Troop pullout in Afghanistan set for next summer

So you didn't support bush's announcement in 2008 of a troop drawdown because it threatened lives? Good for you.

"The reduction will begin with a Marine Corps battalion set to leave this fall from Anbar Province, once the center of the anti-government insurgency. …

Mr. Bush announced his decision on future force levels in Iraq, which includes withdrawing a full brigade of combat troops in the first few weeks of 2009, in an address on Tuesday to the National Defense University here. The text of his speech was released late Monday by the White House."


http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/war-at-home-bushs-iraq-troops-drawdown/

There is a bit of a difference. When many on the left were screaming for a withdrawal of troops and establishing a firm time line... Bush instead INCREASED the number of troops.

When the surge (along with the Sunni uprising) worked in reducing the violence, THEN Bush announced that some of the troops would be coming home and when. Had the situation deteriorated, those troops would likely have remained.

contrary to that approach, Obama is setting a firm withdrawal DESPITE the fact that things have been getting WORSE in Afghanistan. That means pulling troops out and leaving those remaining will be in greater harms way.
 
9 years of a war we shouldn't have been in is too long. Sorry rightwing tools the murder of towel heads has to stop.
 
Imagine if Eisenhower had said after June 6, 1944 that the Allies would withdraw from continental Europe by Christmas of 1944, because that was all the talk, home by Christmas. The Germans would have dug in, fought a defensive war and we would have left, leaving the Germans to continue with their onslaught of Germany. War is a motherfucker, men and women die in war. Civilians die in war. It is the nature of the beast. You don't tell the world you are leaving a war zone by date certain. It's bad form and gives your enemy a date certain on a calendar that they have to wait it out for. I have no doubt, that if the media outlets and the internet existed in 1942, we would not have fought the war in Europe or Japan to our fullest and we would have left unsuccessful.

Bullshit on top of bullshit

there is no end game in Afghanistan, we need to get the fuck out yestarday.
 
So you didn't support bush's announcement in 2008 of a troop drawdown because it threatened lives? Good for you.

"The reduction will begin with a Marine Corps battalion set to leave this fall from Anbar Province, once the center of the anti-government insurgency. …

Mr. Bush announced his decision on future force levels in Iraq, which includes withdrawing a full brigade of combat troops in the first few weeks of 2009, in an address on Tuesday to the National Defense University here. The text of his speech was released late Monday by the White House."


http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/war-at-home-bushs-iraq-troops-drawdown/

There is a bit of a difference. When many on the left were screaming for a withdrawal of troops and establishing a firm time line... Bush instead INCREASED the number of troops.

When the surge (along with the Sunni uprising) worked in reducing the violence, THEN Bush announced that some of the troops would be coming home and when. Had the situation deteriorated, those troops would likely have remained.

contrary to that approach, Obama is setting a firm withdrawal DESPITE the fact that things have been getting WORSE in Afghanistan. That means pulling troops out and leaving those remaining will be in greater harms way.

this and bush's was not firm, he was against firm timelines that the dems were screaming for, instead he was quite clear that it was a "time horizon"

big difference
 
Bullshit on top of bullshit

there is no end game in Afghanistan, we need to get the fuck out yestarday.
There is indeed an end game in Afghanistan. Success and victory. If you had asked Eisenhower in 1942 what the endgame was, he would have said the defeat and unconditional surrender of Germany and Japan. He would not have any idea how that was going to come but that would have been the endgame. Not KNOWING how a war is going to ultimately end is not a lack of an endgame.
 
There is indeed an end game in Afghanistan. Success and victory. If you had asked Eisenhower in 1942 what the endgame was, he would have said the defeat and unconditional surrender of Germany and Japan. He would not have any idea how that was going to come but that would have been the endgame. Not KNOWING how a war is going to ultimately end is not a lack of an endgame.

fuck that winning is in football games, this is not an army we are fighting it's illiterate rag tag criminals.
 
There is a bit of a difference. When many on the left were screaming for a withdrawal of troops and establishing a firm time line... Bush instead INCREASED the number of troops.

When the surge (along with the Sunni uprising) worked in reducing the violence, THEN Bush announced that some of the troops would be coming home and when. Had the situation deteriorated, those troops would likely have remained.

contrary to that approach, Obama is setting a firm withdrawal DESPITE the fact that things have been getting WORSE in Afghanistan. That means pulling troops out and leaving those remaining will be in greater harms way.
And they are getting "worse" there because if the Jihadists can make it appear as if the USA retreated, then they've won more than a Pyhrric victory.
 
they can have a victory dance on camels for all I care..
None of you chickenhawks wants to fight over there, it's a bullshit war of choice and we can't afford it.
 
a political solution is what is needed, supported by the military until the afghan government can stand alone using its own military - and hopefully not dependent on an opium crop to sustain its economy
 
Back
Top