Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-26-2013, 07:20 AM
 
45,577 posts, read 27,172,269 times
Reputation: 23882

Advertisements

Michael Moore's website? This report was in August 2010. I had not heard this. I wonder what the current number is.

More U.S. Troops Killed in Afghanistan Under Obama Than Under Bush

During former-Pres. George W. Bush’s tenure, 575 U.S. troops were killed in Afghanistan.

Since President Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009, 580 U.S. troops have perished there (as of August 19).

In just 19 months, the Afghan war under Obama has claimed more U.S. lives than the previous administration’s entire 88-month quagmire.

That number does not include the exorbitant number of suicides, of which June 2010 brought the highest number in U.S. military history. In that single month alone, seven GIs killed themselves while deployed in Afghanistan or Iraq, along with dozens of others stateside.

That number also does not include the vastly inflamed number of GIs who are maimed, paralyzed, endure brain trauma and lose limbs. According to ABC news, in 2010, U.S. troops are being maimed at 12 times the rate they were in 2008.

These statistics are joined by the highest level of military spending in world history, and new reports that show 2010 to be the deadliest year for Afghan civilians as well as U.S./NATO troops.



I figured this would happen - because there is a Commander in Chief that really doesn't care about the troops. They need to come home if we are not dedicated to winning the battle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-26-2013, 07:21 AM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
20,054 posts, read 18,279,569 times
Reputation: 3826
Told you so. The only defense the Obamatrons have are that it was the "noble" war or that it was the war Bush should've escalated, while others blame Bush for starting Afghanistan in the first place. LOL

The anti-war crowd is splintering both the establishment Dems as well as the establishment GOP. I'm finally glad to start seeing this happen on the "left".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 07:38 AM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,119,311 times
Reputation: 9409
Obama changed the rules of engagement. Even when shot at, don't shoot back unless specifically instructed to.

No. I'm not kidding. That's the liberal version of "war."

When you can't shoot back, there's a good chance the enemy will shoot at you more often and with more intensity. And people died because of it.

Of course, the media won't report that tiny little tidbit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 07:50 AM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,450,045 times
Reputation: 4243
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
Obama changed the rules of engagement. Even when shot at, don't shoot back unless specifically instructed to.

No. I'm not kidding. That's the liberal version of "war."

When you can't shoot back, there's a good chance the enemy will shoot at you more often and with more intensity. And people died because of it.

Of course, the media won't report that tiny little tidbit.
Obama didn't want "his people" getting killed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 07:58 AM
 
45,577 posts, read 27,172,269 times
Reputation: 23882
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
Obama changed the rules of engagement. Even when shot at, don't shoot back unless specifically instructed to.

No. I'm not kidding. That's the liberal version of "war."

When you can't shoot back, there's a good chance the enemy will shoot at you more often and with more intensity. And people died because of it.

Of course, the media won't report that tiny little tidbit.

U.S. Marines Tread Softly in Southern Afghanistan

Remarkably, in the face of the resistance, the Marines, who have a reputation as hard chargers, rarely fired back. They wanted to, but their command had warned the young Marines that even one civilian casualty could negate the No. 1 objective of this operation -- winning the trust and respect of the farmers of the Helmand River Valley.


Don’t Shoot Back at Taliban Terrorists! Obama’s First Military Order

But the Marines, thanks to Mr. Obama, are conducting this mission with their hands tied.
The first order from America’s new commander is that the Marines must not return enemy fire for fear of killing an Afghan non-combatant.

...
The Marines of Bravo’s Company 1st Platoon sleep beside groves of poppies Troops of the 2nd Platoon walk through the fields on strict orders not to swat the heavy opium bulbs. The Afghan farmers and laborers, who are engaged in scraping the resin from the bulbs, smile and wave at the passing soldiers.

The Helmand province is the world’s largest cultivator of opium poppies – the crop used to make heroin.

Afghanistan grew 93 percent of the world’s poppy crop last year, with Helmand alone responsible for more than half of the opium production in the country, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

Heroin, as it turns out, represents the only staple of the Afghan economy. The country manufactures no domestic products for exportation and the rocky terrain yields no cash crops – except, of course, the poppies.

The poppies fuel the great Jihad against the United States and the Western world. More than 3,500 tons of raw opium is gleaned from the poppy crops every year, producing annual revenues for the Taliban and al Qaeda that range from $5 billion to $16 billion.
Destroying the fields could very well put an end to terrorist activities in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

But the Obama Administration remains intent upon protecting the poppies so that the Afghan farmers and local drug lords can reap the benefits of what purports to be a bumper crop.

Many Marines in the field are scratching their heads over the situation.


Why in the world would anyone doubt Obama's allegiance to this country? Don't fire against the enemy? Sending money and weapons for warfare to Muslim Brotherhood controlled Egypt? Much of what he does benefits our "frenemies" in the Middle East.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 08:00 AM
 
Location: southern california
61,288 posts, read 87,405,055 times
Reputation: 55562
the wars have continued and escaladed in the mideast we did not leave. hence more deaths.
sad to say its not about what is said or done its about who says and does it.
as to the campaign promise to get us out of iraq. not kept---- he simply took out regular troops and replaced them with far more expensive blackwater aka Xe aka mercenaries aka "security forces".
40% of DOD budget is blackwater.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 08:06 AM
 
382 posts, read 588,313 times
Reputation: 139
Michael Moore has an ideology, he is not a party based person. People who are party based do what the party says and goes with it. Obama right or wrong, Bush right or wrong. Moore has a value and idea based belief system. If anyone does not fit into it he is against them. I agree with Moore on National Health care, not on guns. I agree with some of what he has to say. I disagree on other things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 08:10 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,771,962 times
Reputation: 24863
I would like to know the economic reason we are still in Afghanistan. If there are huge resources our plutocracy wishes to control why not just exterminate the Afghanis. there are not that many, instead of trying not to hurt their feelings. We may need Afghani resources but we most definitely do not need Afghanis.

I think we should leave the entire area and let them get on with their internal wars. After they have weakened themselves we and offer slight assistance for their treasures or just kill the survivors and steal the treasures. That is what we did in North America not so long ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 08:11 AM
 
13,900 posts, read 9,768,836 times
Reputation: 6856
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
I would like to know the economic reason we are still in Afghanistan. If there are huge resources our plutocracy wishes to control why not just exterminate the Afghanis. there are not that many, instead of trying not to hurt their feelings. We may need Afghani resources but we most definitely do not need Afghanis.

I think we should leave the entire area and let them get on with their internal wars. After they have weakened themselves we and offer slight assistance for their treasures or just kill the survivors and steal the treasures. That is what we did in North America not so long ago.
I think that's the plan. We are drawing down and plan to leave.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 08:36 AM
 
17,468 posts, read 12,934,462 times
Reputation: 6763
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
Obama changed the rules of engagement. Even when shot at, don't shoot back unless specifically instructed to.

No. I'm not kidding. That's the liberal version of "war."

When you can't shoot back, there's a good chance the enemy will shoot at you more often and with more intensity. And people died because of it.

Of course, the media won't report that tiny little tidbit.
Now we have this........Soldiers told not to shoot Taliban bomb layers - Telegraph

Who the hell is making the rules to kill as many soldiers as possible.....seems to me someone is playing the devil's advocate!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top