- Joined
- Sep 13, 2007
- Messages
- 79,903
- Reaction score
- 20,981
- Location
- I love your hate.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Afghan War Debate Endangers U.S. Troops - Veterans
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/10/15/world/international-uk-afghanistan-usa.html
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. veterans criticized President Barack Obama's lengthy review of Afghan war strategy, saying on Thursday the drawn-out debate in Washington was a direct threat to troops and the nation's defence.
The head of Veterans of Foreign Wars, a group representing 1.5 million former soldiers, issued a tersely worded statement urging Obama to follow the advice of his military commanders, who want more troops for the eight-year war.
"The extremists are sensing weakness and indecision within the U.S. government, which plays into their hands," said Thomas J. Tradewell Sr., a Vietnam veteran and head of VFW.
That was "evidenced by the increased attacks in Afghanistan as well as Pakistan," he said.
"I fear that an emboldened enemy will now intensify their efforts to kill more U.S. soldiers," Tradewell added.
I urge the president to heed the assessment and advice of his military leaders," Tradewell said, adding Obama needed to be "decisive during this critical juncture."
You can't get a man with no brains or balls to listen to military commanders that have plenty of both. They need to send more of us(soldiers) over there or bring my brothers home, and lob a few glass makers over there. The glass makers will serve notice to Iran, and the rest of the anti American crowd that we will not tolerate any BS that threatens the American Way. All of you lame-in-love Barry lovers should be proud of the most gutless POS we have ever had as president. It is too bad you can't get rid of all the anti-American crowd(liberals) in the US. Maybe we could get San Francisco or Seattle to hold a ACLU convention, and drop a glass maker there as well.
Greetings to all.
If the path is so clear why is Gates saying he needs to meet with Obama before a decision is made?
Are you advocating the President make a major military strategy decision without the input of the Secretary of Defense?
The war in Afghanistan has no strategy, not anymore. The only strategy should be to get out. Enough with the waste of dollars and lives already.
You consider advocating a nuclear attack on a civilian population center of the United States to be a "great post" apdst? I'd rate it as "weak troll" myself.
You consider advocating a nuclear attack on a civilian population center of the United States to be a "great post" apdst? I'd rate it as "weak troll" myself.
On one hand, Obama has to get a handle on what's really going down there. But he has to do so in a manner which best serves the military. But I wouldn't expect an end to this any time soon. These wars we started....we ****ed them up since the beginning.
On one hand, Obama has to get a handle on what's really going down there. But he has to do so in a manner which best serves the military. But I wouldn't expect an end to this any time soon. These wars we started....we ****ed them up since the beginning.
It is not the President's job to "best serve the military." His assignment is to best serve the people of the United States. If, in his best judgment, that means withdrawing from ill-conceived and inadequately supported military operations, then it is his duty to order them military to withdraw. If, on the other hand, he can identify a realistic military objective which will better serve the interests of the American people, it is his responsibility to provide the military with all the personnel and support which they need to fulfill their mission.
But neither course is automatically correct. It is a matter of having a clearly defined goal and a realistic way to achieve it. That is something we have not had for the past eight years, and Mr. Obama is only going to get one chance to get it right. I don't blame him for being careful--those are our sons and daughters whose lives are being put at risk.
That should have happened the second Obama received McChrystal's report. A real CIC would have convened an emergency meeting among military leadership and told them to have a recommendation on his desk in two days. Instead, he dithered, and talked, and delayed, and went to grovel for the Olympics, and went on talk shows, and launched a war against a news channel...still nothing, still no results.
I guess I have never seen a real CiC in action then. Bush also took months to make a decision on strategy changes in Iraq.
Link to where he had troops sit in harms way while he decided whether to pull out or continue.
Obama isn't deciding to pull our or continue. He's deciding on whether to change the primary objective towards Al-Q rather then the Taliban.
Bush: I'm Not Going To Be Rushed On Iraq [Strategy], while commanders in Iraq sit and wait for a request for 20,000 troop increase to be granted.
Bush: I'm Not Going To Be Rushed On Iraq - CBS News
Oh I don't deny Obama should have met and had all the options a while ago. At the same time I also don't pretend to believe determining the overall strategy that impacts hundreds of thousands of peoples lives and billions of dollars is a decision that can happen in over a lunch meeting.:lol: you see the difference here? Bush was activley persuing solution. Obama is fiddling in indecision.
Oh I don't deny Obama should have met and had all the options a while ago. At the same time I also don't pretend to believe determining the overall strategy that impacts hundreds of thousands of peoples lives and billions of dollars is a decision that can happen in over a lunch meeting.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?