PDA

View Full Version : 43 Troops Have Died Since General Called for Reinforcements in Afghanistan



McDuck
09-30-2009, 09:01 PM
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54807

Buster
10-07-2009, 09:01 AM
Guess he'll need 43 more than he originally asked for now..

Intrepid_Timer
10-07-2009, 09:05 AM
Guess he'll need 43 more than he originally asked for now..


That just ain't right.................:(

tsptalk
10-07-2009, 09:05 AM
I sure hope Obama sends the troops the general needs, but I also don't want to see another daily update on body counts like the left did to Bush.

Intrepid_Timer
10-07-2009, 09:07 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/10/06/afghanistan.us.deadly.fight/index.html

JTH
10-07-2009, 09:20 AM
I'd rather just leave that place all together. Some things just can't be fixed... :mad:

alevin
10-07-2009, 09:39 AM
Let's see, the British figured that out, the Russians figured that out, somebody before the British figured that out. A-ghan is one of the poorest countries in the world, and one of the most proud. A book I read last year put forward the proposition that the main misstep we made was installing a Northern Coalition government in Kabul, surrounded by Pashtun/Pushtun tribes who would never accept "foreigner" tribe as leader of their part of the country. Miscalculation on our part on acceptability of choiceof U.S. installed puppet gov.

Intrepid_Timer
10-07-2009, 09:43 AM
Why don't they just strap some C4 to the backs of a million moles and let em go down all the holes and blow em up? Oh that's right, PETA.............

Birchtree
10-07-2009, 09:55 AM
It would be much more cost effective to air drop a bag of infected fleas. Iran could also benefit from the same air drop. Yellow rain would also work well.

Buster
10-07-2009, 01:19 PM
That just ain't right.................:(
No it ain't right, but the math is correct...Meaning, the longer we wait to support the requirements requested from the Generals..the more troops we'll need there in the longer run.

Hope you were not trying to spin what I said to be a bad thing..:suspicious:

phil
11-22-2009, 10:29 AM
Rory Stewart (whom I've met several times) and his interview. It's a good interview about the ground realities in Afghanistan. Mr. Stewart walked throughout Afghanistan before and during the war in Afghanistan.

The idea that the Afghans are going to be a threat to the US is bizarre. The language of counterinsurgency has taken over the dialogue in Afghanistan.....a terrible mistake.

600,000 troops?

http://video.pbs.org/video/1276001522/

Politically, President Obama has to respond by giving more troops, as the request from the entire defense establishment has asked for more troops. It's a mistake of epic proportions. Writing a blank check. The policy decision has already been made. I notice that Ambassador Eikenberry has NOT asked for more troops for the country. He was previously a general there.

The analogy is: someone comes to ask you whether they should wear a seatbelt when they drive off the cliff. The answer is: don't drive off the cliff.

Warrenlm
11-22-2009, 11:45 AM
It would be much more cost effective to air drop a bag of infected fleas. Iran could also benefit from the same air drop. Yellow rain would also work well.

You keep coming up with the right ideas. Are you going to run for office like Schiff is to get your ideas some more air time? :D

mick504
11-22-2009, 07:46 PM
I really don't think Afganistan will be completely stabilized unless US troops are there in great numbers permanently which I do not think is a good idea. I would send enough troops to kick ass for awhile....kill off most Taliban...and leave the rest to fight as they wish. Thinking we are going to change them completely is nonsense. Vietnam but worse.

James48843
11-22-2009, 09:33 PM
I really don't think Afganistan will be completely stabilized unless US troops are there in great numbers permanently which I do not think is a good idea. I would send enough troops to kick ass for awhile....kill off most Taliban...and leave the rest to fight as they wish. Thinking we are going to change them completely is nonsense. Vietnam but worse.

It would not be "stable" over IF we had US troops there in great number.

There is no good answer.

The Soviets lost 13,310 dead, and 35,478 wounded by the time they left-a ten year occupation.
They (Soviets) deployed about 109,000 at the peak six years after their initial invasion- (1985), and took four more years before the last of their troops left in 1989. Over a million Afghans were killed over that same time frame.

We're currently at about 65,000 U.S. troops on the ground now, and we have lost, so far, 916 dead, and 4,529 wounded.

There is no good option.

War is hell.