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.

 

No bluff: U.S. planning possible withdrawal of all troops from Afghanistan

page: 5
37
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 06:13 PM
link   


We gotta get it from somewhere.
reply to post by neo96
 


Are you willing to give your life to go take something that's not yours? Give the life of your sons and daughters? Slaughter innocent people?




Every single year we grow more dependent on foreign countries.


Yet somehow you think this dependancy will be lessened by borrowing money you don't have to kill people who pose no threat to you?

Who can argue with that logic? (sarc)




posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 06:17 PM
link   

SLAYER69
reply to post by OpinionatedB
 


No need to drag the Pakistani ISI into this. They've helped enough already as is...



This was not to which I was referring, I was referring to certain someone's who had visions of medals in his head, and messed up a very good thing, long ago...



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 

I read every post in this thread and choose this one as the easiest to reply to. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Why are we in Afghanistan? To ensure regime change? Perpetuate the production of -H-? Have a reason to spend Defense $s?

Nothing good has come from it and there's nothing to gain looking from horizon to horizon. So ... why an announcement? Don't actions still speak louder than words?

Personal to seabag - One of your other posts almost drew this tongue-in-cheek response I can't get out of my head: Damn Texans!! You're supposed to play possum ... not armadillo. LOL



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by deadcalm
 





Are you willing to give your life to go take something that's not yours? Give the life of your sons and daughters? Slaughter innocent people?


What the hell does that have to do with the topic.

Asking hypothetical questions don't prove anything.

Other than proving just how far some people will go using red herrings to justify there opinion.





Yet somehow you think this dependancy will be lessened by borrowing money you don't have to kill people who pose no threat to you?


Using emotional arguments is not using logic.

It's called using EMOTIONAL arguments because they don't have any facts to argue with.
edit on 26-2-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by deadcalm
 


The Iraq war had just started when my son turned 18, and we were worried about him being sent there, so he did not join. I would have given him for the war in Afghanistan, I have given my nephew, and my adopted son for that war.

It was justified. Iraq wasn't. But I don't think this thread is about justification...

When you sit down with afghani's, you will find many wanted us there, badly... in the beginning. That only changed because of all the boots on the ground, and the time.
edit on 26-2-2014 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


I disagree with you...

We should have kept it to what it was in the beginning, very small and very specialized teams working with the locals... we were on our way to a complete win, without risking many lives at all...

Then someone decided they wanted boots on the ground. This never goes well in places like Afghanistan... if we had wanted to win, that is the one thing we should never have done. They were working with us...
edit on 26-2-2014 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 06:51 PM
link   

OpinionatedB
reply to post by beezzer
 


I disagree with you...

We should have kept it to what it was in the beginning, very small and very specialized teams working with the locals... we were on our way to a complete win, without risking many lives at all...

Then someone decided they wanted boots on the ground. This never goes well in places like Afghanistan... if we had wanted to win, that is the one thing we should never have done. They were working with us...
edit on 26-2-2014 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)


Then don't call it a war.

War is a horrible, messy, ugly thing. It should be a measure of last resort.

Not a way to make money or play political points.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


That last sentence is the problem isn't it....



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:06 PM
link   
I'm sorry but the moment we ventured into that craphole it was a failed state. There was no good outcome for the people of Afghanistan.. We deploy troops and aircraft to bomb that country back a good 20-30yrs infrastructure wise and you guys worry that the state will be in a civil war/chaos when our security forces leave? Isn't that what's ALREADY GOING ON? Afghanistan is long gone and there's nothing we can do about it and who gives a FK what pakistan has to say...they harbor and arm those fighting against our troops & refuse to protect their own borders stopping weapons and freedom fighters from crossing. boohoo at pakistan they might actually have to do some work~



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


They want to bring them home to fight us.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:38 PM
link   
I say hang 'em out to dry. Leave. Now.

It took, what?, 417 boots on the ground-with air support-to drive the Taliban out of Afghanistan totally.

We let them back in.

If you aren't going to do what is necessary to win there is no point or justification to waste one single life for political expediency. That's all that is left by staying. Political expediency.

It will not get any better by hand wringing comments like we can't leave them hanging. It will not be any better 6 months or 6 years from now the way we're doing or "allowed" to do business.

It's over. Save some of our servicemen's lives/health.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


I concur. It would finally be one of any US President Administration's wisest choice yet.
The whole thing has been pretty much a useless and too long endeavor.
Enough lives lost already.
Though there are many theories about the US's constant sending out troops to control over population in sent to area.
Cannot believe the Pakistan's wanting US troops to remain...I wonder the real reason... Guess they can start their own troops but don't want to.
Then again, one time Countries, areas, felt more obligated and more honor toward their Warriors than today


Excellent topic as usual, S&F



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Obummer needs all the guns(soldiers) he can get to send to the Ukraine. He can't let Russia play world police too.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 10:22 PM
link   
When ever they talk of removing troops, you can be almost 100% assured that it just means we are relocating the troops to get ready for the next invasion. I wonder how many of these soldiers will be returning home, or are just pulled out of one 'hot spot' and repositioned to another.
I wonder how many of the troops being pulled out of Afghanistan are now waiting on a ship to be deployed in somewhere like Syria or Ukraine ?
"Withdrawing" the troops doesn't actually mean that they are coming home, it just means that they are being withdrawn from one area.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 10:39 PM
link   
Hagel also said that the budget for Special Ops and Cyber Warfare was protected (no cuts there, probable increase) so there's a clue to the 21st century military restructure - should work well if we do leave and then have to go back for short term al Q hunts.



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 12:36 AM
link   


That only changed because of all the boots on the ground, and the time.
reply to post by OpinionatedB
 


No...it changed because of the horrific toll in life among Afghan civilians....they didn't mind you killing the Taliban, what they couldn't stand was the deaths of at least 20,000 Afghan civilians....and they are still dying in US drone strikes.

With the deepest respect, I'm sorry that you would give the lives of your loved ones for something that could never have achieved the goal of ridding Afghanistan of the Taliban....they are still there now, and will be long after the US is gone. Had the US tried diplomacy instead of guns....which is how this will end eventually....more than 6000 American mothers would still have their sons/daughters and more than 60,000 US service men and women wouldn't be permanantly maimed. Not to mention the 5 TRILLION dollars that it has cost you in treasure. I think Eisenhower said it best...




Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.

Dwight D. Eisenhower



The fact remains that unless the Afghan people are willing to stand up for themselves and fight the Taliban as a united people, any attempt to hand them that freedom is meaningless....as Americans love to say....freedom isn't free....not for you, and not for the Afghan people. It's time to go.



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


These people have been killing each other for as long as time........Pull out and let them sort it all out. We should have never gone in the first place. You want to invade a country that deserves it invade Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.




These are a true enemies........Oh wait they are a friends..........YA right.



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 01:54 AM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB
 


How was it justified? When we were winning, as you said we were at one point, what was going to be the end result? I never understood what a "win" was supposed to look like in Afghaniland. Kill Osama? Kill everyone? I mean I really just dont get the point of it all. Well, I do get it, but I dont get the point that you people see who think it was a good idea. I would love to have someone explain to me what a victory would've looked like.

The official story says "We had to get Osama cuz he killed 3000 americans, so we're going to let him kill thousands more as long as we can get to him, its all good." That is the most nonsensical crap logic ive ever seen in my life yet it seems to be what a lot of people think.

Afghanis also dont give a S if we are there or not. They dont want us there. If they did their pres. would sign this dumb crap so some of us can stay. If 10k Americans stay wth are they going to do? Train afghanis to better kill each other? Makes sense.

edit on 27-2-2014 by Bundy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 06:51 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 




Nah I didn't pay attention to Clintons EPIC failures in foreign policy that CREATED the last decade of warfare.

So you want to blame Clinton for the wars Bush started?


Didn't pay any attention to Clinton having 4 chances to kill Bin Laden.

You also didn't pay attention to congress not giving him the authority to kill him. So you want a dictator in office that just does whatever he wants huh?


Didn't pay any attention to the First World Trade Center attack

You also paid no attention that the people responsible for the attack is now in prison. And he didn't have to start two wars and get thousands of Americans killed to do it.


Didn't pay any attention to the USS COLE bombing.

You also didn't pay attention to the missile that killed the people responsible. And once again no wars.


Didn't pay any attention to the Kobar towers bombing.

So you want Americans to die solving problems that Saudi Arabia has? Some American you are when will you be moving to good old Saudiland?


Hell I didn't even pay attention to that Hollywood film "Path to Paradise'.

So you get your info from Hollywood that explains a lot.


Nah I been totally living in a cave the last decade.

And it shows.



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 





So you want to blame Clinton for the wars Bush started?


Bush started eh ?

BUSH STARTED ?



Have anything of real substance ?

Or just going to continue pushing intellectual dishonesty?



new topics

top topics



 
37
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join