Obama to meet plane carrying fallen soldiers in Afghanistan

[Modbert]

you even posted it and you dont get it
400,000 will be AFGHANIS
not Americans

She said 240 and 160 is 500,000 Afghanis like Si Modo said. Go ahead and tell me how that's right. And that's what they want by a certain date, they will not reach it most likely.

 

[Si modo]

Now you lie.

The CiC ultimately deploys troops (if he can get of his ass and do SOMETHING even when the recommendations say several times over that the timing is critical) based on what the military recommends. Thus, we do not deploy Afghanis, you idiot.

Find another blond to quote, K? You'll look just as foolish for being so very intellectually lazy.

And then lie about it.

Then you'll look like the immature child you are.

We don't deploy Afghanis but we certainly give the money to train them and get them weapons. Where did you think all this money for the Afghani money came from? Magical piggy banks? It came from us.

So while we may not deploy Afghanis, they certainly are going to follow our lead while we are there.

If anyone is being foolish at the moment, it is you. You failed at math, got called out on it, and then proceeded to attack my age. That's maturity?

Money is one thing. American and NATO bodies are another.

Idiot.

 

[Modbert]

Money is one thing. American and NATO bodies are another.

Idiot.

Except it's not just money. Who do you think is going to be needed to fill the holes left by the understaffed Afghani Army in the meantime?

Spoiler Alert: Out of the 64,000+ NATO troops in Afghanistan, I'm willing to bet around 25-30,000 of them are U.S. troops.

Edit: You never answered my question. How many troops do you think it takes to hold Afghanistan efficiently?

 

[DiveCon]

Money is one thing. American and NATO bodies are another.

Idiot.

Except it's not just money. Who do you think is going to be needed to fill the holes left by the understaffed Afghani Army in the meantime?

Spoiler Alert: Out of the 64,000+ NATO troops in Afghanistan, I'm willing to bet around 25-30,000 of them are U.S. troops.

Edit: You never answered my question. How many troops do you think it takes to hold Afghanistan efficiently?

what McChrystal has asked for

 

[Si modo]

Money is one thing. American and NATO bodies are another.

Idiot.

Except it's not just money. Who do you think is going to be needed to fill the holes left by the understaffed Afghani Army in the meantime?

Spoiler Alert: Out of the 64,000+ NATO troops in Afghanistan, I'm willing to bet around 25-30,000 of them are U.S. troops.

Are those 'holes' even mentioned in the report? You are seriously grasping and it's pathetic. Your gullibility and/or lack of intellectual curiosity was exposed. Are you dishonest? Likely. Are you immature? Likely. Are you lacking a pair? Definitely.

ETA your edit:

Edit: You never answered my question. How many troops do you think it takes to hold Afghanistan efficiently?

What the military tells BHO they need.

 

[Modbert]

what McChrystal has asked for

So you think 40,000 more troops and all our problems are solved troop level wise?

 

[Si modo]

no, shes reading it right
you got that lying crap from the blonde talking head and think it means American troops
it doesnt

I'm talking general troops, not just U.S. troops. But maybe you can tell me % wise how much of the current forces in Afghanistan is U.S. Then you can also add how much of that % is funded by us. So we would be the majority of that 500,000.

you even posted it and you dont get it
400,000 will be AFGHANIS
not Americans

Astounding, eh?

 

[Modbert]

Are those 'holes' even mentioned in the report? You are seriously grasping and it's pathetic. Your gullibility and/or lack of intellectual curiosity was exposed. Are you dishonest? Likely. Are you immature? Likely. Are you lacking a pair? Definitely.

ETA your edit:

Edit: You never answered my question. How many troops do you think it takes to hold Afghanistan efficiently?

What the military tells BHO they need.

The holes don't need to be mentioned in the report. It's 4 am and I am not going to try and read that entire report at the moment. It's quite obvious that the Afghani Army is behind schedule greatly and has many problems. From deserting to disloyalty to being understaffed to not the necessary equipment. You don't need a report in this case to see the obvious.

I don't have any gullibility. You seriously have no idea what you are talking about and you show it with your crummy math. 240 + 160 = 500? Let me guess, War is peace too?

I'm neither dishonest nor immature. You attacked me as soon as I pointed out the flaws in your argument. I told you for your own sake to stop making a fool of yourself, but you refused to listen.

Afghanistan needs 500,000 troops at the current moment to have a proficient chance at winning. In the meantime, until the people in the Afghani army are properly trained with the right equipment, who do you think will be in their place? Us.

And I love the broad statement you made. "Whatever the Military tells BHO what they need." That's great, but the thing about troop levels is that the Military disagrees quite often with one another on that.

And while you may think Obama is taking too much time on whether the troop increase should happen or not. At least he's not taking eight ******* months to make a decision unlike a previous Administration I can name.

My opinion at the present moment is to get the hell out of that desert wasteland for all of our sakes. If you seriously think we can get an army of 400,000 Afghani who would be a loyal proficient fighting group by 2011, then maybe you are high at the moment.

 

[Modbert]

Astounding, eh?

What's more astounding is your crummy math. At least Divecon is not reading it correctly.

The Afghan National Army (ANA) must accelerate growth to the present target strength of 134,000 by Fall 20101 with the institutional flexibility to continue that growth to a new target ceiling of 240,000. The target strength of the Afghan National Police (ANP) must be raised to 160,000. This will require additional mentors, trainers, partners and funds through an expanded participation by GIRoA, the support of IsAF, and the resources oftroop contributing and donor nations.

It's at 134,000 currently. By Fall of 2011, they want 240,000. As for the ANP, whatever it's number is, it needs to be raised by 160,000.

So why don't you tell me Modo, who's going to pick up the pace in the meantime until the Afghani Army catches up?

 

[DiveCon]

what McChrystal has asked for

So you think 40,000 more troops and all our problems are solved troop level wise?

thats not all he asked for
40,000 plus the Afghanis

 

[Modbert]

thats not all he asked for
40,000 plus the Afghanis

Yes, by 2011. Except besides our 40,000, who else is going to fill the hole in between? I don't see anyone in NATO volunteering. And we both know that these things have never happened on time yet. So it's going to go beyond 2011 probably.

 

[Si modo]

Are those 'holes' even mentioned in the report? You are seriously grasping and it's pathetic. Your gullibility and/or lack of intellectual curiosity was exposed. Are you dishonest? Likely. Are you immature? Likely. Are you lacking a pair? Definitely.

ETA your edit:

Edit: You never answered my question. How many troops do you think it takes to hold Afghanistan efficiently?

What the military tells BHO they need.

The holes don't need to be mentioned in the report. It's 4 am and I am not going to try and read that entire report at the moment. It's quite obvious that the Afghani Army is behind schedule greatly and has many problems. From deserting to disloyalty to being understaffed to not the necessary equipment. You don't need a report in this case to see the obvious.

I don't have any gullibility. You seriously have no idea what you are talking about and you show it with your crummy math. 240 + 160 = 500? ....

That's all you've got to grasp at at this point - a typo. It's pretty sad and not worthy of any respect. And, let's not forget that you first mentioned the number 500K. But, you haven't any balls, either.

And, you admit to never even reading the report (it's been out for over a month) and you admit to having no intention to read it. Watch the tube some more and look like a fool.

.... Let me guess, War is peace too? ...

At this point in time and considering your insanity in this thread, I bet you would actually believe that.

.... I'm neither dishonest nor immature. ....

If that is true, don't act that way.

.... You attacked me as soon as I pointed out the flaws in your argument. ....

What flaws? That you reported a number of troops for deployment that McChrystal requested that is so very in error but a blond on the tube told you that number and you believed it? You are ******* insane, 4 AM or not. You are not right upstairs.

.... I told you for your own sake to stop making a fool of yourself, but you refused to listen. ....

I noticed and I just laughed.

... Afghanistan needs 500,000 troops at the current moment to have a proficient chance at winning. In the meantime, until the people in the Afghani army are properly trained with the right equipment, who do you think will be in their place? Us. ....

Read the report, you ******* moron and learn how idiotic your idea is.

The rest of your erroneous and pathetically grasping post is just too tedious to respond to for such ease of argument.

 

[Modbert]

That's all you've got to grasp at at this point - a typo. It's pretty sad and not worthy of any respect. And, let's not forget that you first mentioned the number 500K. But, you haven't any balls, either.

I never said I never have no intention of reading it, I just said not at 4 am.

So I'm not going to bother to respond to the rest of your bullshit since at this point all you're doing is lying and grasping straws.

 

[Si modo]

That's all you've got to grasp at at this point - a typo. It's pretty sad and not worthy of any respect. And, let's not forget that you first mentioned the number 500K. But, you haven't any balls, either.

I never said I never have no intention of reading it, I just said not at 4 am. ....

Get current. It's been out for over a month. Yet you spout off bullshit because some blond on the tube told you that bullshit.

What you should concern yourself with now is finding the scraps of integrity you once had.

 

[DiveCon]

That's all you've got to grasp at at this point - a typo. It's pretty sad and not worthy of any respect. And, let's not forget that you first mentioned the number 500K. But, you haven't any balls, either.

I never said I never have no intention of reading it, I just said not at 4 am.

So I'm not going to bother to respond to the rest of your bullshit since at this point all you're doing is lying and grasping straws.

btw, i guess we can expect you to make a thread pointing out how MSNBC lied about this in thier coverage, right?
like the way you do almost ANY error by FNC

 

[Modbert]

btw, i guess we can expect you to make a thread pointing out how MSNBC lied about this in thier coverage, right?
like the way you do almost ANY error by FNC

You sure can expect a thread on the coverage.