Posted on 09/16/2009 7:02:22 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
NATO-led forces are investigating the death of four Marines in eastern Afghanistan after their commanders reportedly rejected requests for artillery fire in a battle with insurgents, the Pentagon said on Wednesday. Tuesday's incident was "under investigation" and details remained unclear, press secretary Geoff Morrell told a news conference. A McClatchy newspapers' journalist who witnessed the battle reported that a team of Marine trainers made repeated appeals for air and artillery support after being pinned down by insurgents in the village of Ganjgal in eastern Kunar province. The U.S. troops had to wait more than an hour for attack helicopters to come to their aid and their appeal for artillery fire was rejected, with commanders citing new rules designed to avoid civilian casualties, the report said.
(Excerpt) Read more at military.com ...
Welcome Nachum. Thanks for Pinging.
How old are you? What a cheap shot.
Exactly..What I have always said..Obama’s Vietnam.
” with commanders citing new rules designed to avoid civilian casualties, the report said.
God help us. “
Lt General Gilmary Hostage held a press availability at the height of the Town Halls.
So, this was overlooked.
Except by Freepers.
Lt General Hostage is in charge of the kinder, gentler air war over Afghanistan.
He calls this strategy of allowing the Taliban to escape unharmed
“ Buzz Not Bomb. “
And he seems quite chipper about the whole situation.
“The first thing we do is fly over head, and the bad guys know airpower is in place and oftentimes that’s enough.
That ends the fight, they vamoose,”
“The A-10 has a very distinct sound.
The cannon on an A-10 is horrifically capable and our adversaries know it. When they hear the sound of an A-10, they scatter.”
Hostage quoted General McChrystal ordering:
, “If you are in a situation where there’s a civilian at risk,
he’d rather have us back away
than pressing to engage the enemy and run the risk of damaging or hurting somebody.”
Hostage, McChrystal and Obama are all about protecting the locals from the Taliban.
Which will cause them to be so grateful, they will no longer harbor the Taliban.
US forces physically defeating the Taliban is no longer the primary mission.
“In a circumstance where I’m only able to blow things up, I’m pretty limited in what I can do,” Hostage said.
“If I use graduated measures, then there are many things I can do to affect the situation.”
A couple of weeks ago ,CNN had a piece about Camp Keating in Afghanistan.
The soldiers in this remote outpost have to take incoming rounds from the hillside every day
from the same three Taliban that brazenly walk up the hillside knowing they will be given safe passage.
Because they are unarmed.
And obviously have their weapons cached.
Three walk up and shazamm, three areas open up on the camp.
So far, just physical damage to the camp, no one killed..yet.
One of the soldiers said they are fighting with one hand tied behind their back.
Back in 2007-the ROEs were different .
And civilians were sometimes killed and there was the typical backlash from the tribal elders.
Last sentence tells how Camp Keating got it’s name.
www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/02/27/afghanistan/print.html
“ Watching Afghanistan Fall, “ Matthew Cole Feb 27, 2007
Top of the morning.
Haven't been here long have you?
The Troops need to stand down. One base did it under Carter. They can’t fight like this..what is the sense?
Work and work.
"Haven't been here long have you?"
Mom, SENDING MORE ADVIL AND COFFEE!!!
Mark Levin read the McClatchy piece on the air last week and I had to turn it off. I just couldn’t stand hearing what Obama has done to our military and our guys.
“Mark Levin read the McClatchy piece on the air last week and I had to turn it off. I just couldn’t stand hearing what Obama has done to our military and our guys.”
Good! Beck also made a brief mention of the current ROE’s on his show last night. Word is spreading, that’s for sure.
The names of the four dead Marines should be made as famous as the name Cindy Sheehan. Every American should know the names of these amazing men.
Hate to break the obvious to you, but the commanders making the decision to withhold artillery weren’t on-site either and didn’t listen to the men who were.
As a result, 4 good men died.
This is long. I didn’t even realize how long I’ve been wanting to jam McChrystal through a wall.
Start at the bottom and work up.
To: SoCalPol
YOUR filthy mouth would be the one more at home at DU or Kos. You, madam, are a loon! Your posts do NOTHING but insult and demean, to no purpose whatsoever. You are just another mouthy, nasty RINO troll.
156 posted on Wednesday, September 09, 2009 11:14:11 PM by dcwusmc (We need to make government so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub.)
To: STARWISE
“OMG .. the sick and twisted rules of
engagement are utter depravity and
unspeakably vile .. and to my core, I’ve
been so afraid of this and hesitant to say
why.”
I have also been afraid of this and have said so repeatedly on this forum. Some of the old timers said I was crazy.
Obama is sacrificing our troops for political expediency and sympathy for the taliban who he wants to “negotiate” with. It is treason.
McChrystal has betrayed the troops he was sent there to command and should be Court Martialled for his malfeasance. This CAN NOT STAND!!!
May GOD bless and protect our Troops from all enemies...foreign AND domestic. The enemy within has sold us out.
95 posted on Wednesday, September 09, 2009 1:54:05 AM by MestaMachine (One if by land, 2 if by sea, 3 if by Air Force 1.)
To: antceecee
o is not waging war. He has surrendered. One dead soldier at a time.
Hell awaits him.
100 posted on Wednesday, September 09, 2009 2:14:58 AM by MestaMachine (One if by To:
Gritty
“We walked into a trap, a killing zone of relentless gunfire and rocket barrages from Afghan insurgents hidden in the mountainsides and in a fortress-like village where women and children were replenishing their ammunition.”
While McChrystal worries about their “muslim sensibilities.”
DAMN HIM!
102 posted on Wednesday, September 09, 2009 2:20:16 AM by MestaMachine (One if by land, 2 if by sea, 3 if by Air Force 1.)
To: McGruff; Lancey Howard; All
“Where the hell is the media.”
The hell with the media. Where is the PENTAGON??? We just had Troops killed rescuing a New York Times reporter. Do you think the NYT is going to thank them or support them?
The ONLY thing of value in Afghanistan is the drugs. The ONLY thing. I have been saying it over and over and over, but the “search” for a freaking DEAD Bin Laden has been the excuse used by the powers that be to keep our Troops there, now under almost impossible condititons.
McChrystal is a politician. He sold his bowl of venison to the Senate in order to be promoted to general. There had to be reasons why he was not promoted before that, Pat Tillman not withstanding. I would like to know what Petraeus thinks of his performance in Afghanistan. And I wonder where the Pentagon is when there appears to be outright anger from the troops serving under his command and they are not being quiet about it.
I have been hearing it under the radar for weeks, but it has become much more public now.
He is clearly putting our Troops in danger. This is NO WAY TO RUN A WAR.
**********************************************
“from November 1994 to June 1996. After a year as a senior service college fellow at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, he moved up to command the entire 75th Ranger Regiment from June 1997 to August 1999, then spent another year as a military fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.”
“At the beginning of the Iraq War in March 2003, he was serving in the Pentagon as a member of the Joint Staff, where he had been vice director of operations, J-3, since July 2002. McChrystal was selected to deliver nationally televised Pentagon briefings on U.S. military operations in Iraq, including one in April 2003 shortly after the fall of Baghdad in which he announced, ‘I would anticipate that the major combat engagements are over.’”
“McChrystal was considered a candidate to succeed General Bryan D. Brown as commander of U.S. Special Operations Command in 2007,[12] and to succeed General David H. Petraeus as commanding general of Multi-National Force - Iraq or Admiral William J. Fallon as commander of U.S. Central Command in 2008, all four-star positions. ***Instead, McChrystal was nominated to succeed Lieutenant General Walter L. Sharp as director of the Joint Staff in February 2008, another three-star position.***”
“Normally a routine process, McChrystal’s Senate confirmation was stalled by members of the Senate Armed Services Committee who sought more information about the alleged mistreatment of detainees by Special Operations troops under McChrystal’s command in Iraq and Afghanistan. After meeting with McChrystal in private, the Senate Armed Services Committee confirmed his reappointment as lieutenant general in May 2008 and he became director of the Joint Staff in August 2008. With his June 10, 2009 Senate approval to take command in Afghanistan, McChrystal was promoted to General. Shortly after McChrystal assumed command of NATO operations, Operation Khanjar commenced, marking the largest offensive operation and the beginning of the deadliest combat month for NATO forces since 2001.”
************************************
And it has been getting steadily worse since he took over. He has completely disregarded the safety and security of the Troops under his command, OURS as well as other country’s.
They will not stay there under McChrystal much longer.
Our Troops are nothing more than cannon fodder over there. They are not allowed to engage the enemy. They are not even allowed to defend themselves.
This is insane. The whole thing is insane.
If we are there because of pakistan, then it’s Pakistan we need to deal with on a much more aggressive level. Instead we baby them.
ENOUGH of this.
131 posted on Wednesday, September 09, 2009 10:05:06 AM by MestaMachine (One if by land, 2 if by sea, 3 if by Air Force 1.)
To: RabidBartender; 444Flyer
REPOST:
Thursday, September 03, 2009 6:36:09 AM · 8 of 15
MestaMachine to ImpBill
THIS is why Peters, and many guys with boots on the ground, are angry at the changes in ROE and McChrystal’s throwing caution to the wind where it comes to protecting our troops.
He thinks our TROOPS have acted too defensively in their own best interest and caused the “poor, helpless civilians” humiliation.
NOTE THE DATE.
General wants more troops for Afghan war
By: The Associated Press - The Sentinel-Record - Published: 08/02/2009
MORE TROOPS: Lt. Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the U.S. general in charge of turning around the war in Afghanistan, may recommend significant changes to U.S. and NATO operations in a report due in August.WASHINGTON - The U.S. general put in charge of turning around the war in Afghanistan is likely to recommend significant changes in the campaign and may include a request for more U.S. forces that the White House is expected to resist.
Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s long-awaited reassessment of the war against Taliban insurgents aims for a transformation of the shaky relationship between U.S. forces and Afghan civilians as troops press a counterinsurgency strategy of clearing and holding populated areas, said officials apprised of the report’s contents.
The biggest change urged in McChrystal’s report is a “cultural shift” in how U.S. and foreign troops operate - ranging from how they live and travel among the Afghan population to where and how they fight, a senior military official in Kabul said Friday.
The latest draft of the assessment also urges speeding up the training of Afghan soldiers and police and nearly doubling their numbers to roughly 400,000, said a senior defense official in Washington, one of several uniformed and civilian officials who spoke on condition anonymity because the report has not been made public.
As McChrystal readies the assessment of the war, due in two weeks, numerous U.S. officials and outsiders aware of his thinking suggest that he will request in a companion report that more American troops, probably including marines, be added next year.
Several people familiar with the work being done cautioned that McChrystal could opt not to ask for an increase at all - a recognition that President Barack Obama and other White House advisers would not look favorably on adding new numbers to U.S. forces after already agreeing to boost their ranks by 21,000 troops earlier this year.
The main recommendations for change stem from the military’s new counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan, which is now designed to focus less on going after Taliban strongholds and more on protecting the local population.
The new U.S. strategy is also aimed at helping develop an Afghan government that civilians will embrace rather than siding with the insurgents, two senior military officials said. To achieve that, one official said, the latest draft of McChrystal’s assessment includes the following recommendations:
- Using intelligence less to hunt insurgents and more to understand local, tribal and social power structures in the areas where they operate. McChrystal is considering concentrating troops around populated areas rather than going after sparsely populated mountain areas where Taliban hide.
- Getting troops more active in fighting corruption. U.S. forces will need to take care in their dealings with local Afghan leaders to ensure that they are not perceived by the Afghan population to be empowering corrupt officials.
*PLEASE NOTE THIS PARAGRAPH IN PARTICULAR.
In preparing his assessment of the Afghan command, McChrystal found an American military culture that showed a great concern for troops’ protection – sometimes at the expense of their relations with Afghan civilians.
To change those relations, McChrystal wants American forces to think twice about basic conduct - for instance no longer pointing their guns at people when they pass in convoy or blocking narrow roads with their convoys, while relegating Afghans to the ditches.
To deal with the most contentious aspect of those shaky relations, McChrystal has already committed to try to reduce civilian casualties by issuing new orders that restrict when troops should call in bombing strikes.
139 posted on Wednesday, September 09, 2009 10:40:05 AM by MestaMachine (One if by land, 2 if by sea, 3 if by Air Force 1.)
Saturday, September 12, 2009 9:32:22 AM · 126 of 3,316
MestaMachine to maine-iac7
REPOST of a REPOST
EVERYONE NEEDS TO SEE THIS!!!
Wednesday, September 09, 2009 10:40:05 AM · 139 of 187
MestaMachine to RabidBartender; 444Flyer
REPOST:
Thursday, September 03, 2009 6:36:09 AM · 8 of 15
MestaMachine to ImpBill
THIS is why Peters, and many guys with boots on the ground, are angry at the changes in ROE and McChrystal’s throwing caution to the wind where it comes to protecting our troops.
He thinks our TROOPS have acted too defensively in their own best interest and caused the “poor, helpless civilians” humiliation.
NOTE THE DATE.
General wants more troops for Afghan war
By: The Associated Press - The Sentinel-Record - Published: 08/02/2009
MORE TROOPS: Lt. Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the U.S. general in charge of turning around the war in Afghanistan, may recommend significant changes to U.S. and NATO operations in a report due in August.WASHINGTON - The U.S. general put in charge of turning around the war in Afghanistan is likely to recommend significant changes in the campaign and may include a request for more U.S. forces that the White House is expected to resist.
Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s long-awaited reassessment of the war against Taliban insurgents aims for a transformation of the shaky relationship between U.S. forces and Afghan civilians as troops press a counterinsurgency strategy of clearing and holding populated areas, said officials apprised of the report’s contents.
The biggest change urged in McChrystal’s report is a “cultural shift” in how U.S. and foreign troops operate - ranging from how they live and travel among the Afghan population to where and how they fight, a senior military official in Kabul said Friday.
The latest draft of the assessment also urges speeding up the training of Afghan soldiers and police and nearly doubling their numbers to roughly 400,000, said a senior defense official in Washington, one of several uniformed and civilian officials who spoke on condition anonymity because the report has not been made public.
As McChrystal readies the assessment of the war, due in two weeks, numerous U.S. officials and outsiders aware of his thinking suggest that he will request in a companion report that more American troops, probably including marines, be added next year.
Several people familiar with the work being done cautioned that McChrystal could opt not to ask for an increase at all - a recognition that President Barack Obama and other White House advisers would not look favorably on adding new numbers to U.S. forces after already agreeing to boost their ranks by 21,000 troops earlier this year.
The main recommendations for change stem from the military’s new counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan, which is now designed to focus less on going after Taliban strongholds and more on protecting the local population.
The new U.S. strategy is also aimed at helping develop an Afghan government that civilians will embrace rather than siding with the insurgents, two senior military officials said. To achieve that, one official said, the latest draft of McChrystal’s assessment includes the following recommendations:
- Using intelligence less to hunt insurgents and more to understand local, tribal and social power structures in the areas where they operate. McChrystal is considering concentrating troops around populated areas rather than going after sparsely populated mountain areas where Taliban hide.
- Getting troops more active in fighting corruption. U.S. forces will need to take care in their dealings with local Afghan leaders to ensure that they are not perceived by the Afghan population to be empowering corrupt officials.
*PLEASE NOTE THIS PARAGRAPH IN PARTICULAR.
In preparing his assessment of the Afghan command, McChrystal found an American military culture that showed a great concern for troops’ protection – sometimes at the expense of their relations with Afghan civilians.
To change those relations, McChrystal wants American forces to think twice about basic conduct - for instance no longer pointing their guns at people when they pass in convoy or blocking narrow roads with their convoys, while relegating Afghans to the ditches.
To deal with the most contentious aspect of those shaky relations, McChrystal has already committed to try to reduce civilian casualties by issuing new orders that restrict when troops should call in bombing strikes.
Panetta Marks 9/11 Anniversary, Tries to Boost CIA Morale
Friday, September 11, 2009 6:23:19 AM · 2 of 24
MestaMachine to nickcarraway
“The President has made clear that our mission is to disrupt, defeat, and destroy al-Qa’ida—”
How? Is he going to commit hara kiri?
“and that’s exactly what we intend to do. It is a privilege for me to work with men and women worthy of so vital a mission. Thank you for serving so well in this fight—and for helping the United States guarantee that no life lost in this attack or battle shall be lost in vain. That is our pledge and our prayer on this September 11th.”
Dear Leon,
obama lies.
Drop dead!
Panetta Marks 9/11 Anniversary, Tries to Boost CIA Morale
Friday, September 11, 2009 6:42:51 AM · 9 of 24
MestaMachine to Crim
I’ve been fighting this crap since he got here. I am on a personal vendetta against McChrystal for what he is doing over there. It is insane. It is criminal. He is committing outright murder, and he should be relieved of command and shot at sunrise along with his treasonous boss.
Obama’s Rules Of Engagement In Afghanistan Costing Our Troops Lives
Wednesday, September 09, 2009 10:24:03 PM · 21 of 35
MestaMachine to Nachum
Somalia. Blackhawk Down.
Obama’s Rules Of Engagement In Afghanistan Costing Our Troops Lives
Wednesday, September 09, 2009 11:35:37 PM · 27 of 35
MestaMachine to 444Flyer
Did you see “We Were Soldiers Once, And Young?”
There was a song by Clan an Drumma, “Sgt. MacKenzie.” I bought the whole CD just for that track. It is haunting. It goes through my head every time one of our Troops fall. Remember Me. That is what I keep thinking. All these Soldiers. So much pain and for what?
I don’t know. And they don’t either. It hurts so much.
So we remember. And that just is not enough. Not for this.
OBAMA’S BASE ON AFGHANISTAN?
Wednesday, September 09, 2009 11:43:58 AM · 6 of 20
MestaMachine to Route797
If this is even CLOSE to being true, Pubbies better back off and back off NOW. bam is intentionally losing this “war.” More Troops, MORE needless American deaths.
No way should we be condoning this.
The Syria-Iran Alliance Has Won a Great Victory–Will Not Wait Until Hesitant Obama Reaches Decision
Monday, September 07, 2009 11:19:59 AM · 9 of 13
MestaMachine to BenLurkin
obama. He is reversing everything the US has achieved there. Iraq is reverting to its past tribalism. It will soon look as though we had never been there.
It will also make the all the sacrifices of Americans pointless.
This is his intent. This will be his legacy. And Afghanistan is following suit.
9/11 plotters still alive and planning more attacks: Mullen
Thursday, August 27, 2009 8:25:35 AM · 7 of 13
MestaMachine to Schnucki
“Those who plotted the deadly attacks on World Trade Centre on September 11, 2001, are still alive and planning to carry out more terror strikes...”
I don’t like the sound of this. bam is in trouble. He just sent a terrorist back to Afghanistan in the dark of night free as a bird without warning to anyone.
Why?
Series of Blasts in Baghdad Kill 50, Injure 300
Wednesday, August 19, 2009 6:42:53 AM · 7 of 75
MestaMachine to livius
I do NOT understand why the military, seeing, knowing, what a reckless idiot omama is, don’t step up to the plate for the guys taking the flak. I know the commanders in Iraq have complained bitterly to no avail, but McChrystal in Afghanistan seems determined to put the safety of our troops far, far behind “sensitivity” towards the b@st@rds that are bent on murdering us. He should be court martialled for his malfeasance.
Where is Petraeus? WHERE is ANYONE with some backbone that will stand up to this, this, ......I can’t say it here.
NY Muslims:Collect the Jizya from the Jews and Christians~Video
Monday, August 17, 2009 10:24:55 PM · 31 of 51
MestaMachine to Frantzie
No. Thank o who appointed McCrystal who could give less of a damn about our troops.
He has ordered Marine women to wear friggin’ headscarves to be “sensitive” to the “moral” sensibilities of islawhackos in Afghanistan.
He changed the ROE in Afghanistan to protect the “innocent” civilians instead of protecting our troops.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2317891/posts
Afghan husbands allowed to starve their wives if she refuses sex under new law
Monday, August 17, 2009 11:40:20 AM · 39 of 55
MestaMachine to Alberta’s Child
Nope. Looks like they’re culturally “sensitizing” Marine Women. MARINES!!!
GOD help us.
KHAWJA JAMAL, Afghanistan — Put on body armor, check weapons, cover head and shoulders with a scarf.
That was the drill for female American Marines who set out on patrol this week with a mission to make friends with Afghan women in a war zone by showing respect for Muslim standards of modesty.
Large blast heard in Afghan capital near embassies [Car Bomb]
Saturday, August 15, 2009 2:50:20 AM · 29 of 40
MestaMachine to erkyl
To which I can only respond, AMEN!
There are plans in the works to send even more Marines. The ROE are stacked against them and will be still more drastically changed after McChrystal’s “formal assessment.” I fear for them. I fear for us. Pray hard. We need it. THEY need it.
Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies
Large blast heard in Afghan capital near embassies [Car Bomb]
Saturday, August 15, 2009 2:35:08 AM · 27 of 40
MestaMachine to erkyl
No. They are too busy worshipping at the alter. Miss-pelling on purpose.
Seriously, what is happening in Afghanistan is an outrage. I’ve been posting about it for weeks. Some people think I don’t know what I’m talking about, but they are wrong. I know only too well.
Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies
Large blast heard in Afghan capital near embassies [Car Bomb]
Saturday, August 15, 2009 2:18:27 AM · 25 of 40
MestaMachine to erkyl; Jet Jaguar
Seems that way, don’t it?
Remember when clinton had the massive callup and 90 day TDYs right before his 2nd election so most of the military couldn’t vote or have their votes counted?
There is absolutely nothing in Afghanistan worth fighting for, let alone dying for...except the drugs.
McChrystal made the statement that there was too much attention paid to security in the direction of our troops instead of the population. He changed all that. Now our troops are sacrificed to protect “innocent” civilians. And the American death toll continues to rise.
Afghan mission falls short of expectations: Lawmakers
Sunday, August 02, 2009 4:48:55 AM · 5 of 12
MestaMachine to Lancey Howard
And evidently, under McCystal, it can only get worse.
*****************************
The biggest change urged in McChrystal’s report is a “cultural shift” in how U.S. and foreign troops operate — ranging from how they live and travel among the Afghan population to where and how they fight, a senior military official in Kabul said Friday.
The latest draft of the assessment also urges speeding up the training of Afghan soldiers and police and nearly doubling their numbers to roughly 400,000, said a senior defense official in Washington, one of several uniformed and civilian officials who spoke on condition anonymity because the report has not been made public.
In preparing his assessment of the Afghan command, McChrystal found an American military culture that showed a great concern for troops’ protection — sometimes at the expense of their relations with Afghan civilians.
To change those relations, McChrystal wants American forces to think twice about basic conduct — for instance no longer pointing their guns at people when they pass in convoy or blocking narrow roads with their convoys, while relegating Afghans to the ditches.
To deal with the most contentious aspect of those shaky relations, McChrystal has already committed to try to reduce civilian casualties by issuing new orders that restrict when troops should call in bombing strikes.
*******************************************
Just imagine our Military showing “great concern” for our troops’ protection. How dare they
FR under attack again by leftist punk trolls
Saturday, August 01, 2009 5:36:58 PM · 180 of 227
MestaMachine to Jim Robinson
What is truly ironic about this, is that what they consider troll bait is true.
i.e.:
“start the next ‘Barak Obama is a secret muslim’ ‘Clinton has had dozens of people killed’”
But it’s old news.
Right now, I am more concerned with losing the country to the dozers he is using to run over us and the Troops being killed in Afghanistan while he wants to negotiate with terrorists.
I’m concerned with his apparent acceptance of a nuclear Iran.
I am concerned that Iraq is reverting to pre-surge days because he is in such a hurry to disengage. The Commanders there are having fits, but the press won’t report it.
I am concerned about his lack of intelligence and want the string pullers exposed.
I am concerned about his racism.
I am concerned that one of his whacko czars thinks trees should have “standing” in a court of law, but American Citizens trying to find the truth do not.
Many, many things. If they think it’s funny, that makes them section 8. It will show itself.
President Barack Fonda Rules Out US Military Victory in Afghanistan
Friday, July 24, 2009 11:32:33 PM · 10 of 20
MestaMachine to pissant
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/23/obama-victory-necessarily-goal-afghanistan/
President Obama has put securing Afghanistan near the top of his foreign policy agenda, but “victory” in the war-torn country isn’t necessarily the United States’ goal, he said Thursday in a TV interview.
“I’m always worried about using the word ‘victory,’ because, you know, it invokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur,” Obama told ABC News.
The enemy facing U.S. and Afghan forces isn’t so clearly defined, he explained.
“We’re not dealing with nation states at this point. We’re concerned with Al Qaeda and the Taliban, Al Qaeda’s allies,” he said. “So when you have a non-state actor, a shadowy operation like Al Qaeda, our goal is to make sure they can’t attack the United States.”
To: MinorityRepublican
Almost. And it was almost for the same reason, but it was NOT deliberate. Our losses in Iraq were the fault of a misguided judgement by GW Bush to put the State department in charge instead of the Military.
Colin Powell is a pacifist and did everything he could to undermine the Military in Iraq and to undermine Bush PERIOD!
Guess who is “advising” obama.
Having said that, this man is doing this for show so he can pretend to be fighting the war on terror. The rules of engagement are ridiculous. Miranda rights for terrorists. Don’t fire if there is a civilian within 10 miles. How do you know who is or isn’t a civilian?
The Afghan government is beyond corrupt. The people are far more isolated and tribal.
There is NO reason for our Troops to be battling for control of the poppy fields. If anyone was serious about stopping the growing of poppies, airstrikes to destroy the fields would be happening until they were GONE. We would not be sending good Marines in harm’s way under the pretense that we are trying to build an infrastucture for people who DO NOT WANT IT and will revert at the first possible minute.
And if we were serious about destroying Al Qaeda, the zone between Pakistan and Afghanistan would be a damn ditch where anything that moved would be dead within seconds.
Instead, we are propping up the radicals in Pakistan, controlling a corrupt government in Afghanistan, and OUR Troops are the front line.
NATO could give a damn.
Hamid Karzai agrees 99% of the time with the Taliban and against us and the ONLY thing of value in Afghanistan is drugs.
19 posted on Friday, July 17, 2009 8:11:24 AM by MestaMachine (OREO, Milk’s favorite cookie. At least that’s what my TV said.)
President Barack Fonda Rules Out US Military Victory in Afghanistan
Friday, July 24, 2009 11:58:41 PM · 15 of 20
MestaMachine to sushiman
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2294541/posts
When I posted this, I was challenged by some who refused to believe what obama was doing. I will say it again. obama is sacrificing American Marines for NOTHING!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2294541/posts
To: Valin; BlueNgold
BlueNgold”Fight to win, and don’t let the media deter us from using the best available tactics and strategy because the headlines might show a number that looks bad.”
That is exactly the point. We are NOT fighting to win anything. We are just fighting.
Valin: My “extreme lack of knowledge” is only exceeded by your extreme willingness to believe that the obama administration has a legitimate reason for what he is doing. There is none.
I never questioned WHY we are in Afghanistan. I KNOW why we went there. What I question is obama’s commitment both to the WOT AND our Military.
He arbitrarily changed the ROE to hamstring our Troops. Hamid Karzai is at best a paid lackey who has no fealty to US except that we keep him propped up and he insures the drug flow is maintained. Nothing we are doing there is going to help the people of Afghanistan, and it doesn’t further our own National Security. It doesn’t stop the radical takeover in Pakistan. It doesn’t check Iran.
The whole lay of this “war” is completely different than the one in Iraq. Our troops are being misused and if that is BS, rhen I am in good company.
A couple of months ago, I spoke with a very good friend of mine, and I said that I was expecting them to pull osama bin laden out of his grave so they would be able to “go after him” and kill him, for the glory of obama.
Sure enough, a VIDEO tape shows up last week purporting to be osama NOW. It was supposedly being “authenticated.” Have you heard a SINGLE word about it since?
No, I didn’t hink so.
This is a criminal administration. They will do anything to screw us AND the Military.
Defend them if you wish, but don’t accuse me of being ignorant of the facts. I am not.
29 posted on Saturday, July 18, 2009 10:45:30 AM by MestaMachine (OREO, Milk’s favorite cookie. At least that’s what my TV said.)
7 US troops killed throughout Afghanistan
Tuesday, July 07, 2009 8:09:15 AM · 15 of 37
MestaMachine to LibLieSlayer
Our Troops are being killed for a farce. A dog and pony show by obama to make us think he is actually doing something for Afghanistan and our national security. This operation is meaningless and the administration knows it. It is temporary and without any real purpose. All it is doing is putting our Marines in harm’s way so obama can give the impression of fighting terror.
Ralph Peters: Our Afghan Error
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/our_afghan_error_lfic3MKLeP2WrGhpQWbnhM
It is my opinion that you are an infected ***** of the highest order, hence the need for a douche.
“The names of the four dead Marines should be made as famous as the name Cindy Sheehan. Every American should know the names of these amazing men.”~Deb
“...As a result, 4 good men died.”~Gourmet Dan
Bagpipes of Lamentation for them. Brothers in Arms...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq3a_7242Lc&feature=related
Let’s hope many of those still at the top has the same passion and concern you have for our troops Mesta. At the very least, McChrystal needs to have his butt fired over this one.
P.S. See above bagpipes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.