Obama ready to announce Afghan troops surge

The Australian ^ | November 25, 2009

[myknowledge]

BARACK Obama is just days away from committing up to 35,000 additional US troops to the war in Afghanistan as part of a revitalised military strategy against the Taliban.

The US President was understood to be close to a final decision last night on the details of an Afghanistan surge in the new year, following a meeting of his war cabinet at the White House.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said: "After completing a rigorous final meeting, President Obama has the information he wants and needs to make his decision and he will announce that decision within days."

Military sources believe Mr Obama has settled on sending between 32,000 and 35,000 extra US troops to join 68,000 already committed to the eight-year conflict.

[Happyinmygarden]

My oh my, I’m sure glad Dear Leader didn’t have a really tough decision to make. You know, a really important decision, like what kind of dog to get.

[gruffwolf]

Pakistan? Don’t you mean Paakestan?

[silverleaf]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/23/lawmakers-propose-war-surtax-pay-troop-increase-afghanistan/

TAX THE RICH TO PAY FOR THE SURGE

My GOD, is that ALL the democ rats are capable of thinking about????????

QUOTE
“Two top Democrats say they want to impose a new tax on the wealthy to finance any increase in U.S. troops for the Afghanistan war.

Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., chairman of the purse string-controlling House Appropriations Committee, is calling the idea a “war surtax.” He said that just as the federal government is expected to pay for its proposed intervention in the health care sector with new taxes, any escalated involvement in Afghanistan should come with a payment plan.

“If we have to pay for the health care bill, we should pay for the war as well ... by having a war surtax,” Obey told ABC News in an interview that aired Monday. “The problem in this country with this issue is that the only people that has to sacrifice are military families and they’ve had to go to the well again and again and again and again, and everybody else is blithely unaffected by the war.”

Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is making a similar demand.”

[Doogle]

PUCKOUS tan

[silverleaf]

1 December

An address to the nation

Oh by the way, there will be a “war surtax” - on “the rich” of course

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/23/lawmakers-propose-war-surtax-pay-troop-increase-afghanistan/

[cake_crumb]

" The bowing failure can't street talk his way out of a paper bag when he leaves this country..."

LOL, Axlerod was blaming the public before Dippy even retreated from Chinese soil. He claimed the public's expectations were too high, because a couple of reporters actually asked (at the end of the trip) what exactly it WAS Dippy was hoping to accomplish. It's pretty bad when the press corps is more experienced at diplomacy and statesmanship than the president.



I'm not at my computer, or I'd Photoshop one of these into Obama.

[hal ogen]

The generals say they need AT LEAST 40,000 in order to win. So Nobama sends fewer. Wow...what a supporter of the military effort. Nobama is FAIL. He is so confused that he probably scares him self. I feel sorry for the troops over there. Nobama: Resign in disgrace today. Wherever you move, we will send you the veggies from your wife’s stupid garden. Have a pleasant Thanksgiving.

[Friendofgeorge]

I guess they figure by sending 5-8 thousand less troops than The General asked for, is red meat for moveon.org??

Does he really believe that sending 35 thousand instead of 40, is going to excite them? Hey, I have said all along that the majority of the so called anti war movement was really only anti Bush. They claim at times to be concerned about the US soldiers dying, but then on the other hand are so quick to believe the worst about our fighting men and women.

[Syncro]

I loved seeing her use Cheney's word dithering last nite.

I can't see the end result being anything else but Obama eventually losing this war.

Afghanistan is worlds apart from Iraq in every way.

Obama will continue the PC tactics and not do the proper mass destruction of the enemies there and those that protect them.

He will sacrifice American Troop lives to avoid any collateral damage (unavoidable to win) to the Afghans.

Get in, do the job and leave just isn't in the works with this administration and leftist Congress

[cake_crumb]

Yep. He has no knowlege of history. He has to micromanage this war.

[pgyanke]

I'm not at my computer either. That's why I had to do this post in pencil...

Sorry... couldn't resist...

[exit82]

I know you are telling the truth.

This is all window dressing. And 90 days will have been wasted by the time he makes his decision.

Now it’s winter in ‘stan—he just made the difficult logistical mission of getting troops and supplies there so much more difficult.

He, and his party, are the enemies of freedom.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"Give the general the troops he wants instead of this middle of the road BS"

I agree. Give the commanders on the ground the tools they need to win. Hopefully this will work for McChrystal, we'll see when he goes before Congress. If it wasn't good enough, then he seems to be a man who will stand up and say no good. Perhaps we can get some committment from our allies if McChrystal needs more troops. Perhaps we will send more combat troops and our allies can send some trainers to make up the difference in the 40,000.

If we can coordinate a spring offensive with the pakistani troops who now seem interested in rooting out the Taliban, we can make this work.

[AmericanInTokyo]

Anything between Full Commitment to Victory, or Full Redeployment (Retreat) Either Into or Out of The Hellhole, will be satisfactory by me. Anything else—i.e. between those two, is NOT ACCEPTABLE. And anything else is liable to be timed for political purposes as a “wag the dog”.

[tbpiper]

Obama ready to announce Afghan troops surge

I expect a 'troop spurt' not a real surge. The Gelding-in-Chief doesn't have the stuff in him for a real fight.

[tbpiper]

Obama ready to announce Afghan troops surge

I expect a 'troop spurt' not a real surge. The Gelding-in-Chief doesn't have the stuff in him for a real fight.

[tbpiper]

Obama ready to announce Afghan troops surge

I expect a 'troop spurt' not a real surge. The Gelding-in-Chief doesn't have the stuff in him for a real fight.

[Truth29]

Agree. If the ROEs are not vastly loosened, additional troops will just be more targets for the Taliban. Also, I read elsewhere that the time-line to send these additional troops is up to 9 months. The USA takes most of a year to add 35,000 troops? Everything screams that Obama’s heart isn't in this and that he is looking for the exist even as he says that he intends to add troops. The enemy and the world sees that Obama is weak and that weakness is a strategic advantage for the enemy.

[pabianice]

Heads are exploding at Democrats.com.

==========================================================

Dear ,

Despite over $1 trillion in costs and the majority of Americans opposing escalation, President Obama continues to move towards increased military action in Afghanistan.

Tell President Obama: End the War in Afghanistan

Bob Fertik

=======================================================

End the War in Afghanistan

Dear President Obama,

News reports indicate that you have rejected specific plans to send between 10,000 and 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan put forward by your military advisers, but that you are still considering escalating the war in Afghanistan.

We urge you to reject escalation altogether and give us a bridge out of Afghanistan.

Expanding the war in Afghanistan will make Americans less safe, not more so.

Less than 100 members of Al Qaeda remain in Afghanistan. The Karzai government we support is controlled by warlords and is riddled with corruption. Pakistan's stability will be gravely imperiled by an expansion of the war. Hundreds if not thousands of troops will be killed, along with countless civilians. Anti-American sentiment throughout the Muslim world will be inflamed by civilian bloodshed, facilitating recruitment by terrorist organizations.

The war will cost billions of dollars when we can least afford it, and will stymie your domestic agenda.

The cost of sustaining a military force in Afghanistan is $1 million per soldier per year -- that's close to $100 billion dollars annually with the troop increase. With the economy in shambles, the deficits generated by these enormous costs will compromise your domestic legislative agenda both fiscally and politically.

The United States has no vital interest in Afghanistan. If you choose to further escalate troop levels in Afghanistan, you will be making the biggest mistake of your presidency.

[chiefqc]

Busy schedule Golf, Parties, dinner dates, vacations, resting, self promotions, phony photo-op’s.

Busy, busy, busy.

Oh did I forget to the most important, Bal*less, clueless, arrogant, and a nonredeemable liar.