It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

NATO allies rally to Obama request with 7,000 more troops for Afghanistan

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 11:00 AM
link   
One of the original complaints was the American generals dominated the operation and certain Europeans, (i.e France, Germany) did not want to commit thousands and thousands of soldiers if their generals had no influence.

Which is a fair argument.

If the Conservatives win the general election next year, which is likely, then they've promised to increase British troops not by a few hundred - but a few thousand. British presence could be increased over 20,000+

Germany is difficult. Even though the nation is the third largest provide of soldiers in Afghanistan, Militarism is a socio-political taboo (started two catastrophic world wars)

However, President Obama promising to leave in 2011 is political suicide and appeasement to the Taliban.

[edit on 5-12-2009 by infinite]




posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
However, President Obama promising to leave in 2011 is political suicide and appeasement to the Taliban.



I'm no Obama fanboy by any stretch of the imagination but...

Statements like this will lead to disappointments. He nor anybody from his administration "Promised" Anything. Didn't you watch the recent hearings? They eluded to an exit date tentatively set around that period.

If people start making statements of "Promises" Well I'll tell you right now. REMEMBER me saying so.

It aint going to happen unless the Talibums quit fighting or surrender.



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Just to piggy-back on that point:


The US won't pull out of Afghanistan in 2011.
President Obama's top national security adviser, who has played a key part in designing the new Afghanistan and Pakistan strategy, has been trying to clear up some confusion about the exit strategy.
Gen James Jones told me that "in no manner, shape or form" would the US withdraw from Afghanistan in 2011.


video included - BBC



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by St Udio
 


yeah and i have the feeling the next step is to invade pakistan and that is why we are sending more troops and prolonging the war in other countries.
think about it- pakistan has nukes and has threatened india numerous times. we have outsourced our businesses to india- and pakistan we have accused of harboring the taliban and bin laden.
put 2 and 2 together and it seems to me we will be waging war in pakistan also shortly
the us is going to "hell in a handbasket" quickly



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
First these are paltry numbers. Great Brittan 500 additional soldiers, wow talk about stepping up to the plate there!


Check you'r facts, chum..

These are 500 additional, on top of the 500 additional we sent two months ago to a total force over 10,000, the second largest force in Afghanistan.

We're also doing the lions share of the fighting and dying in Helmand too...

10,000 might not seem like a lot to you, but it is 10% of our entire Army.

Back off..



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
First these are paltry numbers. Great Brittan 500 additional soldiers, wow talk about stepping up to the plate there!


Check you'r facts, chum..

These are 500 additional, on top of the 500 additional we sent two months ago to a total force over 10,000, the second largest force in Afghanistan.

We're also doing the lions share of the fighting and dying in Helmand too...

10,000 might not seem like a lot to you, but it is 10% of our entire Army.

Back off..


I'll quote the entire reply.

Here HERE!


Good, Bad or indifferent in peoples opinion of the war. The US has a true friend/Allie in the UK.

Many here appreciate them for it.



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   
i will say nothing bad about the british- as was said they are really the only country we can really count on.
they are our biggest ally.
they did a huge job in the kuwait invasion too.



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 





10,000 might not seem like a lot to you, but it is 10% of our entire Army.


Yeah what are the rest of them doing? Getting their hair done or pedicures and manicures? Walking their poodles? Knitting or crocheting? Since it’s Royal Dutch Shell’s pipeline that all the fighting and dying is over, and it’s owned by a British Lord frankly it’s Black Water/XE that should be getting paid by Royal Dutch Shell to do all the fighting and dying. Alas then it would be exactly what it is, not a war, but a rape of a land for profit and control. Can’t have people thinking that’s going on!

This is how many British soldiers should be there: 0 (zero)
This is how many American soldiers should be there: 0 (zero)

This is how much respect I have for our warmongering governments and the military industrial complex: 0 (zero)



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Yeah what are the rest of them doing? Getting their hair done or pedicures and manicures? Walking their poodles? Knitting or crocheting?


Don't be an arse all your life. Such is the amount of troops we have there, those we have back at home are on rotation. They get 6 months back in the UK, then do 6 months prep and then it's 6 months back to Afghanistan.

Not all the 100k or so men and women in the Army are not combat troops, so we really are at almsot full stretch if we are to allow the rotation's to work and to give the guys a break before being sent back out.

They have families and children too, you know.



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


Of course since having those massive one and two million man armies in the first and second world war we have come to realize nations can be conquered in no time with 10,000 men!

Meanwhile 8 years later...

You have 10,000 security gaurds securing a pipeline, copper mines and poppy fields.

Don't kid yourself.

When England was really in danger in World War II practically every man and woman in the nation served in some capacity.

The reality is there is no real terrorist threat, and that's why we haven't mobilized to conquer these nations and secure them like we did in World War I and World War II.

I might be an Arse but I live in Miami not Orlando, when the heck did they get a Disney Land over in England friend?

Citizens need to wake up to the fact we aren't fighting these wars to win them, because we could have won them a long time ago. We are fighting these wars to rape and pillage other nations.

One could expect that much out of England, but seeing America do it sure is a sad departure from what our founders ever wanted.



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 06:06 PM
link   
What i can see developing over the last few weeks besides the domestic issues facing each nation, is that a war with Iran is on the horizon. Which really sucks, but watching our nations pump in all of these troops to take out 100 "CiA backed" terrorists leads me to believe that something bigger is coming. We've got Iran surrounded, and by the spring, we'll have enough troops for an invasion. Iran just recently announced they are building like 10 more nuclear sites, in complete defiance of the rest of the world. If they could actually prove they have a need for that many facilities, i could see it, but we dont even have that many here in Canada i dont think??

I feel that Iran does have the right to nuclear tech, but do just go overboard like this in complete ignorance tells me that they want us to invade. Like they got something else up their sleeve???

I am not for war, as matter of fact, i think it is obsolete. I'd like to think we've grown out of that phase, but apparantly TPTB dont want to.

for 100 Al-Ciada they would have better luck sending covert ops. i feel.



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Of course since having those massive one and two million man armies in the first and second world war we have come to realize nations can be conquered in no time with 10,000 men!


If you knew your history, you'd know that before BOTH world wars, the UK's standing Army was not much bigger than it is today. Only with an actual Declaration of War against another State and sustained losses (pre-Somme trench warfare or Dunkirk) were people called upon in masse to join the Army.


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
You have 10,000 security gaurds securing a pipeline, copper mines and poppy fields.


Really? Please kindly point me and others to evidence of British troops doing any of the above. What pipeline is it that runs through Afghanistan?


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
When England was really in danger in World War II practically every man and woman in the nation served in some capacity.


Only in 1941 did the whole nation get spurred to do something. At the outset of war, before Dunkirk and the Battle of Britain, the British Army was still a volunteer, professional force.

Oh, it's the UK mate. England is just one part of the UK and the least powerful element, in terms of politics.


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
The reality is there is no real terrorist threat, and that's why we haven't mobilized to conquer these nations and secure them like we did in World War I and World War II.


The reality is that these are a small bunch of terrorists and there is no need for mass-mobilisation. if you're trying to compare this little counter-insurgency operation to Total warfare, you're a fool.


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
I might be an Arse but I live in Miami not Orlando, when the heck did they get a Disney Land over in England friend?


What has that got to do with the price of Fish on a wednesday?


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Citizens need to wake up to the fact we aren't fighting these wars to win them, because we could have won them a long time ago. We are fighting these wars to rape and pillage other nations.


Ah yes, the flow of Oil and other resources out of Afghanistan proves that point. Booming economy, massive exports. Yes, I had forgotten that....

What a load of crock. If your trying to hold this up as an example of neo-colonialism, you're again woefully misguided. Afghansitan is COSTING money year on year with no net return, what exactly are we "raping and pillaging", except our own national treasuries?


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
One could expect that much out of England, but seeing America do it sure is a sad departure from what our founders ever wanted.


Again, it's the UK mate, not England! Some of the biggest proponents of Empire the UK ever had were actually Scots! Don't just blame the English!

Oh and America has been "raping and pillaging" natives and other countries since it's founding. Get off your high horse.



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 12:19 AM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


yep i agree with you on america raping and pillaging- look what we did to the native americans.
that was just wrong. we could have learned so much from them but instead decided to slaughter them after they welcomed us.
and really the only time we have ever fought COMMUNISM is against them -we havealways fought SOCIALISM but gov't and media portray it as communism and we are as bad as the countries we wage war against
i am not afraid to speak out against my country because it is a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF MINE- and i hope they are reading this-they want to come and get me so be it- but they better bring body bags



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 12:54 AM
link   
This is much bigger then Afghanistan, there isn't a need for 120,000 troops in Afghanistan when the Taliban has fled.

This is much bigger, Iran, I believe.



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 02:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by xstealth
This is much bigger then Afghanistan, there isn't a need for 120,000 troops in Afghanistan when the Taliban has fled.

This is much bigger, Iran, I believe.


Agreed, Iran is the bigger picture to look at here. Expect Israel to get the fearmongering going again soon. I wouldn't be surprised to see something crazy happen sometime in the new year to provoke a war with Iran. Although we've all been expecting this for some time now, it does look as though the final pieces are being put into place. No more attention on Iraq either anymore, which gets one wondering what might be brewing there that we dont know about.



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 11:37 AM
link   
yeah i forgot about the whole iran/isreal mess. hasn't been talked about alot lately.
i really have the feeling the world leaders are playing a very unfriendly/dangerous game of risk(if you ever played the game you know what i am talking about)



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfoot1212
 


Oh ya played risk, axis and allies, u name it. Loved those games!!

Israel's always threatening someone with war, they aren't happy unless they are. And i mean the israeli gov, not the people themselves.

I feel sorry for all the innocents that have been going thru this crap for all these decades. Like wow, could u imagine living everyday in Gaza??? or in some war torn african country? I am truly grateful for where i live, as its probably one of the most peaceful spots in the world. Thats why we call it God's country here
It's truly a paradise!

Which brings me to another point. The Iran/Iraq/NK/Pakistan stuff is only what we've been told about. What about all the other wars that are probably going on, that are not reported??

If u add them all up, we could very well be in WW3 now. There are alot of countries involved!



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by eArth33lr
 


yeah that is what i was alluding too.
the world will never be a peaceful place- be it because of religion(main one and has been happening since the dawn of man), drugs, money hungry leaders intend on world domineering,or just 2 people fighting for food- add more if you want- those were just off the top of my head



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfoot1212
 


I sure would like to think we should be working at getting past all of that tho. I'm sure everyone can agree that the only way to change whats going on, is to change ourselves. Practice what we preach. What will it take to get humanity to stop killing each other? I for one wish that this will happen in 2012. If not anything else, it would sure be a awesome if something happened on either a physical or mental level that would forever change mankind. To teach us that we are all connected, and that we all need each other to survive. And that we are so much more, and capable of great things! If its alien intervention then so be it, if its a war or a plague that wipes out half the population (hopefully one that only takes out those responsible for the BS). Either way, i do feel the earth or something is going to eventually respond to our violent and poisonous actions.
It needs to happen i think. we're due for a cleansing.



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by eArth33lr
 


it will never happen-even tho i wish it would- humans by nature are greedy and bloodthirsty and domineering and always want to fight with someone and take what they have if they don't have it.
or push their beliefs on others and when they don't agree they kill them.
look all thru history all wars have been fought over these things- "i want what you have because i don't have it" you don't believe in my god so you are wrong and need to die" etc etc
humans will never be peaceful to one another



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join