The Problem with Barack Obama... to me...

[JakeStarkey]

Name calling proves your point? PP, you don't have any points; that is the point. You have no idea what you are talking about. Go ask some on your side of the fence the "why" for the reinforcements. They will explain it to you. In fact, ask Karl Rove, who supports the reinforcements and gives a qualified support of Obama on this issue. Rove: Obama Can Win in Afghanistan - WSJ.com

 

[rightwinger]

In either case.. 5000 to 10,000 troops wasn't enough to hold much of the ground we had taken in the original invasion.. So yes.. There will be some retaking on lost ground thanks to the neglect of Bush..

and this statement is indicative of your ignorance of military operations. In the initial invasion of Afghanistan there were only about 1500 troops...that's it you imbecile...1500. In 2002 the levels gradually grew. So how could 10,000-15,000 MORE troops in 2006 and 25,000 more troops in 2008 hold less ground than 1500 troops used in the initial invasion in 2001? What about our allies? What was their contribution? Do you even know that we had allies? What exactly is your educational level?

Now you wonder why you are stuck in a dead end life with no hope of ever accomplishing anything meaningful. I'll give you some advice...go back to school and educate yourself so you can hold conversations with adults.

Are you really that ignorant of history?

Capturing ground an holding ground are two different things. As usual, Bush underestimated what was needed to stabilize the country and allowed the Taliban to retake lost ground.

Once again nailing down Bush's position as the worst President in history

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Name calling proves your point? PP, you don't have any points; that is the point. You have no idea what you are talking about. Go ask some on your side of the fence the "why" for the reinforcements. They will explain it to you. In fact, ask Karl Rove, who supports the reinforcements and gives a qualified support of Obama on this issue. Rove: Obama Can Win in Afghanistan - WSJ.com

Ok...I tried to be nice....

You stupid ass.....the troop request CAME ABOUT 3 MONTHS AGO!!! You got that shit for brains????

Prior to that WE KILLED AL QAEDA, DEPOSED THE TALIBAN AND WHAT WAS LEFT, FLED TO PAKISTAN WHERE WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...THERE...THEY REGROUPED AND CAME BACK ACROSS THE BORDER RE-ARMED AND RE-ENFORCED. As they increased their attacks on innocent civilians and our troops, President Bush sent more and more troops over there to combat them. That's why the troop levels WERE NEVER CUT! They increased from 1,500 to 34,000.

Now, once you learn to read come back and shoot your mouth off about how fucked up you are.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

In either case.. 5000 to 10,000 troops wasn't enough to hold much of the ground we had taken in the original invasion.. So yes.. There will be some retaking on lost ground thanks to the neglect of Bush..

and this statement is indicative of your ignorance of military operations. In the initial invasion of Afghanistan there were only about 1500 troops...that's it you imbecile...1500. In 2002 the levels gradually grew. So how could 10,000-15,000 MORE troops in 2006 and 25,000 more troops in 2008 hold less ground than 1500 troops used in the initial invasion in 2001? What about our allies? What was their contribution? Do you even know that we had allies? What exactly is your educational level?

Now you wonder why you are stuck in a dead end life with no hope of ever accomplishing anything meaningful. I'll give you some advice...go back to school and educate yourself so you can hold conversations with adults.

Are you really that ignorant of history?

Capturing ground an holding ground are two different things. As usual, Bush underestimated what was needed to stabilize the country and allowed the Taliban to retake lost ground.

Once again nailing down Bush's position as the worst President in history

and so does Obama...he doesn't plan on capturing any ground either...only control the population centers.

NEXT!!!!

 

[JakeStarkey]

PP is either a partisan loon or simply just a loon.

The American forces simply did not finish the job in Afghanistan under Bush's watch. He withdrew elements from Afghanistan that are key to suppressing the bad guys -- helicopter and special operations. Yes, this was the Bush administration's fault, and nothing you say can change that fact.

Rove himself give qualified support for what Obama is doing now to rectify the errors of what Bush did then. Your crybabying and looniness changes none of that.

Get over it, PP. Oh, and drop the tuff guy approach, you wuss.

 

[mudwhistle]

PatekPhillippe is certainly known for being generally wrong, as demonstrated here. (1) The troops committed in Afghanistan were certainly not enough. (2) Special OPs forces and helicopter units were redeployed for the Iraq invasion; these units are essential to fighting the bad guys in Afghanistan. (3) Obama's policy will be to hold the capitol city and important sites in the country, not "defeat" the bad guys, because the U.S. can no longer do that.

And you have proof for all of this.

I know from talking to the guys that were there that you're full of crap.

We are constantly redeploying our Special Operation Forces...but we've never just pulled them out completely like you claim.


Also we can defeat the Taliban...drive them out if we choose to....but we have chosen not to. It was done before and we can do it again.....but Obama doesn't think it will make him look good in the eyes of the Nobel Committee, and he's catching hell from the left. So he refuses to commit to the battle and the use of an effective force.

 

[rightwinger]

and this statement is indicative of your ignorance of military operations. In the initial invasion of Afghanistan there were only about 1500 troops...that's it you imbecile...1500. In 2002 the levels gradually grew. So how could 10,000-15,000 MORE troops in 2006 and 25,000 more troops in 2008 hold less ground than 1500 troops used in the initial invasion in 2001? What about our allies? What was their contribution? Do you even know that we had allies? What exactly is your educational level?

Now you wonder why you are stuck in a dead end life with no hope of ever accomplishing anything meaningful. I'll give you some advice...go back to school and educate yourself so you can hold conversations with adults.

Are you really that ignorant of history?

Capturing ground an holding ground are two different things. As usual, Bush underestimated what was needed to stabilize the country and allowed the Taliban to retake lost ground.

Once again nailing down Bush's position as the worst President in history

and so does Obama...he doesn't plan on capturing any ground either...only control the population centers.

NEXT!!!!

A country is its people not its ground. We need to ensure the population centers are safe, not some unihabited stretch of desert

 

[PatekPhilippe]

PP is either a partisan loon or simply just a loon.

The American forces simply did not finish the job in Afghanistan under Bush's watch. He withdrew elements from Afghanistan that are key to suppressing the bad guys -- helicopter and special operations. Yes, this was the Bush administration's fault, and nothing you say can change that fact.

Rove himself give qualified support for what Obama is doing now to rectify the errors of what Bush did then. Your crybabying and looniness changes none of that.

Get over it, PP. Oh, and drop the tuff guy approach, you wuss.

Jake Starky posts LIES!!!

When there are no bad guys to shoot at BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL IN PAKISTAN what do you do with the troops smart ass?????

and here...we see Starkey's lies exposed for what they are...LIES FROM A PARTISAN SHIT BAG MOONBAT...
read it!!!
This man, unlike the pussy Starkey who's too chicken shit to leave his own basement, was one of several hundred Special Operations troops in Afghanistan who was supposedly withdrawn by president Bush!!!! He gave his life so others could live! Something dipsticks like Starkey have no concept of.....personal sacrifice.
LT Michael P. Murphy USN - Medal of Honor
and heres a whole book written about the operation from the SPECWAR personnel who were supposedly removed from Afghanistan ... according to the VILLAGE IDIOT Starkey.
Marcus Luttrell Book | Navy SEALs Blog by USNavySEALs.com

and this is but a single story of MANY MANY that took place in Afghanistan bewteen 2001 and 2008.....but the village idiot Starkey is rehashing Huffington talking points so let's see what lies he posts next!!

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Are you really that ignorant of history?

Capturing ground an holding ground are two different things. As usual, Bush underestimated what was needed to stabilize the country and allowed the Taliban to retake lost ground.

Once again nailing down Bush's position as the worst President in history

and so does Obama...he doesn't plan on capturing any ground either...only control the population centers.

NEXT!!!!

A country is its people not its ground. We need to ensure the population centers are safe, not some unihabited stretch of desert

Oh...changing your tune now eh???!!! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha..You stupid fuck...THANKYOU for supporting MY POINT and dissing your meaningless babble!!!

 

[JakeStarkey]

No where does Luttrell say there were enough Special Ops and helicopter units to do the job, PP. You are going to have to do far better than that.

And Karl Rove says that Obama is doing the right thing.

And notice that PP is now claiming RW's position as his own. Pathetic loser. Rather dumb, too.

 

[Coyote]

Are you really that ignorant of history?

Capturing ground an holding ground are two different things. As usual, Bush underestimated what was needed to stabilize the country and allowed the Taliban to retake lost ground.

Once again nailing down Bush's position as the worst President in history

and so does Obama...he doesn't plan on capturing any ground either...only control the population centers.

NEXT!!!!

A country is its people not its ground. We need to ensure the population centers are safe, not some unihabited stretch of desert

This is particularly true in such mountainous and decentralized country as Afghanistan. If you can protect the people long enough to help them establish control over their own areas, then they can "hold the ground" themselves. Bush's mistake was an over-reliance on a western style democracy in the form of a strong central government. Afghanistan is very different from traditional wars - the central government is weak and corrupt and it's always been a de-centralized country. The Taliban is able to retake lost ground by intimmidating the civilian population or offering them economic incentives to cooperate and the Afghans will go with whomever can offer them the most security at the moment which is not likely to be the central government.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Security and economic development are the answers of course.

That is what the UK did in Malaysia and succeeded. That is where the Bush administration screwed up in Iraq and made very sure that Iraq will tell us to go and ally with Iran.

We perhaps may have better fortune in Afghanistan with BHO's government than Bush's.

 

[LilOlLady]

LUKEWARM PRESIDENT.

We have a lukewarm president that wants to please some of the people some of the time. He does not want all the people mad at them all the time. I don’t believe for one second that he wants to send more troops to Afghanistan and escalate and expand the war that is not winnable. He is doing this to have some of the democrats and some of the republicans on his side. He got his feelers out among the democrats and the republicans then the acts. Obama is afraid to having people against him. One thing I admired about Bush was he was not afraid to act alone. He was the “decider.”

 

[JakeStarkey]

Bush was not afraid to make decisions. We the American people got what we deserved with him. An awful lot of pain today.

 

[rightwinger]

LUKEWARM PRESIDENT.

We have a lukewarm president that wants to please some of the people some of the time. He does not want all the people mad at them all the time. I don’t believe for one second that he wants to send more troops to Afghanistan and escalate and expand the war that is not winnable. He is doing this to have some of the democrats and some of the republicans on his side. He got his feelers out among the democrats and the republicans then the acts. Obama is afraid to having people against him. One thing I admired about Bush was he was not afraid to act alone. He was the “decider.”

Oh Bush was the decider all right
He would decide on a course of action then send his people to gather data to support his pre-chosen course of action. He would not listen to dissenting opinion and surrounded himself with people who agreed with him

That is how we got into two wars. How we cut taxes to pay for wars. How we engaged in torture and defended it

 

[MaggieMae]

I'm aware of who Patraeus is, and who McChrystal is, and I know that what they say in public is not necesarily what they think.

I have more respect for professoinal officers than I do for any politician. Patreus is a great officer, as is McChrystal.

My point - unless you are within a very limited chain around either, then you are unlikely to know what either of them really thinks about Obama's strategy.

You don't have much respect for GEN Petraeus' integrity if you think he would be pressured into a plan that he didn't agree with.

Considering Petraeus advocated for the "surge", you don't think he'd try a similar template in Afghanistan?

For the record, I don't think it's the right approach there, but I know that Petraeus is much smarter about this than I am. That gives me some confidence.

Officers follow orders. That's all they can do or resign.

Strange how Obama wants to surge but never admitted that the surge in Iraq ever worked. This new policy is an open admission that he thinks it did.
If you wait long enough liars [Democrats] evenually expose themselves.

Problem being that most people aren't smart enough to figure out that it happened. In most cases you have to point it out to them.

I have zero confidence that this surge will work in Afghanistan. It's basically a cheap imitation of the Bush surge.....with cut & run date being included to assure failure.

Strange. Even die-hard FOX watchers only hear what they WANT to hear.

Barack Obama Admits To O'Reilly That Surge Succeeded 'Beyond Wildest Dream'

 

[MaggieMae]

Love how a ten year engagement in Afghanistan is "cut and run"

It's simple....first of all it isn't 10 years....try 9...secondly Obama wasn't President during most of it but no sooner do things get tough for him he wants to quit.

First he proclaimed it was the good war...then he said he would not rest until it was won.....now he wants to bail out on a fixed date regardless of whether we have a victory or not. He's gonna take a full year to build up our forces and within 6 months he's gonna start pulling them out.

That's called Cutting and Running.

I applaud him for not giving the Afghan government the luxury of an open ended commitment.

Secondly, it's irrelevant how long Obama has been running the show. What is relevant, is the perception on the Afghan street, which is that we have overstayed our welcome. When the public stops seeing us as liberators and occupiers, the insurgency is strengthened. I suspect that is a large part of the Taliban resurgence.

Exactly. The great masses of Afghanis are illiterate, they don't understand why the US presence in their country is any different than any other occupier, from the Soviets going all the way back in history to the British in the 19th century and the Russians a century later.

 

[MaggieMae]

Strange how Obama wants to surge but never admitted that the surge in Iraq ever worked. This new policy is an open admission that he thinks it did.

Except that he did.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Udt92OwPOgs[/ame]

After that, is there any point in addressing the rest of your points?

If you wait long enough liars [Democrats] evenually expose themselves.

Problem being that most people aren't smart enough to figure out that it happened. In most cases you have to point it out to them.

I have zero confidence that this surge will work in Afghanistan. It's basically a cheap imitation of the Bush surge.....with cut & run date being included to assure failure.

Funny...what I heard was him refusing to give credit where credit is due.

He said the surge worked in ways even Bush didn't think it would.

Which is the same thing as saying Bush succeeded by accident but not saying the word "succeeded".

He never wants to show any class and admit Bush was right about anything.

So in effect he says the troops succeeded but Bush wasn't responsible for anything at all...which means he still says Bush failed.

This is a very small man this Obama guy.

Oh please, it wasn't until Bush finally dumped Rumsfeld which allowed Patreaus to come in with counter-insurgency (touted as the ONLY way to "win" for years by Bush's own advisors). So GWB should get kudos for having his back against the wall and being FORCED into this decision?

 

[MaggieMae]

You don't know what you're talking about.

Afghanistan was mostly a Special Op war. Green Berets directing indigenous forces to defeat the Taliban.

It worked marvelously.

We've been slowly building up our forces in Afghanistan since the war was won but not fast enough for dickheads like Obama who claimed for years that Afghanistan was the place we should be...not Iraq. He said Afghanistan had to be won in his first couple of months in office. Now he's worried about the costs and the political damage it's causing him. Personally I think we should pull out now. And I say this because I know Obama doesn't have the stomach for it.

He never wanted to win. He just wanted to wait for the opportunity to leave. But he talked like a bad-ass when it was easy to do. Now he has a real problem and his solution is half-assed and will end up in nothing but a huge cost in lives and dollars.

Oh My God!

Are you serious? Don't you realize we had the Taliban defeated and driven out of the provinces? By pulling our regular troops Bush allowed the Taliban to reestablish itself.

Obama wouldn't have to reclaim lost ground if Bush had not given it back to the Taliban

Ok...dumbass. Many of the guys from my former unit were there. It was the Northern Aliance under the direction of US Special Operations Forces that did the bulk of the fighting.

Iraq was a more conventional war. Bush never just pulled our guys out of Afghanistan. The Democrats generated that falsehood. We were still deployed in Afghanistan all during the Iraq War but of course the media refused to cover that bit of information unless they needed a dead soldier to fill in the quiet periods in Iraq. I know too many guys that were there not to know this was the case. The excuse was that Bush hadn't captured Osama Bin Laden. Rumor has it he's dead.....and many in Washington know this. But that didn't stop them from claiming Iraq was just a waste of money and lives and OBL was waiting in Afghanistan to be captured. Well...he aint there.

I'd love to know which history books you've been reading on this. Troops WERE yanked from Afghanistan and moved to Iraq (as well as MONEY diverted from one to the other). I recall reading at the time a comment by Tommy Franks (who was overseeing the strategy for Afghanistan) after Rumsfeld came down with the order that he (Franks) should begin working out strategies for invading Iraq. His initial reaction was "WHAT THE FUCK?" Isn't it interesting that the one general who could shed some hands-on light on this controversy has rarely, if ever, spoken out about those early days of tusseling over which was more important: Afghanistan or Iraq. The war of words are laid out in Bob Woodard's two books: "Bush at War" and "Plan of Attack."

 

[MaggieMae]

We have at least two more years before we start to withdraw troops. He never said anything close to he would not rest until it was won.....you are making that up

Victory is defined as Afhanistan defending itself. If they cannot build the capability to control their own country after more than ten years they never will

When Bush pulled troops to attack Iraq...was that "cut and run"??

I'm betting on "They Never Will".

Immie

Yup...as long as President Pencil-neck continues to act like an empty-suit sending out mixed messages as far as the military is concerned they haven't a chance.

It wouldn't matter to someone like you what the message was.