Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I wonder if the Obama people really do believe that this equation will work out. In 2007 Obama spoke out very much against the appointment of Petraeus to do his Surge in Iraq and promised it wouldn't work but now look what he has done. Is Petraeus the only General who can carry off this victory in an unwinnable war? Does Obama really believe that 3 years later and a victory with the Bush generated Surge in Iraq it will work in Afghanistan? My golly gee, he really thinks that another Bush program is worth copying.
Chielgirl, with respect, from almost the outset, we were told that Bin Laden was hiding in the mountains of Afghanistan. It was also clear that the government of Afghanistan were not going to be of any help to us in locating him. To be honest, I was glad I was NOT Bush on that day, because I would have been VERY reactionary. And very happy to have released the planes that would have blown that area off the face of the map. Sorry - but one thing you will always get from me - either on a board like this or in a face-to-face is honesty.
However, no one, with perhaps the exception of Saddam Hussein, was more surprised than me when I heard we were going into Iraq. As furious as I was at the time, I was very much saying "What in the WORLD are we going there for? Bin Laden is not in Iraq. Isn't that who we hold responsible for this?". I did NOT support the US going into Iraq.
By Bush, from the outset.
Your solutions are?
I find it very sad that you would murder innocent people because you can't rein in your emotions.
That's very unfortunate.
I'm against all wars and think the US should stay at home and bring our military home. Now.
But don't blame Obama for something he didn't start.
The "cub reporter" at the publication that facilitated this upset and change in military leadership is nothing more than a keft wing eager beaver out to make his mark. The Rollling Stone is left leaning and anti-war, and I believe they hoped to disrupt the war effort to hasten troop withdrawal. It's coming out now that they were very selective in what they included in the article, choosing only the most negatively charged comments that were made in conversation over hours of talk. It's a very slanted article. Typical of Left wing progressive type of propaganda.
Well, it looks like their attempt is backfiring.
Got any proof of your statements or are you just airing your opinion in public?
You are the editor and writer of the article? Is that how you know what you're trying to pawn off as fact?
Opinion does not equal fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by southward bound
Can you post links to this proving that the "rules of engagement" were issued by McCrystal?
If orders were issued in a war zone, the leading officer is responsible.
It's certainly not anarchy.
ROB - I see you are beginning to realize the war in Afghanistan is not winnable no matter how much we spend and who we put in charge.
I believe the war in Afghanistan is actually winnable. We could use the same method Julius Caesar used against the Franks in the first century BC. That is, to more or less quote the losing Frankish leader, "You have created a silence and called it victory." I do not recall what Caesar said before he executed the Frank. The Romans controlled Frank land for a very long time thereafter.
We can create the silence by killing as many of the Afghani males as we can find. But I do not want us to because that would blight our country forever. We are not Romans, our armies are not the Legions and we do not commit genocide.
A simple return to the tactics of our Grandfathers era is needed! Remember when we "saved the world"
Can you post links to this proving that the "rules of engagement" were issued by McCrystal?
Why not read McChrystal's memo about the need to abandon force protection! I mean after all the folks who caterwaul about "giving the general what he wants" never chose to read what the general was asking for!!
Pre-occupied with protection of our own forces, we have operated in a manner that distances us - physically and psychologically - from the people we seek to protect. In addition, we run the risk of strategic defeat by pursuing tactical wins that cause civilian casualties or unnecessary collateral damage.
Appendix E Reducing Civilian Casualties
Under the direction of the Task Force Commander, sub-unit ground commanders must plan for and rehearse a full range of tactical options to include application of force in unpopulated areas, de-escalation of force within populated ones, or even breaking contact as appropriate to accomplish the mission (emphasis added).
Wen requesting Close Air Support (CAS) ground commander and Joint Tactical Air Controllers (JTAC) must use appropriate munitions or capabilities to achieve desired effects while minimizing the risk to the Afghan people and their property. Ground commanders must exercise similar judgement in the employment of indirect fires.
Why not read McChrystal's memo about the need to abandon force protection! I mean after all the folks who caterwaul about "giving the general what he wants" never chose to read what the general was asking for!!
Pre-occupied with protection of our own forces, we have operated in a manner that distances us - physically and psychologically - from the people we seek to protect. In addition, we run the risk of strategic defeat by pursuing tactical wins that cause civilian casualties or unnecessary collateral damage.
Appendix E Reducing Civilian Casualties
Under the direction of the Task Force Commander, sub-unit ground commanders must plan for and rehearse a full range of tactical options to include application of force in unpopulated areas, de-escalation of force within populated ones, or even breaking contact as appropriate to accomplish the mission (emphasis added).
Wen requesting Close Air Support (CAS) ground commander and Joint Tactical Air Controllers (JTAC) must use appropriate munitions or capabilities to achieve desired effects while minimizing the risk to the Afghan people and their property. Ground commanders must exercise similar judgement in the employment of indirect fires.
That supports what I said in post #50. It was not a secret that McCrystal initiated this policy, and it had its supporters (both Bush and Obama for example), but the troops hated it.
Looks like Petraeus will repeal the McCrystal rules of engagement and allow the troops to fight the war. This could be a game changer, and it might turn out that McCrystal did the troops a big favor by playing himself out of the picture with his blunder.
A military source close to. General David Petraeus told Fox that one of the first things the general will do when he takes over in Afghanistan is to modify the rules of engagement to make it easier for U.S. troops to engage in combat with the enemy, though a Petraeus spokesman pushed back on the claim.
Troops on the ground and some military commanders have said the strict rules -- aimed at preventing civilian casualties -- have effectively forced the troops to fight with one hand tied behind their backs.
Do you think we're still there because he LIKES it?
We are still there because he doesn't know the first thing about war. He is now back peddling about the pull-out date. He makes these promises to people, that he cannot make.
We are still there because he doesn't know the first thing about war. He is now back peddling about the pull-out date. He makes these promises to people, that he cannot make.
We are still there because he doesn't know the first thing about war.
So, if he was an expert on war, we would not be there? Explain please.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
