?"
Mohammad - "No Akbar. Has you no shame. I has nukkeleer bomb".
Akbar - "Ooohh lemme see." *peers in suitcase* "Hey, what dis red button do"?
Mohammad - *slaps Akbar on the wrist* "Akbar you no touch button. You no touch anything! Now stay out way. I must go and mail off first payment of Bill Me Later to de Rushhans for dis bomb. You stay. But you NO TOUCH".
*Mohammad leaves room*
Akbar - "oh he all mister big and important now that he got himselfs a bomb. Ohhh.. you no touch Akbar. Well fuck him. FUCK YOU MOHAMMAD! I wills touch. Watch this Allah"
*pushes red button*
BOOM!
-
We will neither kill nor hug our way out of this war. The ROE changes from theater to theater...240 forget the Geneva convention. The US follows the Law of warfare, which has nothing to do with torture of any of that crap. Most of what we signed as regards the accords don't apply. These people don't have POW camps, uniforms or play by any rules...we do. 15,00 troops is not near enough. The whole strategy needs to change or morph. Things are changing again and organizations that had been steadily drawn down are being stood back up to deal with Afghanistan. Obama needs to make up his mind and decide what he wants to do pretty damm quick. He also needs to make sure the money follows. All the crap from Iraq needs to be replaced or repaired and sent to Afghanistan. We need more helicopters...C-130's and other lift platforms to get folks where they need to be. My worry is that the Dems will sit on the funds to reapir once they see less money being spent in Iraq as we continue to draw down.
-
skip & 33,
Is obama doing the right thing by sending 15k forces to afghanistan?
If the military says they need them, then of course he's doing the right thing. That's not to say it will give us a decisive victory.
The more difficult decision with Afghanistan lies in the road ahead. As Dr. Gates noted, "I believe the decisions that the president will make for the next stage of the Afghanistan campaign will be among the most important of his presidency, so it is important that we take our time to do all we can to get this right." Let's just hope they don't take too long.
If the decision is made to stay, then I think you give the military EVERYTHING they need to accomplish the mission.
-
They're setting up Biden as some great military thinker..he's been wrong since the Gulf War, Give Stan what he thinks he needs.
-
They're setting up Biden as some great military thinker..he's been wrong since the Gulf War, Give Stan what he thinks he needs.
Well since he likes to mislead people into thinking his chopper was forced down by AQ, maybe he thinks he's now "hardened" and "experienced" enough to make tough military choices. Hopefully, the administration will listen to the experts.
-
The "ROE" isn't some static military law that was enacted however long ago by congress or something. There are ROE's for every theater and, as far as I know, they can change from time to time as the situation dictates. Right now our soldiers aren't going to get the support if there is a chance that civilian causalities could be a result, kicking in doors, house to house stuff is also a no-no (as far as I know, correct me if I'm wrong) and the list goes on. We have The Geneva Conventions, correct, but in the terms of the Rules of Engagement in Afghanistan, they aren't the same thing.
The problem is that the enemy knows our ROE's because they were, stupidly, publicized and they know exactly how to fight our troops while they are constrained by the ROE's. Like Operation Rolling THunder during Vietnam, it was a big "showcase" air campaign that while it dropped lots of bombs, it did little to destroy supplies, infrastructure etc...because the "no bombing" zones were plentiful and the communists knew where to keep the important war waging supplies/fuel etc to keep them protected. Compare that to the Linebacker air operations in the early 1970's that took of the gloves and essentially crippled the communist forces.
Spot on! McChrystal took a lot away from us and I've been here since June. He says that will curb casualties in the long run. That's great, if you're coming here in a few years. I guess we're just supposed to go home in boxes for now.