Obama strongly considers withdrawing ALL troops from Afghanistan in 2014

[Sunni Man]

(CNN) -- President Barack Obama is seriously considering withdrawing all U.S. troops from Afghanistan in 2014, a senior administration official told CNN.

The official's comments came after The New York Times reported the administration was looking at speeding up the troop withdrawal to the "zero option," leaving no troops in Afghanistan.

Until now, U.S. and Afghan officials had been discussing plans to keep a small force behind to fight insurgents and to train Afghan security personnel.

But Obama has, in recent months, grown increasingly frustrated in dealing with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

A "zero option" has always been among the scenarios the United States envisioned. But the new revelation means that it could be a very possible one now.

Obama considering withdrawing all troops from Afghanistan in 2014 - CNN.com

 

[Sallow]

 

[High_Gravity]

Good idea, bring everyone home.

 

[Sallow]

Good idea, bring everyone home.

We can't get out of there, soon enough.

2013 would be better.

 

[Desperado]

It would be the smart thing to do, unfortunately Obama does not do smart.
Just have to hope for the best.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Who will protect and help transport the poppy industry though?

I dont see that happening until all contracts for raw materials have been established in Afghan. There are trillions in element in those mountains. Why did you think we were theere? To fight terrorists?

 

[Peter Dow]

New York Times: U.S. Considers Faster Pullout in Afghanistan

President Obama, frustrated in his dealings with President Karzai, is considering speeding up troop withdrawals from Afghanistan and even leaving no American troops after 2014

WASHINGTON —

Mr. Obama is committed to ending America’s military involvement in Afghanistan by the end of 2014, and Obama administration officials have been negotiating with Afghan officials about leaving a small “residual force” behind. But his relationship with Mr. Karzai has been slowly unraveling, and reached a new low after an effort last month by the United States to begin peace talks with the Taliban in Qatar.

Mr. Karzai promptly repudiated the talks and ended negotiations with the United States over the long-term security deal that is needed to keep American forces in Afghanistan after 2014.

A videoconference between Mr. Obama and Mr. Karzai designed to defuse the tensions ended badly, according to both American and Afghan officials with knowledge of it. Mr. Karzai, according to those sources, accused the United States of trying to negotiate a separate peace with both the Taliban and their backers in Pakistan, leaving Afghanistan’s fragile government exposed to its enemies.

Peace talks with the enemy is where poor generals with a failed war strategy end up.

Weak strategic thinking and planning by US and then NATO generals has dragged out the Western intervention in Afghanistan since 2001 and caused far more casualties to our soldiers than was ever necessary.

The military general staff has lacked vision about the enemy and failed to comprehend and react appropriately to intelligence reports that Al Qaeda, the Taliban and other jihadi terror groups are proxies for hostile states, typically managed from Pakistan and funded from Saudi Arabia.

Military strategic essentials have been neglected, such as - when occupying territory, always ensure secure supply routes from one strong point to another.

Instead NATO-ISAF forces in Afghanistan have been deployed in isolated bases, deployed more like tethered goats as bait for the enemy than a conquering or liberating army.

Some combination of military incompetence by the generals and a preference for appeasement on the part of the civilian political leadership has perversely left the West bribing our enemies within the Pakistani terrorist-proxy-controlling state and continuing business-as-usual with our enemies in the Saudi jihadi-financing state.

It’s never too late to learn lessons and adopt an alternative competent and aggressive military strategy and to that end, I have published a detailed improved AfPak military strategy in this topic in the USMB Military forum.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/milit...istan-pakistan-and-win-the-war-on-terror.html

 

[Peter Dow]

Peace talks and bringing the troops home without winning the war is a dumb idea.

Not being in Afghanistan didn't stop Pakistan sponsoring their terrorist proxies to do 9/11 and so what's to stop them doing it again?

Don't you think the Pakistani ISI can find another one like Bin Laden to do the same again? After all, they've still got Ayman Al-Zawahiri stashed away somewhere. Remember him, the old Al Qaeda number 2, now number 1?

(First image I posted didn't display next time I looked, so now adopting triple modular redundancy approach!)

Then where will your "brilliant" "just bring the boys home" idea have got you then, huh?

 

[Katzndogz]

The last phone call between obama and Karzai was so acrimonious the two are barely speaking. obama is insisting that the taliban be able to set up a government in exile in Qutar. Karzai doesn't want the taliban at all. If obama can't force the taliban back into power we will leave and Karzai will be fighting them again. obama wins either way.

 

[Sunni Man]

When the Russians withdrew from Afghanistan.

The puppet dictator they had installed to run the country was assassinated in short order.

I have no doubt that after we leave Karzai will meet the same fate. ..

 

[Peter Dow]

When the Russians withdrew from Afghanistan.

The puppet dictator they had installed to run the country was assassinated in short order.

I have no doubt that after we leave Karzai will meet the same fate. ..

So if the Taliban murder an elected president you'd be cool about that?

What kind of American are you, the Lee Harvey Oswald kind?

Are you cool about shooting schoolgirls as well?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngAIoxzIBzM]Malala Yousufzai - Free Pakistan - Kill the Taliban - YouTube[/ame]

As a Taliban sympathizer, shouldn't you been on some kind of FBI watch list?

 

[Sunni Man]

When the Russians withdrew from Afghanistan.

The puppet dictator they had installed to run the country was assassinated in short order.

I have no doubt that after we leave Karzai will meet the same fate. ..

So if the Taliban murder an elected president you'd be cool about that?

What kind of American are you, the Lee Harvey Oswald kind?

As a Taliban sympathizer, shouldn't you been on some kind of FBI watch list?

Karzai is just a puppet dictator installed by the U.S.

His demise after we withdraw is just my opinion based on the fate of the Russian puppet dictator.

And no, I am not a Taliban sympathizer.

Although, the U.S. government seems to like them; and wants to have talks with them. ..

 

[Peter Dow]

The last phone call between obama and Karzai was so acrimonious the two are barely speaking. obama is insisting that the taliban be able to set up a government in exile in Qutar. Karzai doesn't want the taliban at all. If obama can't force the taliban back into power we will leave and Karzai will be fighting them again. obama wins either way.

Obama, the US and allies lose, we all lose, if the Taliban get back into Afghanistan but this is Obama trying to negotiate surrender terms with Pakistan, to save face, instead of being unceremoniously booted out.

New York Times

Mr. Karzai, according to those sources, accused the United States of trying to negotiate a separate peace with both the Taliban and their backers in Pakistan, leaving Afghanistan’s fragile government exposed to its enemies.

The Taliban's backers in Pakistan are the military forces of Imperial Pakistan who want to get Afghanistan back as a client state that Pakistan controls once more.

The Taliban could be described as irregular, auxiliary or paramilitary forces operating for and on behalf of the military forces of imperial Pakistan.

You'd know that if you'd watched SECRET PAKISTAN, a BBC documentary. Here it is in 2 x 1 hour parts.

BBC Panorama's "SECRET PAKISTAN - Part 1 Double-Cross"

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSinK-dVrig]Secret Pakistan : Documentary by BBC Part 1 (Double Cross) - YouTube[/ame]

BBC Panorama's "SECRET PAKISTAN - Part 2 Backlash"

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5-lSSC9dSE]Secret Pakistan : Documentary by BBC Part 2 (Backlash) - YouTube[/ame]

So we need our suspicion and hatred of the Taliban to transfer onto our updated view of the Pakistani military, who we should stop trusting.

We don't want our innocent, trusting, child-like view of the Pakistani military to transfer onto an updated view of the Taliban.

We were right about the Taliban all along. They are the enemy.

We were wrong about the Pakistani military all along. Some of them, the ISI, have been behaving like the enemy too.

Any co-operation we've ever got from Pakistan has cost us billions of dollars and so we've given Pakistan every financial incentive to keep supporting terrorism because it pays big rewards when they help us shoot at terrorists they've trained up. It's like a billion-dollar quail or pheasant shooting business for Pakistan but with the Taliban as the game birds.

So quit paying Pakistan billions of dollars in aid and IMF bailouts then think about the acts of war we can take, against the Taliban and their backers in Pakistan, to pressure the Pakistani military to act to crush the Taliban from the ground while we crush them from the air, in Pakistan. Stop paying up, time for pay-back!

Pakistan could crush the Taliban but we need to turn the screws on them to make them do it.

This war needs to be won, in Pakistan.

So leave Karzai to one side for now to do his own thing and let's finish off the enemy in Pakistan.

 

[Caroljo]

I hope this is true.....my son is supposed to be heading there very soon. We should have left a long time ago, when the ones our soldiers were over there training started turning on them and murdering them.

 

[Synthaholic]

Who will protect and help transport the poppy industry though?

I dont see that happening until all contracts for raw materials have been established in Afghan. There are trillions in element in those mountains. Why did you think we were theere? To fight terrorists?

So, you are putting yourself on record as saying Bush didn't invade Afghanistan in response to the 9/11 attack, he just used that as an excuse to gain access to raw materials for U.S. corporations?

I think you are full of shit.

 

[Synthaholic]

I would urge all of you to watch this clip from last night's Rachel Maddow Show:


Subtext seen in conflicting reports of US Afghanistan exit - Video on NBCNews.com


She offers a different take: that this story in the NY Times may have been a plant, from the White House or some other, designed to be a trial balloon to gauge public response to an early pull-out from Afghanistan.

For the ADD-afflicted: it's only 4 minutes long.

 

[Sunni Man]

Who will protect and help transport the poppy industry though?

I dont see that happening until all contracts for raw materials have been established in Afghan. There are trillions in element in those mountains. Why did you think we were theere? To fight terrorists?

So, you are putting yourself on record as saying Bush didn't invade Afghanistan in response to the 9/11 attack, he just used that as an excuse to gain access to raw materials for U.S. corporations?

Basically, that is the truth.

We didn't need to invade a whole country in order to find 1 man.

But the invasion did give us access to Afghanistan's vast untaped mineral resources.

Which in reality explains the invasion and subsequent occupation. ..

 

[Synthaholic]

Who will protect and help transport the poppy industry though?

I dont see that happening until all contracts for raw materials have been established in Afghan. There are trillions in element in those mountains. Why did you think we were theere? To fight terrorists?

So, you are putting yourself on record as saying Bush didn't invade Afghanistan in response to the 9/11 attack, he just used that as an excuse to gain access to raw materials for U.S. corporations?

Basically, that is the truth.

We didn't need to invade a whole country in order to find 1 man.

But the invasion did give us access to Afghanistan's vast untaped mineral resources.

Which in reality explains the invasion and subsequent occupation. ..

Liberals have been arguing that since Day 1.

But not because of your conspiracy theory.

 

[Desperado]

New York Times: U.S. Considers Faster Pullout in Afghanistan

President Obama, frustrated in his dealings with President Karzai, is considering speeding up troop withdrawals from Afghanistan and even leaving no American troops after 2014

WASHINGTON —

Mr. Obama is committed to ending America’s military involvement in Afghanistan by the end of 2014, and Obama administration officials have been negotiating with Afghan officials about leaving a small “residual force” behind. But his relationship with Mr. Karzai has been slowly unraveling, and reached a new low after an effort last month by the United States to begin peace talks with the Taliban in Qatar.

Mr. Karzai promptly repudiated the talks and ended negotiations with the United States over the long-term security deal that is needed to keep American forces in Afghanistan after 2014.

A videoconference between Mr. Obama and Mr. Karzai designed to defuse the tensions ended badly, according to both American and Afghan officials with knowledge of it. Mr. Karzai, according to those sources, accused the United States of trying to negotiate a separate peace with both the Taliban and their backers in Pakistan, leaving Afghanistan’s fragile government exposed to its enemies.

Peace talks with the enemy is where poor generals with a failed war strategy end up.

Weak strategic thinking and planning by US and then NATO generals has dragged out the Western intervention in Afghanistan since 2001 and caused far more casualties to our soldiers than was ever necessary.

The military general staff has lacked vision about the enemy and failed to comprehend and react appropriately to intelligence reports that Al Qaeda, the Taliban and other jihadi terror groups are proxies for hostile states, typically managed from Pakistan and funded from Saudi Arabia.

Military strategic essentials have been neglected, such as - when occupying territory, always ensure secure supply routes from one strong point to another.

Instead NATO-ISAF forces in Afghanistan have been deployed in isolated bases, deployed more like tethered goats as bait for the enemy than a conquering or liberating army.

Some combination of military incompetence by the generals and a preference for appeasement on the part of the civilian political leadership has perversely left the West bribing our enemies within the Pakistani terrorist-proxy-controlling state and continuing business-as-usual with our enemies in the Saudi jihadi-financing state.

It’s never too late to learn lessons and adopt an alternative competent and aggressive military strategy and to that end, I have published a detailed improved AfPak military strategy in this topic in the USMB Military forum.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/milit...istan-pakistan-and-win-the-war-on-terror.html

No there no winning in Afghanistan. The longer we stay the more it cost us and the more we lose.
Anyone that thinks that there is a way to win in Afghanistan is delusional. I commend you on your work planning the win in the Afghanistan but your time would be better spent playing Stratego.
At least in that game you can win.

 

[Peter Dow]

It’s never too late to learn lessons and adopt an alternative competent and aggressive military strategy and to that end, I have published a detailed improved AfPak military strategy in this topic in the USMB Military forum.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/milit...istan-pakistan-and-win-the-war-on-terror.html

No there no winning in Afghanistan. The longer we stay the more it cost us and the more we lose.
Anyone that thinks that there is a way to win in Afghanistan is delusional. I commend you on your work planning the win in the Afghanistan but your time would be better spent playing Stratego.
At least in that game you can win.

Well my strategy is not an Afghanistan-only strategy. It an Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy - an "AfPak" strategy as we say.

In a sense you are right - there never was a way to win in Afghanistan alone. It has to be won in both Afghanistan and Pakistan at the same time.

That doesn't mean, does not mean invading Pakistan like we did with Afghanistan.

There's no need to invade Pakistan.

But any AfPak strategy does require that our political leaders at least name, declare Pakistan to be a state sponsor of terrorism.

To my knowledge, no NATO leader has yet done that. It's treating Pakistan with kid gloves and paying them billions of dollars which is making the war in Afghanistan so difficult to bring to a successful conclusion and simply withdrawing and allowing the Taliban to re-take Afghanistan would be a serious defeat for us all, Americans, British, the West, Afghans - even Pakistanis have more to gain in the long run by having their own military brought into proper democratic control by a regime change war.