Prez Obama- Get Us The HELL Out Of Afghanistan!!

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I know it's difficult to end a war, but he's had 4 years and we're no closer to getting out oft here and insiuder attacks are increasing.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/top...n-we-re-willing-fight-not-willing-be-murdered

(CNSNews.com) - Gen. John Allen, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, says he's "mad as hell" about the increasing number of insider attacks, in which Afghan soldiers and police murder the Americans who are trying to train them.

"You know, we're willing to sacrifice a lot for this campaign. But we're not willing to be murdered for it," Gen. Allen told CBS' "60 Minutes" in a segment that aired on Sunday.

Gen. Allen told CBS Correspondent Lara Logan that the insider attacks will continue: "The enemy recognizes this is a vulnerability. You know, in Iraq, the signature weapon system that we hadn't seen before was the IED. We had to adjust to that. Here, I think the signature attack that we're beginning to see the -- is going to be the insider attack."

Allen also said "the vast majority” of Afghans are "with us in this." He noted that a number of Afghans have been killed trying to save NATO forces from rogue Afghans.

A Taliban commander -- described as a specialist in suicide bombings who was trained by al Qaeda -- also spoke to "60 Minutes," telling Lara Logan that the Taliban is behind the insider attacks:

"These are Taliban attacks," the unnamed man said. "This is part of our new military strategy. We have our people in the Afghan police and the army. And the orders come from the top."

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Re: Prez Obama- Get Us The HELL Out Of Afghistan!!

Can a mod change my speling to Afghanistan, please?

Thanks

 

[BrianFromWA]

Re: Prez Obama- Get Us The HELL Out Of Afghistan!!

A Taliban commander -- described as a specialist in suicide bombings who was trained by al Qaeda -- also spoke to "60 Minutes," telling Lara Logan that the Taliban is behind the insider attacks:

"These are Taliban attacks," the unnamed man said. "This is part of our new military strategy. We have our people in the Afghan police and the army. And the orders come from the top."

The part I agree with is that they have a new military strategy. Take credit for every single bad thing that happens to western troops, because they're not getting us with very many IEDs anymore. 60 Minutes will believe you.

In other news, I'm glad that al-Qaeda-trained, Taliban suicide specialist commanders get a voice in dictating American strategy.

 

[Mediocre Man]

And move it to OT

 

[Denny Crane]

Can't use drones on our own forces.

There's the crux of the problem.

 

[julius]

Whoever is next in line to be President should get us out of there and shrink out # of troops worldwide.

On a side note, I wish Oregon had a military base.

 

[BrianFromWA]

The 2014 transition plan is relatively solid, but the problem is going to be funding. We're deep into the process of training the 350k Afghan National Security Forces (ASNF) and Afghan National Police (ANP) needed to keep the country stable after the NATO/US troops leave en masse, but Afghanistan doesn't make enough in revenue yet to pay them all. It's not a chicken-and-egg scenario....if the country can be stable and relatively free from insurgency and terrorism, the governance, security and rule of law we're setting up (and transitioning) can allow more business, mineral exploitation, and trade, bringing in more tax revenue and helping them get their country into the 20th century. If the world doesn't keep the aid funding going until that point, then you have a bunch of unemployed people with guns and military training and warlords chomping at the bit to use them to plunge the country back into the mid-90's civil war battleground that allowed the 9/11 training camps. While $5-8B in aid might seem like a lot, when you look at the trillions spent and thousands of troops killed/wounded to get to where we are it seems like a small price to pay to keep security going and allow the country to stand on its own.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

The 2014 transition plan is relatively solid, but the problem is going to be funding. We're deep into the process of training the 350k Afghan National Security Forces (ASNF) and Afghan National Police (ANP) needed to keep the country stable after the NATO/US troops leave en masse, but Afghanistan doesn't make enough in revenue yet to pay them all. It's not a chicken-and-egg scenario....if the country can be stable and relatively free from insurgency and terrorism, the governance, security and rule of law we're setting up (and transitioning) can allow more business, mineral exploitation, and trade, bringing in more tax revenue and helping them get their country into the 20th century. If the world doesn't keep the aid funding going until that point, then you have a bunch of unemployed people with guns and military training and warlords chomping at the bit to use them to plunge the country back into the mid-90's civil war battleground that allowed the 9/11 training camps. While $5-8B in aid might seem like a lot, when you look at the trillions spent and thousands of troops killed/wounded to get to where we are it seems like a small price to pay to keep security going and allow the country to stand on its own.

Very informative.

 

[Denny Crane]

How much funding does it cost to maintain a fleet of drones?

Or to keep an aircraft carrier parked offshore with the times demand it?

 

[PapaG]

Just keep bombing the hell out of entire villages and claiming "victory" when a member of AQ/Taliban is found in the rubble.

Seems to be very Nobel-worthy...

 

[BrianFromWA]

How much funding does it cost to maintain a fleet of drones?

Or to keep an aircraft carrier parked offshore with the times demand it?

It's cheaper and more sustainable to just help them pay their own guys until they can do it themselves. If you want to keep drones for surveillance/close air support, then there's not a whole lot of infrastructure involved.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

we will stay there as long as it is profitable, then move on to the next country and the next and the next

trillions of dollars and thousands of lives for what? a few years of fake democracy? give me a fucking break.

 

[Denny Crane]

It's cheaper and more sustainable to just help them pay their own guys until they can do it themselves. If you want to keep drones for surveillance/close air support, then there's not a whole lot of infrastructure involved.

Let them pay their own guys. No point in us doing it. We'd hugely overpay them anyway.

It seems a lot cheaper and safer if we left and let the Taliban show themselves. Once they're out in the open, they're a lot easier to target.

 

[Denny Crane]

we will stay there as long as it is profitable, then move on to the next country and the next and the next

trillions of dollars and thousands of lives for what? a few years of fake democracy? give me a fucking break.

There's no profit to be had from Afghanistan. They have no oil to speak of. You might be able to build a pipeline across part of it and charge rent for the land.

 

[julius]

Just keep bombing the hell out of entire villages and claiming "victory" when a member of AQ/Taliban is found in the rubble.

Seems to be very Nobel-worthy...

yeah, should've done that on a aircraft carrier.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

There's no profit to be had from Afghanistan.

oh! silly me, i thought the taxpayers were buying drones and bombs and bullets and kevlar and tanks and etc, guess they were all donated

and a pipeline you say?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline

i wonder if there are any people hoping that us forces will stay and protect their investment

 

[PapaG]

yeah, should've done that on a aircraft carrier.

That was Iraq. This is Afghanistan.

One gaffe was 9 years ago. The other is killing troops right now.

 

[Denny Crane]

oh! silly me, i thought the taxpayers were buying drones and bombs and bullets and kevlar and tanks and etc, guess they were all donated

and a pipeline you say?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline

i wonder if there are any people hoping that us forces will stay and protect their investment

There is no pipeline, nor is there any real massive corporate profits to be had from one. At least nothing close to justifying spending a $trillion and 20,000+ injuries or casualties on our part.

It wasn't my idea to escalate the war there, which seems to have made things worse. The use of drones to bomb our ally, Pakistan, hasn't made things better there, either - actually quite worse.

As for the war itself, if it were about spending money on bombs and bullets for profit, we'd have had much bigger wars and spending, no?

 

[huevonkiller]

Just don't experiment with my money, and when it blows up in your face that won't surprise anyone.

Food poisoning is a much bigger threat statistically than terrorism from the Middle East. It shows how inbred military officials are that they worry about this so much.

 

[huevonkiller]

There is no pipeline, nor is there any real massive corporate profits to be had from one. At least nothing close to justifying spending a $trillion and 20,000+ injuries or casualties on our part.

It wasn't my idea to escalate the war there, which seems to have made things worse. The use of drones to bomb our ally, Pakistan, hasn't made things better there, either - actually quite worse.

As for the war itself, if it were about spending money on bombs and bullets for profit, we'd have had much bigger wars and spending, no?

Yeah I don't think it has to do with profit, dumbfuck rednecks simply want us to pay for their war and it annoys me.

And the war crimes we've committed with Drones is rarely taken seriously, the state does not want to incriminate itself.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

As for the war itself, if it were about spending money on bombs and bullets for profit, we'd have had much bigger wars and spending, no?

a war that will last forever is a pretty big war denny, and spending in the trillions is pretty big spending

and if you think we are stationed in bases all over the middle east because we want to promote democracy, you have officially been brainwashed

 

[Denny Crane]

I think W said the wars would not provide a stimulus effect.

Why did the Nobel peace prize winner escalate the war in Afghanistan and initiate attacks and bombing of the neighboring country.

Change we can believe in!

 

[MARIS61]

Since some here claim ignorance of why we wage wars:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_profiteering

 

[Denny Crane]

There's no need for war since govt. is perfectly willing to give $trillions of taxpayer money and borrowed Chinese money and printed money to whoever is willing to kick back some of it.

 

[BrianFromWA]

we will stay there as long as it is profitable, then move on to the next country and the next and the next

trillions of dollars and thousands of lives for what? a few years of fake democracy? give me a fucking break.

Profitable for who or what?

Calling it a "fake democracy" is selling it hugely short. And whether you think it's correlation or causality, the stated goal of removing threats like 9/11 has been successful here for a decade.

 

[BrianFromWA]

There's no profit to be had from Afghanistan. They have no oil to speak of. You might be able to build a pipeline across part of it and charge rent for the land.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...claims-mineral-wealth-is-worth-3trillion.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-18342888

China and India already have set up exploitation agreements. Russia is in negotiations. AFAIK, no US entity has. And as South Asia becomes more stable, there's a whole lotta trade going to be passing through the old Silk Road countries.

 

[BrianFromWA]

a war that will last forever is a pretty big war denny, and spending in the trillions is pretty big spending

and if you think we are stationed in bases all over the middle east because we want to promote democracy, you have officially been brainwashed

No, we want to protect our interests and it costs a shitton of money to move a Maritime Preposition Group, 2 carrier battle groups and fly over an Army brigade every time someone gets a wild hair.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Yeah I don't think it has to do with profit, dumbfuck rednecks simply want us to pay for their war and it annoys me.

And the war crimes we've committed with Drones is rarely taken seriously, the state does not want to incriminate itself.

Pakistan's trying to prevent their own civil war right now, and keep control over their own nuclear weapons. ISI's acceptance/care and feeding of groups like Quetta Shura Taliban and Haqqani is starting to blow up in their face, or else they'd be trying to pull the "war crimes" garbage that publicity-seeking nobodies like Malaysia push out.

 

[Denny Crane]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...claims-mineral-wealth-is-worth-3trillion.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-18342888

China and India already have set up exploitation agreements. Russia is in negotiations. AFAIK, no US entity has. And as South Asia becomes more stable, there's a whole lotta trade going to be passing through the old Silk Road countries.

Let China and India do the nation building if they stand to profit.

Which they don't

 

[3RA1N1AC]

Profitable for who or what?

really man, i mean arent you over there?

DynCorp
Fluor Group
Perini
Lookheed Martin
Bechtel
General Dynamics
Kellogg, Brown & Root
The Louis Berger Group
The Rendon Group
Chemonics International Inc.

billions and billions and billions of dollars

Calling it a "fake democracy" is selling it hugely short. And whether you think it's correlation or causality, the stated goal of removing threats like 9/11 has been successful here for a decade.

really? the reason there hasnt been another 9/11 is because you are bombing the mountains of afghanistan?

that must also be the reason that there hasnt been another okc bombing