How can you combine Troop increase with a Exit strategy?! Obama capitulates again.!

[PatekPhilippe]

i disagree with your definitions...aq still has folks fighting agianst the afgan govt not to mention the taliban......and the taliban may not control kabul but the control large sections of the country.....

winning a war in afganistan is not possible without wholesale extermination of the "enemy"....

There are fewer than 100 Al Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan today, according to the latest declassified intel. If you have "better" figures and can document them - I'm all ears.

The Taliban was ousted from government in late 2001 (maybe 2002) have to check that one.

As for the relative strength of Taliban fighters throughout Afghanistan, that wasn't a part of either of the "win" definitions I tossed out. You can calculate "win" however you want. But my point is that if you don't include your definition of win, or if you have no quantifiable plan to achieve it - then talking about "winning" and "losing" is just pointless empty words.

is afganistan a stable country able to rule and defend itself from hostile forces either from within or without.....no.....thus the us has not won the war....the point of war is to remove one group and install another friendly to your cause.....see japan and germany.....the us afgan government is still at war with both the taliban and aq on afgan soil....and will be long after you an i are dead....

i do find your statment about "winning" and "losing" being just pointless empty words....and your constant desire to define them to suit your argument interesting....

That's how vayank and this guy play their game....glad you see it too.

 

[Zona]

hey taliban and al queada.....we are sending 30K more troops but will have all them out in 3 years....regardless, that is our exit strategy, so please don't hide out for 3 years and wait for us to leave, attack us now so we can go home in 3 years

Do you think they are still in Afghanistan? They aren't even there...they are in Pakistan...you do know this righty?

We are not at war with the afghan government...really there is no 'win' in this war. We should not be there. We had the chance to do something about the them 8 years ago, but we went to war with Iraq for wmd's. remember?

Yes... all hail zona and his omniscient intel and his mastery of fighting and war strategy

Bow down bitches!

 

[Zona]

I'd like to see people stop using vague, juvenile terms like "in it to win it" and "win this thing." Like this is some sort of high school football game.

Define "WIN."

What specific objectives must be met in order to "win."

Otherwise - you really are just talking crap.

Lefty's or righty's.....how do you "win" in Afghanistan? What are the objectives there. Why are we there, exactly?

 

[saveliberty]

Obama may end partisanship yet. Unfortunately for him, it may be because we all unite against him.

 

[ElmerMudd]

The exit strategy is a message to the Afghanistan citizens too get their butts in gear and their act together because we are not going to spend an indefinite time protecting them, risking American lives while they do nothing.

We are not going to nation build. They need to build and protect their own nation.

The exit strategy is a key and important part of the strategy.

Obama gave us plenty of flexibility by also saying the action on the ground will dictate final strategy.

 

[G.T.]

I don't get this paradigm: you can criticize him for taking too long giving the General what he requested, because "the General KNOWS!!! what is needed," but the General fully supports the withdrawal timeline and all of a sudden, the General!!?!?! doesn't know best, your partisan toolishness does.

I don't get how you can reconcile that with yourself, but carry on.

 

[G.T.]

I don't care, either, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying, that's where you lose me on the thought of you "might" be being even-handed.

 

[maineman]

The exit strategy is a message to the Afghanistan citizens too get their butts in gear and their act together because we are not going to spend an indefinite time protecting them, risking American lives while they do nothing.

We are not going to nation build. They need to build and protect their own nation.

The exit strategy is a key and important part of the strategy.

Obama gave us plenty of flexibility by also saying the action on the ground will dictate final strategy.

precisely.

we are not at war with the people of afghanistan. We went into afghanistan to capture and/or destroy the band of terrorists who attacked us. Bush screwed the pooch on that years ago. Now... we only need to beat back the growing taliban insurgency, and get the afghan security forces in a state where they are able to provide security for their people. If, after we leave, the afghan government choses not to stand up for itself and its people, that is not Obama's fault.

 

[rightwinger]

The exit strategy is a message to the Afghanistan citizens too get their butts in gear and their act together because we are not going to spend an indefinite time protecting them, risking American lives while they do nothing.

We are not going to nation build. They need to build and protect their own nation.

The exit strategy is a key and important part of the strategy.

Obama gave us plenty of flexibility by also saying the action on the ground will dictate final strategy.

precisely.

we are not at war with the people of afghanistan. We went into afghanistan to capture and/or destroy the band of terrorists who attacked us. Bush screwed the pooch on that years ago. Now... we only need to beat back the growing taliban insurgency, and get the afghan security forces in a state where they are able to provide security for their people. If, after we leave, the afghan government choses not to stand up for itself and its people, that is not Obama's fault.

This action is eight years in the making. The surge is necessary to regain the ground lost when Bush pulled troops to go to Iraq. However, the Afghan government has had eight years to straighten their act. If an additional two years doesn't give them enough time, its time for us to pull our troops regardless of how ready they are.
If ten years is not enough...how much is?

 

[dilloduck]

The exit strategy is a message to the Afghanistan citizens too get their butts in gear and their act together because we are not going to spend an indefinite time protecting them, risking American lives while they do nothing.

We are not going to nation build. They need to build and protect their own nation.

The exit strategy is a key and important part of the strategy.

Obama gave us plenty of flexibility by also saying the action on the ground will dictate final strategy.

precisely.

we are not at war with the people of afghanistan. We went into afghanistan to capture and/or destroy the band of terrorists who attacked us. Bush screwed the pooch on that years ago. Now... we only need to beat back the growing taliban insurgency, and get the afghan security forces in a state where they are able to provide security for their people. If, after we leave, the afghan government choses not to stand up for itself and its people, that is not Obama's fault.

naturally---He doesn't take responsibilty for anything

 

[maineman]

The exit strategy is a message to the Afghanistan citizens too get their butts in gear and their act together because we are not going to spend an indefinite time protecting them, risking American lives while they do nothing.

We are not going to nation build. They need to build and protect their own nation.

The exit strategy is a key and important part of the strategy.

Obama gave us plenty of flexibility by also saying the action on the ground will dictate final strategy.

precisely.

we are not at war with the people of afghanistan. We went into afghanistan to capture and/or destroy the band of terrorists who attacked us. Bush screwed the pooch on that years ago. Now... we only need to beat back the growing taliban insurgency, and get the afghan security forces in a state where they are able to provide security for their people. If, after we leave, the afghan government choses not to stand up for itself and its people, that is not Obama's fault.

naturally---He doesn't take responsibilty for anything

quit your adolescent knee jerk bashing of Obama for one minute and tell me, honestly, whether you think it is OUR country's responsibility to ensure that the elected government of Afghanistan has the political will to stand up and defend itself and its people.

 

[saveliberty]

Its called an exit strategy. I know you righty's have no clue what that is and haven't heard about one in the last eight years...but this president actually thought about it.

I cant fucking believe you righty's are actually bitching about an exit plan. You people are amazing. hacks.

I have lived long enough to see an exit strategy several times. Once in Iraq I and then there was Viet Nam. Basically the President stands his ground and says, we are coming home now.

 

[dilloduck]

precisely.

we are not at war with the people of afghanistan. We went into afghanistan to capture and/or destroy the band of terrorists who attacked us. Bush screwed the pooch on that years ago. Now... we only need to beat back the growing taliban insurgency, and get the afghan security forces in a state where they are able to provide security for their people. If, after we leave, the afghan government choses not to stand up for itself and its people, that is not Obama's fault.

naturally---He doesn't take responsibilty for anything

quit your adolescent knee jerk bashing of Obama for one minute and tell me, honestly, whether you think it is OUR country's responsibility to ensure that the elected government of Afghanistan has the political will to stand up and defend itself and its people.

No it's not----so why is he sending more troops and wasting billions ? If I recall correctly our former president was criticized quite highly for this. Has something changed ?

 

[saveliberty]

Breaking News---

In a stuning move early this morning the teleprompter used at West Point in the President's national address has been fired. Mr. Gibbs in a briefing described the teleprompter's tone as unemotional in the speech given by the President. "Clearly this was not a time to simply scroll words across a screen Gibbs said. The nation deserved a heart felt rousing speech."

To compound the problem the teleprompter skipped several times which meant the President didn't read the exit date, reason that Afghanistan will have a national spirit and the Pakistanis will be a strong partner. "You just can't let the American people down like that", according to Gibbs. The montone speech nearly put the entire crowd of Cadets to sleep. Fortunately Secretary of State Clinton's snores woke enough Cadets up for a few claps at the end.

Attendence at the event was surprisingly sparse as the only options for not attending were a family death or a live demonstration on the Cadets of waterboarding. The class was very well attended according to the instructor. Some of the Cadets were getting back in line a second time.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Good speech - very informative, very clear, and well delivered.

I still disagree

 

[Mike458877]

Breaking News---

In a stuning move early this morning the teleprompter used at West Point in the President's national address has been fired. Mr. Gibbs in a briefing described the teleprompter's tone as unemotional in the speech given by the President. "Clearly this was not a time to simply scroll words across a screen Gibbs said. The nation deserved a heart felt rousing speech."

To compound the problem the teleprompter skipped several times which meant the President didn't read the exit date, reason that Afghanistan will have a national spirit and the Pakistanis will be a strong partner. "You just can't let the American people down like that", according to Gibbs. The montone speech nearly put the entire crowd of Cadets to sleep. Fortunately Secretary of State Clinton's snores woke enough Cadets up for a few claps at the end.

Attendence at the event was surprisingly sparse as the only options for not attending were a family death or a live demonstration on the Cadets of waterboarding. The class was very well attended according to the instructor. Some of the Cadets were getting back in line a second time.

LOL ............ Now that is funny!

 

[maineman]

naturally---He doesn't take responsibilty for anything

quit your adolescent knee jerk bashing of Obama for one minute and tell me, honestly, whether you think it is OUR country's responsibility to ensure that the elected government of Afghanistan has the political will to stand up and defend itself and its people.

No it's not----so why is he sending more troops and wasting billions ? If I recall correctly our former president was criticized quite highly for this. Has something changed ?

our former president got us INTO the mess, and mishandled it so badly for seven years that he turned victory into near defeat. Obama is doing the right thing in trying to fix it and in setting limits on how long we will spend in that effort. General Petraeus thinks it is the right decision... I thought he was the right's goldenboy.

 

[saveliberty]

"But the challenges of rebuilding an Afghan national army of any size - for the fourth time in 150 years - are daunting. Afghanistan, torn by war over a generation, has missed the computer revolution that most militaries now take for granted. The Hindu Kush mountain range splinters much of the country into isolated valleys run by warlords, marginalizing any central government authority. And as the 219th poorest nation among the world's 229, Afghanistan simply can't afford to pay for a big military. Afghan forces today are largely slipshod and corrupt, U.S. officers who have served with them say. Technically they seem capable of doing little more than basic daytime operations, and they have yet to master the bookkeeping vital for any military force to keep track of itself."

Obama Speech Leaves Out How to Grow the Afghan Army - Yahoo! News

Can't get much to change that by July 2011.

 

[AllieBaba]

"For each troop movement, Obama had a number to match. US strength in Afghanistan will be tripled relative to the Bush years, a fact that is sure to impress hawks in America. But just 18 months later, just in time for Obama's re-election campaign, the horror of war is to end and the draw down will begin. The doves of peace will be let free.

The speech continued in that vein. It was as though Obama had taken one of his old campaign speeches and merged it with a text from the library of ex-President George W. Bush. Extremists kill in the name of Islam, he said, before adding that it is one of the "world's great religions." He promised that responsibility for the country's security would soon be transferred to the government of President Hamid Karzai -- a government which he said was "corrupt." The Taliban is dangerous and growing stronger. But "America will have to show our strength in the way that we end wars," he added.

It was a dizzying combination of surge and withdrawal, of marching to and fro. The fast pace was reminiscent of plays about the French revolution: Troops enter from the right to loud cannon fire and then they exit to the left. And at the end, the dead are left on stage."

Opinion: Searching in Vain for the Obama Magic - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International

 

[MaggieMae]

Richard Holbrooke defines the mission in Afghanistan November 24th, 2009.

1. Our goal is to destroy al-Qaida, a terrorist organization with global reach which attacked the United States, which conducted attacks in London, Madrid and Bali, and Mumbai and Islamabad, which supports attacks in Afghanistan through other groups.


2. To help the Afghans build their own capacity so that their security forces can replace the international forces over an acceptable period of time.


3. To create enough time and space for the Afghans to take over their own security responsibility. That is the core of the strategy.

4. We're not seeking to destroy every person who supports the Taliban, that's not a credible goal.


2 and 3 are essentially the same goal reworded, so according to Holbrooke ( US special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan) our Afghanistan strategy close mirrors our Vietnam strategy...as the interviewer from SPIEGEL quickly picks up on.

SPIEGEL: When the US has talked about handing over the responsibility for a war to local forces in the past, it represented the final stage before a complete collapse.

Holbrooke: You keep going back to the wrong war and I would rather just focus on Afghanistan.​

Read the interview transcript here : Interview with US Special Envoy Richard Holbrooke: 'We're Not in Afghanistan to Build a Perfect Democracy' - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International

I can't take the time to read the full interview, but I was always under the impression that the primary reason we got involved in Vietnam was the very real threat of the spread of Communism into Southeast Asia, and if it was allowed to progress, the Phillipines could have been next. It had nothing to do with training the South Vietnamese or nation-building.

Nixon was elected President and began his policy of slow disengagement from the war. The goal was to gradually build up the South Vietnamese Army so that it could fight the war on its own. This policy became the cornerstone of the so-called " Nixon Doctrine." As applied to Vietnam, the doctrine was called "Vietnamization." The stated goal of Vietnamization was to enable the South Vietnamese army to increasingly hold its own against the NLF and the North Vietnamese Army. The unstated goal of Vietnamization was that the primary burden of combat would be returned to ARVN troops and thereby lessen domestic opposition tothe war in the U.S.

Vietnam War South Vietnamese North United Conflict U.s States

And it was how long after we had been in Nam before Nixon arrived at his exit plan? I was talking about the initial entrance into Vietnam, arguably by Eisenhower and escalated by Kennedy. It had nothing to do with training the South Vietnamese or nation building.