It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


It's official: President Obama will send 34,000 more troops to Afghanistan

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 12:35 AM

It's official: President Obama will send 34,000 more troops to Afghanistan

After months of wondering what President Obama's decision will be regarding the war in Afghanistan, the wait is over. On December 1 he will announce his plan to send 34,000 more troops. Military officials and others expect Obama to settle on a middle-ground option that would deploy an eventual 32,000 to 35,000 U.S. forces to the 8-year-old conflict. That rough figure has stood as the most likely option since before Obama's last large war council meeting earlier this month, when he tasked military planners with rearranging the timing and makeup of some of the deployments. This troop surge isn't exactly surprising, since it is what him and his cabinet have been leaning towards anyway.

Read the full article here.

Announcing his plan...[The Associated Press: White House]

Here is another article giving truth to "This troop surge isn't exactly surprising..."

Obama Narrows Afghan Options: 34,000-Troop Escalation Favored

In March, President Obama approved a roughly 21,000 man escalation in Afghanistan, which at the time was an enormous escalation of a war which President Bush had himself escalated just a few months prior. Gen. Stanley McChrystalThis escalation accomplished little, and 2009 has ended up being the deadliest year by far since the 2001 US invasion. President Obama will therefore be sending another massive escalation to the nation very soon.

Sorry for the two headlines, but they go hand in hand, and the 2nd headline gives proof to the facts presented in the first (check the sources if you wish to see for yourself).

[edit on 26-11-2009 by highlyoriginal]

posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 02:05 AM
I wonder if he'll be pulling troops out of iraq anytime soon? I seem to remember he said he'd do both.

It's been so long I've almost forgot what victory was supposed to look like in afghanistan. Let us hope that this troop increase will help. Maybe with better numbers less of our armed forces will die.

I'm saddened hearing about our soldiers dying. Do something, and get it done.

posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 02:23 AM
So much for ending the war....

Typical politicians...

But wait, it is change ... Bush sent 20,000 more troops right? so the change is more troops!

posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 03:15 AM
It's really sad that no matter who we elect in the US, the things they promised that mean the most to us all, never end up happening. Either that or they are done way differently than proposed (for the most part anyway).

It's time for change, and if change doesn't happen soon enough, then there will be some sort of revolution between us all.

First though, politicians need to stop making these empty promises... ha! Like that will ever happen.

posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 03:44 AM

Originally posted by Rockpuck
So much for ending the war....

Obama actually said he'd withdraw all troops out of Iraq by 2011 and increase troops in Afghanistan, it was one of his campaign promised. You can speculate all you want, but it aint 2011 yet.

posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 05:55 AM
Yeah well I wouldn't bet a dollar that Obama pulls troops out by 2011. If he does he will either

A) only bring back some troops


B) he brings them all back to prepare for 2012!

posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 09:34 PM
Why did it take President Obama 6 months of meetings and soul-searching
to make such a basic decision? Also, why is it so important to drive the
terrorists out of Afghanistan into some other haven on this big planet?
Moving 34,000 more targets into Afghanistan will generate larger numbers
of our sons/daughters being slaughtered. More excitement for the
satan-owned news media and more funerals for distraught, grieving
families. I thought we elected a BOLD president who guaranteed CHANGE.

posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 10:06 PM
OOPS.. I posted this in the wrong thread. Too much Turkey and Wine
on this Thanksgiving evening!

[edit on 26-11-2009 by carewemust]

posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 10:11 PM
If i recall correct. Obama said the Goal was not to win the war. That would mean that his goal is just to stabilize Afghanistan so it can be safe to build and drift the oil pipeline. And that will take a lot of man power.

posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 10:16 PM
Didn't someone say in this thread that President Obama sent 21,000
additional troops to Afghanistan in March of this year? Why didn't that
deployment get the attention that this impending one is generating?

posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 10:25 PM
reply to post by carewemust

Sending troops over there in March was a good start, but where or what were the objectives.

We had a new general, 21,000 more troops but still no defined mission IMO.

34,000 more troops are being sent because the general requested more troops. How many months ago did he request those troops?

I think the reason this one is getting so much attention is because Obama took his time responding to the request.

I'm await to see what are Obama's objectives in Afghanistan. That will ultimately tell if this is a necessary war or not.

posted on Nov, 26 2009 @ 11:05 PM
reply to post by jam321

Yes, his major prime-time speech on Tuesday night will be interesting.
I hope it's more than the tired old line describing how we must face the
enemy on their soil to keep them from attacking us on ours. This strategy
guarantees a lot of American deaths...our men and women in uniform.

posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 06:17 AM
Obama has now sent more troops then Bush (not including initial buildup).......not that I am for or against it....its the idea that I remember the frenzied opposition to Bush and it seems Obama is getting very little flak over this decision.

We live in interesting and very scary times.

[edit on 27-11-2009 by whiteraven]

posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 06:24 AM
Wow! what an impressive "change". Realy, now i understand why he got the Nobel Peace Price. It clearly makes sence all of a sudden.

tssss. What a artist this Obama, noting less, nothing more

[edit on 27-11-2009 by ThraexX]

posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 08:06 AM
I'm no Obama fan, but he did clearly signal a willingness to escalate the war in Afghanistan during the campaign. Now that he's actually doing it, no one should be surprised.

For my part, I don't necessarily disagree with it and we need to make sure that our forces in Afghanistan have the resources to succeed. That said, I'd like to know why it took so long for Obama to make this decision and more importantly, how he defines victory in Afghanistan. If he can't explain how sending more troops helps to win this war, or what victory is in Afghanistan, then we shouldn't even be over there at all.

posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 09:33 PM

Originally posted by whiteraven
Obama has now sent more troops then Bush (not including initial buildup).......not that I am for or against it....its the idea that I remember the frenzied opposition to Bush and it seems Obama is getting very little flak over this decision.

We live in interesting and very scary times.

Which is why he is such a good servant for TPTB. Obama has been established as being anti-war and was accepted and promoted by many anti-war groups. So very few question it when he sends troops to their death because he is against war, unlike Bush who was a war monger.

posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 09:35 PM
I hope he sends himself too!!!!

What a nevermind T&C's I will just stop right here.

posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 10:50 PM
reply to post by Rockpuck

To set the record straight, before the election Obama said more troops were needed in Afghanistan and promised to send more which he did send 4000 more in March. He also said we should go into Pakistan, but that hasn't happened yet.

My guess is that if he decided not to send any more troops, you would say he is "cut and running". You would complain either way.

So I would like to ask you, what should Obama be doing to win the war in Afghanistan? What is your solution?

I don't know if sending 34,000 more troops is the answer, but I am willing to give Obama a chance to win this war. The same chance I gave Bush when he said we needed more troops in Iraq.

When it comes to putting our troops in harms way, I think that should transcend politics.

I wish our troops the best of luck.

posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 10:53 PM
Well # Obama then. The only reason I voted for the silly bastard was I thought he was getting us out of these wars in eighteen months. What a #ing joke
I want my vote back!

posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 10:59 PM
I know people will want to defend Obama on this because he said he'd escalate the troop levels in afghanistan. That was before 10.2 unemployment (at least), the bank bailouts, the stimulus package, etc.

We simply cannot afford this war. 2011? Don't make me laugh. He said he'd pull the troops out of Iraq DAY ONE. Yes...DAY ONE and you trust this administration on 2011? The only way that happens is an immediate pullout which will NEVER happen. We'll never leave Iraq either.

You want to fix this...send all the troops OR BRING THEM ALL HOME. End it fast or END IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Neither is going to happen.

I want the troops home. Enough blood has been shed...and for what? The situation is still the same as it was 8 years ago.

Asking for troops was the warning sign people. We need to get out.

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in