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.
During the Bush presidency, which ended on Jan. 20, 2009 with the inauguration of President Obama, U.S. troops were present in Afghanistan for 87.4 months and suffered 570 casualties—a rate of 6.5 deaths per month.
During the Obama presidency, through today, U.S. troops have been present in Afghanistan for 29.1 months and have suffered 970 casualties—a rate of 33.3 deaths per month
I haven't heard this mentioned in the news. Actually, it is rare to hear anything about Afghanistan these days. Maybe this is why. I can see how Obama would not want the press reporting on a 500% increase in the casuality rate under his watch.
Step up military operations, add troops, engage more readily with hostile forces, expand your zones of operation, and guess what?
The best way to have low casualties in a war would be to sit like McClellan in the US Civil War and not fight! Doesn't do too much for success, though.
I haven't heard this mentioned in the news. Actually, it is rare to hear anything about Afghanistan these days. Maybe this is why. I can see how Obama would not want the press reporting on a 500% increase in the casuality rate under his watch.
I think those casualties can thank the ridiculous rules of engagement imposed on the troops when the orator took over.
Considering that for almost 8 years the Bush administration forgot there was a even a war going on in Afghanistan... and that Obama actually decided to fight one there...
All of you right wing puppets on this board started screaming that Obama "should listen to the generals" I warned you all at the the time to be careful for what you wish for because it was clear that if you increase the number of troops, you are, by the laws of probability, going to see a corresponding increase in casualties, unless of course you thought that additional soldiers were going stay quartered in their compounds cleaning their weapons and playing video games.
I also pointed out that Gen McCrystal's doctrine clearly outlined that the change in the rules of engagement would lead to increased casualties. But despite that, you craven "conservatives" continued to scream "Obama! Listen to the Generals", so he did.
So here we are two years later, and you come back in a state of shock that there has been an increase in casualties
Considering that for almost 8 years the Bush administration forgot there was a even a war going on in Afghanistan... and that Obama actually decided to fight one there...
All of you right wing puppets on this board started screaming that Obama "should listen to the generals" I warned you all at the the time to be careful for what you wish for because it was clear that if you increase the number of troops, you are, by the laws of probability, going to see a corresponding increase in casualties, unless of course you thought that additional soldiers were going stay quartered in their compounds cleaning their weapons and playing video games.
I also pointed out that Gen McCrystal's doctrine clearly outlined that the change in the rules of engagement would lead to increased casualties. But despite that, you craven "conservatives" continued to scream "Obama! Listen to the Generals", so he did.
So here we are two years later, and you come back in a state of shock that there has been an increase in casualties
Hmm the increase in troops ended the war in Iraq hence reduced casualties. Remember the surge and all? Obama thought that he could do the same on a different battlefield and it would work. He needs to go back to playing risk or axis and allies and let the military handle the heavy lifting. Go play golf or vacation or something.
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.
