U.S. Considers Faster Pullout in Afghanistan after Obama / Karzai videoconference fallout

page: 1
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 04:25 PM
link   

New York Times: U.S. Considers Faster Pullout in Afghanistan

President Obama, frustrated in his dealings with President Karzai, is considering speeding up troop withdrawals from Afghanistan and even leaving no American troops after 2014

WASHINGTON —

Mr. Obama is committed to ending America’s military involvement in Afghanistan by the end of 2014, and Obama administration officials have been negotiating with Afghan officials about leaving a small “residual force” behind. But his relationship with Mr. Karzai has been slowly unraveling, and reached a new low after an effort last month by the United States to begin peace talks with the Taliban in Qatar.

Mr. Karzai promptly repudiated the talks and ended negotiations with the United States over the long-term security deal that is needed to keep American forces in Afghanistan after 2014.

A videoconference between Mr. Obama and Mr. Karzai designed to defuse the tensions ended badly, according to both American and Afghan officials with knowledge of it. Mr. Karzai, according to those sources, accused the United States of trying to negotiate a separate peace with both the Taliban and their backers in Pakistan, leaving Afghanistan’s fragile government exposed to its enemies.


Peace talks with the enemy is where poor generals with a failed war strategy end up.

Weak strategic thinking and planning by US and then NATO generals has dragged out the Western intervention in Afghanistan since 2001 and caused far more casualties to our soldiers than was ever necessary.

The military general staff has lacked vision about the enemy and failed to comprehend and react appropriately to intelligence reports that Al Qaeda, the Taliban and other jihadi terror groups are proxies for hostile states, typically managed from Pakistan and funded from Saudi Arabia.

Military strategic essentials have been neglected, such as - when occupying territory, always ensure secure supply routes from one strong point to another.

Instead NATO-ISAF forces in Afghanistan have been deployed in isolated bases, deployed more like tethered goats as bait for the enemy than a conquering or liberating army.

Some combination of military incompetence by the generals and a preference for appeasement on the part of the civilian political leadership has perversely left the West bribing our enemies within the Pakistani terrorist-proxy-controlling state and continuing business-as-usual with our enemies in the Saudi jihadi-financing state.

It’s never too late to learn lessons and adopt an alternative competent and aggressive military strategy and to that end, I have published a detailed improved AfPak military strategy in posts in the Republican Intelligence forum which I administer.

Military strategy against the Taliban in Afghanistan & Pakistan

AfPak Mission Channel on YouTube

AfPak military strategy blog




posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Now he better kick out all illegals working with fake papers and give those jobs to our veterans.

Maybe I'm asking too much from him.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Trueman
Now he better kick out all illegals working with fake papers and give those jobs to our veterans.

Maybe I'm asking too much from him.


I think Veterans can do a lot better than the jobs illegals do. If those are the jobs they are being stuck with then they will not want to come back. The reason illegals do the jobs they do is because nobody else will. As for leaving Afganistan the sooner the better. Let the Chinese deal with that mess on their border. Also of course you negotiate with the enemy that is how wars end. I do not recall a US war ending without an agreement with enemy. Unless you exteminate them and negotiated settlement is how the vast majority of wars end.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 05:08 PM
link   
the u.s failed to learn from history .. NO outside invader has ever conquered afghanistan ..

u.s had and has no valid reason to have military in afghanistan . the sooner the u.s is out - entirely the better .. for both afghanistan and for the u.s ..



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrSpad
As for leaving Afganistan the sooner the better. Let the Chinese deal with that mess on their border. Also of course you negotiate with the enemy that is how wars end.

Sure, if a war drags out into a long stalemate then negotiations do happen.

But when you can win a war you often do win it and either your enemy unconditionally surrenders or they get wiped out on the battlefield.


Originally posted by MrSpad
I do not recall a US war ending without an agreement with enemy.

Do you recall World War 2? We didn't negotiate with the Nazis, we required them to sign an unconditional surrender and their last general standing did.

Hitler did not get negotiated with. He killed himself and his body was burned. A lot of his top henchmen got executed at war crimes trials.

Do you recall the Iraq War? We didn't negotiate with Saddam Hussein. We, or the Iraqs with our help, put Saddam on trial and he was hung.


Originally posted by MrSpad
Unless you exteminate them and negotiated settlement is how the vast majority of wars end.

Exterminating the Talban works for me.

Or if we turn the screws on the Pakistani military who run the Taliban and the Pakistanis tell the Taliban to surrender unconditionally, that also works for me.

Only the majority of wars which you don't think you can win end with negotiations. As for the wars you win, you can dictate the terms on the losing side.

The problem with this war, is the poor generals we've had all along didn't before and don't now have much of a clue as to how to win it.

But just because the poor generals we've got right now, can't break the stalemate, that doesn't mean that better generals could not break the stalemate and win because I am sure that better generals could win.

All it takes is a winning strategy and good enough generals to carry it through to victory. That's what we did in World War 2. That's what we did against Saddam.

I have published a strategy to win this war which good generals could use to win this war with. That's what my links in the OP link to - my strategy to win.

That's why we need new generals instead of peace talks with the enemy, because winning is better and it makes the fight worth while.


edit on 9-7-2013 by Mr Peter Dow because: typos



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 06:58 PM
link   
This sounds suspiciously like positioning for a contractor takeover.

The U.S. 'military' involvement may have achieved a goal of defending Afghanistan's main industry.

The contractors may be bidding for all we know.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
This sounds suspiciously like positioning for a contractor takeover.

The U.S. 'military' involvement may have achieved a goal of defending Afghanistan's main industry.

The contractors may be bidding for all we know.



Then send the mercs over there to die, and let our troops come home.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 07:12 PM
link   
Better Generals could win, for 40yrs there have been spineless politicians as generals..

career promotion hounds instead of honorable hard working troop adored men.


MAD DOG MATTIS could have won the war, McChrystal is a choad.


What really is needed.. Lewis Burwell Puller.. he can win anything




When an Army captain asked him for the direction of the line of retreat,
Col Puller called his Tank Commander, gave them the Army position, and ordered:
"If they start to pull back from that line, even one foot, I want you to open fire on them."
Turning to the captain, he replied "Does that answer your question?
We're here to fight." At Koto-ri in Korea
- Chesty Puller at Koto-ri in Korea





edit on 9-7-2013 by HanzHenry because: bb codes



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Trueman
Now he better kick out all illegals working with fake papers and give those jobs to our veterans.

Maybe I'm asking too much from him.


Or people could stop supporting companies that ship their manufacturing out to China to make themselves a few more million a year.

Not everything is the governments fault, people have to take some responsibility for allowing these things to happen and supporting businesses with no ethics.

The US needs to leave Afghanistan for one reason, those military resources will need to be used elsewhere. America cannot survive without being at war in one way or another. Too many businesses will suffer, thousands of troops will need assistance when arriving home, the business of war will end. That can't happen, especially not with almost $17 trillion of debt.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
This sounds suspiciously like positioning for a contractor takeover.

The U.S. 'military' involvement may have achieved a goal of defending Afghanistan's main industry.

The contractors may be bidding for all we know.


It doesn't sound from the reports of that Obama / Karzai video-conference that they were discussing which contractor offers the best quote and will do the best job. Sounds like they had more profound disagreements.

As for me, no, I'm a political and military writer these days, never held nor offered a military contract in my life, only ever worked as a college lecturer.

Also winning this war in very short order is more than a purely mercenary job that needs doing here.

For example, there are ways to turn the screw on the Taliban's masters (that would be the Pakistani military) that don't involve firing a shot. Like freezing all aid money and IMF bailouts to Pakistan, (nothing helps quite as much as not paying the enemy's war costs as well as your own).

Then there's seizing or taking out Pakistani satellite TV. That takes more equipment and legal authority than the private sector mercenaries have at their disposal.

Then there is bombing Pakistan with heavy air power and missiles. Again the private sector does not have enough air power to be useful against Pakistan.

Pakistan is a modern 21st Century military power with nuclear weapons and no private mercenary contractor can stand up against Pakistan. Fact.

We need to use official NATO forces and national and international governments and their organisations to win this but with new help from smarter people like myself to add needed brain-power to current organisations.

I don't suppose they'd ask me since I've never been in the military but if needed I'd volunteer to do the Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Europe (DSACEUR) of NATO job (that's the highest rank in NATO open to a Briton like myself).

As well, I'd like Condoleezza Rice as my boss, so she could be appointed as the new Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR).

Now, if our governments can see their way to appointing Condi and me to run this war, we'll get you a complete victory in no time, honest.




edit on 9-7-2013 by Mr Peter Dow because: typos



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Peter Dow
 


So...

Obama being" frustrated" is speeding things up?

I wonder if we can end ALL Wars on his watch by really getting him angry???



Whats it going to take to get Gitmo closed?

Pie to the face?



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Peter Dow
 


Good explanation.

But I think it goes much deeper than what we 'see and hear'.

What we 'see and hear' is always designed to form opinions and provide excuses.

The Afghan national industry is at stake.

That particular 'industry' is not necessarily 'political' by normal definitions.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Peter Dow
 


I agree with all your points but I did not star your posts since you failed to precisely point out that the intervention itself was the problem in what I see a veiled attack to the current administration. I have very low tolerance to this partisan political game on ATS, I sincerely think you are all nuts since the flies change but the s$%& is the same...

The problem is that the mission as sold to NATO/UN was a still born since Pakistan never ceased to be the problem. I can't begin to understand the US policy beyond a regional geopolitical interest (especially the mineral resources and the proximity to China and Iran) the capture of the bearded dude in the cave was clearly a bad joke only morons would accept that as a reason for the intervention, just as well as the WMD in Iraq...



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:25 PM
link   
Pulling out from Afghanistan doesn't necessarily mean they're "coming home". Maybe they'll support Azerbaijan against Armenia/Russia? If Azerbaijan tries to retake Nagorno Karabakh by force, it'll mean a fullscale war against Armenia, and Armenia is allied with Russia...


www.abovetopsecret.com...


A re-ignition of the conflict in the next year-and-a-half could jeopardize troop withdrawal plans from Afghanistan through the corridor



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:28 PM
link   
*** Bookmark this post ***

I actually have no disagreement with Obama at this decision.




posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Trueman
Now he better kick out all illegals working with fake papers and give those jobs to our veterans.

Maybe I'm asking too much from him.



Don't worry the war machine will never stop, they will just go into the next war.
Pick any year since 1776 and there is about a 91% chance that America was involved in some war during that calendar year.
So Iam sure those soldiers will still have a war to fight.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Yeah, I kind of figured that this pullout would have been escalated beyond earlier projections. When I heard that the United States was attempting to negotiate with the Taliban? I was surprised, but lately this government is doing things that at one time would have been deemed unthinkable. The frequency of doing those things is quite telling.

Unorthodox has become the new orthodox! Sending arms and supplies to unvetted militant organizations like the Free Syrian Army, the opposition forces in Libya, and other areas we are not privy too has become the norm. On another note, this government supported and bolstered the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, and we a seeing how that is turning out on the news. What we are witnessing before our very eyes is what bumbling foreign policy looks like. Throwing excrement at the wall and hoping its sticks. Then lets take a look at all the top brass being funneled out for "yes men."

Obama's Purge: Military Officers Replaced Under the Commander-in-Chief


High-ranking officers in the United States military are being replaced by the Obama administration and for a number of dubious reasons.


Looks like one of those old Soviet style purges to me? Our most abled body and skilled military tacticians are being tossed to the curb. For what apparent reason? I have no idea. This behavior by the Administration is not standard for the course in any way, shape, or form. Back on Afghanistan, an obscure article came out last month stating that the military is abandoning quite a bit of military equipment, and at a steep cost.

The military is literally throwing away $7 billion in Afghanistan


The U.S. is simply abandoning tons of equipment because shipping it home would cost too much

The decade-long Afghan war has cost the U.S. a fortune. And withdrawing from the country, which still faces regular insurgent attacks, won't be a bargain, either.


More money swallowed up by the money pit known as Afghanistan. Maybe the US can donate it to the Taliban, because what a way to show good faith during negotiations. Political recognition, and free military equipment. I am just joking! However, the sarcasm of late is proving to look more like reality. Epic facepalm! Or lets make a mental picture of our President making the troll face? I just need to hide my face in my hands!



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 11:38 PM
link   
i think people should be a little worried given U.S if we leave Afghanistan that means we have to occupy somewhere else soon our army never sits idle for long.



posted on Jul, 10 2013 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by MrSpad
 



I think Veterans can do a lot better than the jobs illegals do. If those are the jobs they are being stuck with then they will not want to come back. The reason illegals do the jobs they do is because nobody else will.

As a veteran living in San Diego County, thirty miles from the Mexican border, I spent years being pushed back by a massive tide of illegal immigrants -- I worked stocking supermarket shelves, washing windows and dirty dishes, waiting tables, pumping gas and changing oil, working construction, framing tract homes, pulling wire, painting, landscaping, standing shipyard fire watches, driving delivery trucks, tow-trucks and taxis -- making just enough to pay the bills each month, and no more.

Take a trip to San Diego or Los Angeles someday, and see who's got the lion's share to these jobs. That's right, "se habla español."


Not everyone in America is fortunate enough to become a doctor or a lawyer. Take my word for it, there are plenty of hungry veterans willing to work the jobs that are being handed to illegal immigrants.

Bring the armed forces home, kick the illegals immigrants out of here, deport the corrupt corporate CEOs, and send all the politicians off to fight their own stupid wars.

F.T.G.
edit on 10-7-2013 by seasoul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2013 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Trueman
Now he better kick out all illegals working with fake papers and give those jobs to our veterans.

Maybe I'm asking too much from him.


Wouldn't he have to kick himself out too?





new topics




 
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join