You call lots of stuff, but it is largely irrelevant.What General? I'm calling bullshit, again. Maybe I'll get a relevant response this time.
You call lots of stuff, but it is largely irrelevant.What General? I'm calling bullshit, again. Maybe I'll get a relevant response this time.
Again, that would be fine if he would provide enough troops to at least secure the area for the troops as he makes his decision. You are incapable of reading things that others write that fall outside your already foolish assumptions of them, eh?
I can live with that. Welcome to the board. We were needing some new lefties.
You call lots of stuff, but it is largely irrelevant.
Only if you are retreating, which IMO will be necessary after the half-surge proves unsuccessful.
That is my prediction..
I hope I'll have to eat those words, but that is what I believe is coming down that pipe.
Me. And the general. It's poop or get off the pot time.
Yeah, no indication other than October being the absolute highest body count there since we entered the arena. We have to just turn away from all thought in order to fall in to your form of acceptance. Cover our ears and shout alot and say, "Nobody's dying!" There is no excuse to play with their lives like this, and instead of objecting to it you would rather excuse it because there is a "D" by the name.The underlying assumption in the bold is that McChrystal needs more troops now to "secure the are for the troops." There is no indication whatsoever that more troops are needed now for that purpose.
The additional troops McChrystal is requesting are necessary for purposes of implementing the various strategic changes McChrystal is pushing for, not for troop protection. And, in fact, part of the reason why McChrystal wants so many more troops is that the current way was are fighting the war is done to protect the troops from risk and that has to change in order to mount a successful counter-insurgency campaign. McChrystal's plan involves bringing in more troops and exposing them to increased risk.
Edit: By the by, I'm not a new lefty. I've been here for a long, long while. I'm merely trying on a new moniker. Trying to keep things fresh and to provide badly needed pop-culture references from the past to the youngins on the Board.
You, sir, are just plain going way out of wack with this today. You first pretend that you can't remember the stance I've had all the 8 years or more we've "known" each other online, then you go into this inane stuff because you can't think today. Then you pretend that the General's letter stating he needed more troops in order to at least keep status quo and way more troops if he wanted to turn this around means that he is happy as a pig in mud?Damo, you are now resorting to making shit up? Whats up with you?
Rubbish, there's been draw down in Iraq, and the General hasn't asked for a "whole surge" he asked for a reachable number.A whole surge is not possible without a draft.
The public will not allow it.
Its a clusterfuck and we can not do what the Generals want so Obama has told them to get him a plan to get us out.
I am betting that is what is going on.
We will have to wait and see but I am pretty damned sure that is what we are seeing go down.
Yeah, no indication other than October being the absolute highest body count there since we entered the arena. We have to just turn away from all thought in order to fall in to your form of acceptance. Cover our ears and shout alot and say, "Nobody's dying!" There is no excuse to play with their lives like this, and instead of objecting to it you would rather excuse it because there is a "D" by the name.
And, as I said, you are entitled to. But I believe my track record with Iraq, as well as this theater, stands up. Better than Obama's on Iraq certainly.I'm not claiming that no one is dying. I disagree with your opinion as to both the cause and the solution.
You, sir, are just plain going way out of wack with this today. You first pretend that you can't remember the stance I've had all the 8 years or more we've "known" each other online, then you go into this inane stuff because you can't think today. Then you pretend that the General's letter stating he needed more troops in order to at least keep status quo and way more troops if he wanted to turn this around means that he is happy as a pig in mud?
You should leave and come back when you have your head back on right.
First I never said "abandon", nor did I suggest he was thinking of leaving rightnowrightnowrightnow.Okay, I feel better today and still I ask, "where has anyone, (Ill amend here) other than you, said that Obama is considering abandoning Afganistan? Or did you just make that up??
And while he is "considering" our troops are dying. And he is also "considering" leaving because his "war of necessity" has become unpopular with the people who voted for him.
Do you believe that he isn't?Ohh, right you said "he is also considering leaving."
But still cant back that up, it just came out of you hatred for Obama I guess...!
Do you believe that he isn't?
The "attack" of yours must have come directly from your love of your messiah, I guess...
I made it clear what I was saying in posts later in the thread.
I have seen no indication that Obama is considering leaving Afganistan, if he does that I will be very disappointed because I voted for someone who I belive understands the difference between Iraq and Afganistan. Id like to get something set up in Afganistan using an international force to help those people to set up a stable government.
Since you have no patience and cannot wait for my return and just keep repeating the same thing over and over I will point it out again.What indication have you seen that would support your allegation that Obama is considering leaving Afganistan?