Obama wants Afghan war over in 3 years, officials say

Obama wants Afghan war over in 3 years, officials say

www.cnn.com

The expected new troop deployment would increase the total U.S. commitment to roughly 100,000 troops in Afghanistan, bolstered by about 45,000 NATO forces.

President Obama is sending 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan but plans to conclude the war and withdraw most U.S. soldiers within three years, senior administration officials told CNN Tuesday

(visit the link for the full news article)

Headline "Obama sending 30K more troops but only to train afghani police and troops returning in 6 months"

The Real Headline "Obama plans a minimum of another 3 years of occupation of Afghanistan"

Plain and simple, he's another George Bush.




And saying 3 years is probably only because he wants to get re-elected, so it's most likely way more than just 3 years.

War-Profiteers have won AGAIN!



www.cnn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Just in time for the 2012 election so he can claim that he ended the war.

People can call Obama dumb all day long, but IMO he is a force to be reckoned with.

Now you folks see why Obama has chosen to continue the necessary war. By 2012 economy should be picking up also. 2 factors that will help Obama to be reelected.

Hmmmm....three years puts us at the end of 2012. So, either Obama is gearing up for re-election or the end of the world. Doubt it's the latter.

What I find most disturbing is that this man is the Commander-in-Chief. Surely he knows that setting any time table -- especially one as ridiculous as 3 years -- is nothing more than saying: "OK...you Taliban just stay put and go into hiding outside of Afganistan, and then we'll just peacefully leave in three years...and then you may resume."

One thing positive to come out of this: By declaring this strategy, this officially becomes Obama's war. So all of those people still blaming Bush for a failed war can now watch as Obama fails even worse.

I never in my life thought I would see the day when the United States displays such utter weakness and lack of respect for those that have already lost their lives in the name of democracy.

This is a disgrace. He should just spare the 30,000 lives instead.

And yes, I'm aware that the quote was a "minimum" of 3 years -- but why say that at all? Was anybody really expecting them home before then?

reply to post by ModernAcademia


Good move by Obama . He promised before election he will send troops to train Afghan forces and he has yet again kept his promise.

reply to post by December_Rain


So let me get this straight

Just because you believe, ok let's say he did
Just because he is saying what he said he would do you support it?

You support another minimum of 3yrs of Afghanistan just because Obama said he would take this path in some shape or form?

Great 3 more years of misery, young Americans and Afghans dying. We shouldn't be there in the first place. I thought things were going to "Change?"

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
reply to post by December_Rain

 

So let me get this straight
Just because you believe, ok let's say he did
Just because he is saying what he said he would do you support it?
You support another minimum of 3yrs of Afghanistan just because Obama said he would take this path in some shape or form?

Yes I support that because it is now US/UK "obligation to restore" Afghanistan to a level before Bush invaded it. USA ruined the country with it's "Shock n' Awe" and now someone has to "repair it". Make it sustainable enough for people to "live". USA CANNOT leave it like it is now, because it's USA's fault you let this happen in first place. USA is RESPONSIBLE to bring it back. USA is paying the price now for what it did to Afghanistan and Iraq under Bush regime and you simply cannot escape it.

Obama knows if he leaves Afghanistan like it is now then there will be no more USA. It will be "ex-USSR" allover again. Obama is trying to rebuild whatever he can in Afghanistan so in the end US can atleast stand with it's head up in the World and in history.

Obama is trying to build the country back so that many soldiers and civilians who have died, their deaths do not go in vain. This is not a Circus where you can enter whenever you wish and leave at your own will. This is "real world".

Welcome to the "real world".

[edit on 1-12-2009 by December_Rain]

reply to post by ModernAcademia


The wars in the mid east will never be over. There can be no victory.

It is a clash of ideology. This is a continuation of "The Crusades"

Just thinking of all those human beings going to waste for 3 more years. How anyone with a concious can continue the destuctive policies that have cost the world thousands and thousands of lives.

More brothers,sisters,daughters,sons,fathers,mothers,aunts,uncles,cousins,best friends,co-workers...dying in vein. Unless you consider money and greed worth dying for.

All based on a lie that killed almost 3000 Ameircans. There is so much Blood on the our Government's hands you can't even see the hands!

May these unjust god-forsaken wars end by sunrise tomorrow....Now that sounds like change to me.

Originally posted by December_Rain
Yes I support that because it is now US/UK "obligation to restore" Afghanistan to a level before Bush invaded it.

By killing more afghani civilians?

Originally posted by December_Rain
USA ruined the country with it's "Shock n' Awe" and now someone has to "repair it".

We ruined the country now let's repair it with through the barrel of a gun with over 100K armed troops?

Originally posted by December_Rain
Make it sustainable enough for people to "live".

How about just letting people actually live?
You know... by not killing them?

Originally posted by December_Rain
USA is paying the price now for what it did to Afghanistan and Iraq and you simply cannot escape it.

You know what an insurgent is?
It's a texan shooting a home intruder with his shotgun
the people there WANT us to escape!

Originally posted by December_Rain
Obama knows if he leaves Afghanistan like it is now then there will be no more USA. It will be "ex-USSR" allover again.

No staying there will make America closer to splitting up like the USSR did.

Originally posted by December_Rain
Obama is trying to build the country back so that many soldiers and civilians who have died, their deaths do not go in vain.

More soldiers will die and more civilians will die
nothing else will come out of this except bankruptcy

Bottom line, they want us out of there.

Originally posted by December_Rain
Welcome to the "real world".

Sorry friend your world is not the real world

You know, it's gonna get brough up at some point, and I had a good laugh thinking about it this morning...

2012 eh?

How interesting he would choose 3 years as the deadline to end the war, seems a bit premature, perhaps a bit arrogant on Obama's part. He better be damn sure he can deliver.

A shady political move if he wants to gain more support for his re-election. If he fails on this promise, the Republicans will win all three, house senate and presidency.

~Keeper

Yep we all know its about re-election.

At least people will see him for what he is, just acting a role, where a council above him, gets to tell him what to do.

Originally posted by peponastick
May these unjust god-forsaken wars end by sunrise tomorrow....Now that sounds like change to me.

The funny thing is that if anglo americans wanted to end this rubbish they could. But war is peace as they say. Stup1d society we have built.

Saying it doesn't make it true.

I hope he we go end the "war", but the war will never end. They have been fighting for thousands of years, and they will fight for thousands of more years, with or without us.

Originally posted by dereistic01
Saying it doesn't make it true.

I hope he we go end the "war", but the war will never end. They have been fighting for thousands of years, and they will fight for thousands of more years, with or without us.

Obama wasn't elected with the claim he would bring an end of "warfare" in the region. He was elected on the premise he would bring the wars to a conclusion.

Yes wars have been fought there long before we ever came and they will continue to rage on long after we leave. But at that point the US wont be blamed.

Mr. Chaffetz said his position about terrorists in Afghanistan is based on an assessment by retired Gen. James L. Jones, Mr. Obama's national security adviser, that al Qaeda has no more than 100 members in Afghanistan and no bases.

washingtontimes.com...

100 terroists vs. over 100,000 soldiers = minimum 3 more years of occupation

Does that equation make any sense to anyone????

3 more years of death and destruction?
Sure - that seems resonable.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
By killing more afghani civilians?

No by providing them security cover while their infrastructure is being rebuild which got destroyed by the fire works of Shock and Awe which was live telecommuted among the huge cheering seeing building beings blown up, remember? Someone has to rebuild it brick by brick and guess who that someone is, it's USA. You didn't thought someone else would come and rebuild it, did you for a second? It was afterall a good show of "Shock n Awe" and the country (who "enjoyed the show sitting in it's bedroom seeing the live telecast of modern weaponry in use and fireworks") responsible is the one who will have to do it. No matter who is the President, it's a country who blowed apart another country and that country has to rebuild it.

We ruined the country now let's repair it with through the barrel of a gun with over 100K armed troops?

Not barrel of guns but so that these troops can provide security cover while the infrastructure is being rebuild. So that these troops can train Afghan troops/cops for which these 30k troops are being sent there. So that the rest of 68k troops can work towards segregating ad isolating the "hardcore extremist" from the moderate Taliban (who are forced to figt, who are fighting because simply they do not have jobs, no economy...wanna know why? Because someone blowed away the building where they used to work, someone took away their livehood which they had). So the Afghanis don't have to fear every time they take a step outside outside their door it will be their last time, some "hardcore extremist or foreign fighter" who came in hordes after the invasion will murder them.

And don't tell me you are implying to leave the NATO and ally troops there all alone, are you? These are the same allies USA rallied behind itself to launch an attack. These allies and NATO troops doing the same thing. USA has obligation to these allies also who lost their soldiers, the obligation to do what the country USA said, to make Afghanistan "habitable".

How about just letting people actually live?You know... by not killing them?

That is the intent for sure. By not killing them and training them in self defense and with a proper running army/cop so they don't get slaughtered like animals after the US security cover is removed.

You know what an insurgent is? It's a texan shooting a home intruder with his shotgun the people there WANT us to escape!

Yes they do but not before USA rebuild everything it destroyed. Not before USA make it safe enough for them once again to live which they are not now.

No staying there will make America closer to splitting up like the USSR did.

That may be your view but you are forgetting USSR didn't stayed back to rebuild Afghanistan. Infact they left it war torn and battle scarred same like US did after using Afghanis to defeat USSR. Because of that mistake Afghanistan came in control of Taliban and OBL. USA is not going to repeat the same mistake again.

More soldiers will die and more civilians will die nothing else will come out of this except bankruptcy

See you are not worried about how you leave Afghanistan after destroying it because it is affecting the economy, in the end it comes down to it. You are not worried whether they live or die. You do not are what the invasion did to other country as long as it's not affecting your pocket. That is selfishness, accept it!

Should have thought about that before "invasion", it's too late now and there simply is no way out of it. After "8 years of destroying a country you will have to spend sometime to repair it". As I said earlier it is not a circus show where you can enter and exit on whim.

Bottom line, they want us out of there.

Yes they do after USA undo the damage, if USA cannot then it has to repair it.

Sorry friend your world is not the real world

I hope that is true because in my world a corrupt and arrogant leader of a nation led the whole country and it's allies based on lies into a different country to ransack it, destroy it. Then the whole country was behind the that leader and was cheering the leader to see the fireworks, lets call it Shock n' Awe shall we.

After 8 years of rummaging the country the leader left the throne with pocketfull of money laughing on the stupidity for others to clean up the mess. Now a different leader came in and is trying to repair the country but the nation has realised it was being fooled and they want to get out. They want to get out because they are short on money not caring that the country they invaded is in shambles now. The new leader tries to tell it is not possible to do so without repairing the damage caused by previous leader, but the nation simply do not want to admit they were part of the crime and the first leader.

They simply didn't care earlier what was happening because they had money. But in 8 years the first leader looted the country and now there is very little to none so they are worried they dont have money to spend on luxury and burgers. While not thinking how 8 years of rummaging a different country can be fixed in 8 months!

That's my world, hope your is different.