U.S. Tweaks Message: Troops Will Still Be in Afghanistan in 2014

[cory777]

Source: NYT

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is increasingly emphasizing the idea that the United States will have forces in Afghanistan until at least the end of 2014, a change in tone aimed at persuading the Afghans and the Taliban that there will be no significant American troop withdrawals next

In a move away from President Obama’s deadline of July 2011 for the start of an American drawdown from Afghanistan, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, all cited 2014 this week as the key date for handing over the defense of Afghanistan to the Afghans themselves. Implicit in their message, delivered at a security and diplomatic conference in Australia, was that the United States would be fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan for at least four more years.

Administration officials said that the three had made loosely coordinated comments at the conference, held in Melbourne, to try to convince Afghans that the United States was not walking away next summer and to warn the Taliban that current aggressive operations against them would continue. Although Mr. Obama and administration officials have repeatedly said that July 2011 would be only the start of American troop withdrawals, the Taliban have successfully promoted the deadline among the Afghan populace as a large-scale exit of the 100,000 United States troops currently in the country.

“There’s not really any change, but what we’re trying to do is to get past that July 2011 obsession so that people can see what the president’s strategy really entails,” a senior administration official said Wednesday.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/11/world/asia/11military...

---

Breaking Activist News http://activistnews.blogspot.com/

[Poll_Blind]

1. Even the smartest person, if they follow a dumb idea, is dumb. n/t

PB

[saigon68]

125. They will be there forever--- Look at Korea

[bdamomma]

2. 2014??? and more dead bodies, war sucks

this war won't accomplish nothing

[Poll_Blind]

3. Last line of the article- it's really a Sekret Trick! I shit you not!

PB

[defendandprotect]

4. Disgraceful .... !!! Didn't we elect Dems in '06 to end the wars .... ???

[Roma]

6. Well, maybe "they" elected repubs in '10 to keep 'em goin'

I wonder who is being listened to, don't you?

[defendandprotect]

8. '06 ... Pelosi on video ... "Dems were elected to end the war in Iraq" ....

Obviously Democrats are no responding to the voters they acknowledged in

'06 -- or the voters who wanted MEDICARE FOR ALL.

Silence is also a response!!

[Winterblues]

114. It is becoming apparent who Obama is listening to.

It isn't mainstream Democrats, that's for sure..

[Dr.Phool]

11. That's why I left the party.

Along with Patriot Act II and FISA, and Telecom immunity.

About everything we elected them for, they walked away from.

[markmyword]

5. Going for Broke

Wait a minute, this country can't be in Afghanistan any longer
or anywhere else for that matter, because as a nation  we are
BROKE!

State governments are BROKE and can't pay their bills. We
have millions unemployed, there's no money for
infrastructure, education, jobs, health care, the list goes
on and on.

There's talk of cutting Social Security and Medicare. I have
a better idea, let's put the Pentagon and these wars on the
CHOPPING BLOCK. No money for any war, period.

I'm tired of my money being used to kill other people,men,
women and children and for what?
Over 4,800 soldiers killed, thousands wounded or have
psychological damage,and for what?

The only people making out like bandits because of this non
ending war, are the contractors, defense manufacturers and
the friends of Bush and Cheney.

This war has to end NOW, the deadline to be out should be,
January 1st, 2011.

If anyone saw the U.K. university students protesting in
London over tuition increases, or the French protesting,
because they don't want the retirement age going up,and the
Greeks protesting over their banking problems, where are the
Americans? Why aren't we in the streets protesting two wars?
Just asking.

[speppin]

108. But the money printing press works!!

[Catherina]

109. +1 Welcome to DU n/t

[Blue Owl]

7. So now this optional war against a country a fraction of our size

that has a comparatively tiny air force/navy, is going to take longer than WWI and WWII combined.

Hundreds if not thousands more of our troops will be sacrificed.

And it will cost us trillions in a time of economic collapse.

NO. FUCK NO.

WHAT THE HELL OBAMA?

[defendandprotect]

9. The point is perpetual war for elites/warprofiteers ... that's all ....

it's all a farce --

We'd still be in VN except they were beating us so badly Nixon wanted to

use nukes on 'em -- it was a bit extreme I'd say!!!! Yikes!

[krabigirl]

10. Lovely. So that will be almost 15 yrs...absolutely horrible.

[Newsjock]

12. Obama officials moving away from 2011 Afghan date

Source: McClatchy Newspapers

The Obama administration has decided to begin publicly walking away from what it once touted as key deadlines in the war in Afghanistan in an effort to de-emphasize President Barack Obama's pledge that he'd begin withdrawing U.S. forces in July 2011, administration and military officials have told McClatchy.

The new policy will be on display next week during a conference of NATO countries in Lisbon, Portugal, where the administration hopes to introduce a timeline that calls for the withdrawal of U.S. and NATO forces from Afghanistan by 2014, the year when Afghan President Hamid Karzai once said Afghan troops could provide their own security, three senior officials told McClatchy, along with others speaking anonymously as a matter of policy.

The Pentagon also has decided not to announce specific dates for handing security responsibility for several Afghan provinces to local officials and instead intends to work out a more vague definition of transition when it meets with its NATO allies.

What a year ago had been touted as an extensive December review of the strategy now also will be less expansive and will offer no major changes in strategy, the officials told McClatchy. So far, the U.S. Central Command, the military division that oversees Afghanistan operations, hasn't submitted any kind of withdrawal order for forces for the July deadline, two of those officials told McClatchy.

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/11/09/103468/obama-admi...

[Skittles]

13. well of COURSE

I will kick ASS on anyone who acts fucking surprised

[MisterP]

23. your quads will be HUGE by the time you're done, in that case nt

[Skittles]

24. I kettlebell

my quads are in FINE form

[saigon68]

25. I said this before too

Bread and Circuses--- as long as its not you getting drafted

Wave the flag and have another beer

[Skittles]

26. yup

I'm absolutely appalled, and after Vietnam I cannot believe so few people give a crap about THE WARS - it absolutely disgusts me no end

[dgibby]

94. Not enough people are invested in these wars.

Reinstate the draft and see how fast that gets their attention.

I'm a Viet Nam Era and Gulf War Era vet (did not serve in country in either), and your right, the difference in public outcry is appalling.

[pattmarty]

47. I just thought this was stage 2 of "three dimensional chess"...........

........This guy is such a HUGE fucking disappointment, he's actually worse than Bill Clinton.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AllyCat]

71. No surprise here. We must be at war indefinitely. It is the American way.

School bullies are bad enough, but they have a great role model in American foreign policy.

[The Doctor.]

101. I'm in SHOCK!

...not.

Obama is up against the Pentagon... the fifth branch of government. Frankly, I think Obama should just fire the people insisting we stay, but I don't like the Pentagon's 'checks and balances' system.

[saracat]

14. Of course they are.It was to be expected.

[sakabatou]

15. *facepalm*

[Webster Green]

16. Surprise, surprise.

We'll be there occupying and killing in 2111.

These fuckers need to always be at war. Nothing will ever change.

This planet is so lame.

[Tunkamerica]

17. don't talk about my planet

[clixtox]

28. Do you think we can mine and pump all of Afghanistan's...

wealth in just a hundred years? I bet the energy corporations can drain every drop of oil from the "Stans" and pump it through Afghanistan to ports in Pakistan in 75, or 80 years, on the outside. That allows us plenty of time to also strip mine all of the mineral assets over there and ship them out too! We surely won't dare risk China or Russia, or even India, ever having a shot at exploiting these precious resources for which we are already murdering hundreds of thousands, if not millions. Our lying government is set-up to control that whole region for stupendous corporate profits. Nothing positive otherwise on the corporate warfare agenda, but there is the possibility of some stale crumbs for you and me...

We're rich!

Well not us, not you and me, we are heading for lives mired in abject poverty, living on a few (new) dollars a day while working like slaves with no human or cilvil rights.

The USA's working class will by then be competing for jobs with the 3rd world's least skilled and un-educated masses. That will be the result of trends manifesting already, right now. As the "Know (No) Nothing Party" eliminates the Federal Minimum Wage laws, workplace safety and anti-discrimination laws, etc. the future is coming into focus, and it isn't a pretty picture for the average "jane" or "Joe"!

We will be partying like it's 1399!

[bertman]

80. clixtox, that was BRILLIANT!! A deadly accurate assessment. nt

[CUTTIN HEADS]

84. I hated that I laughed at the 1399 thing...

But, my God...are we all really this stupid??

[dgibby]

95. Bullseye!

This deserves its' own OP!

[sam sarrha]

39. since Nixon we have been taken over by a Dominionist Oligharcy >LINK>>

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1207-26.htm
"snip...According to this carefully researched and well-vetted BBC documentary, Richard Nixon, following in the steps of his mentor and former boss Dwight D. Eisenhower, believed it was possible to end the Cold War and eliminate fear from the national psyche. The nation need no longer be afraid of communism or the Soviet Union. Nixon worked out a truce with the Soviets, meeting their demands for safety as well as the US needs for security, and then announced to Americans that they need no longer be afraid.

In 1972, President Richard Nixon returned from the Soviet Union with a treaty worked out by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, the beginning of a process Kissinger called "dtente." On June 1, 1972, Nixon gave a speech in which he said, "Last Friday, in Moscow, we witnessed the beginning of the end of that era which began in 1945. With this step, we have enhanced the security of both nations. We have begun to reduce the level of fear, by reducing the causes of fearfor our two peoples, and for all peoples in the world."

But Nixon left amid scandal and Ford came in, and Ford's Secretary of Defense (Donald Rumsfeld) and Chief of Staff (Dick Cheney) believed it was intolerable that Americans might no longer be bound by fear. Without fear, how could Americans be manipulated?...snip"


my personal opinion is that The GOP is a Cargo Cult, *a mentally ill group of psychotic OCD wealth Hoarders. The GOP is simply a puppet arm of the *Oligarchy that actually runs this country. Many of the same Cabinet Members of every GOP president since Nixon actually studied under Leo Straus, the Father of the NeoCons, at the U of Chicago

meet the Dominionists...

http://doggo.tripod.com/doggchrisdomin.html
"snip...Leo Strauss was born in 1899 and died in 1973. ... He is most famous for resuscitating Machiavelli and introducing his principles as the guiding philosophy of the neo-conservative movement. ... More than any other man, Strauss breathed upon conservatism, inspiring it to rise from its atrophied condition and its natural dislike of change and to embrace an unbounded new political ideology that rides on the back of a revolutionary steed, hailing even radical change; hence the name Neo-Conservatives.

Significantly, Dominionism is a form of Social Darwinism.<48> It inherently includes the religious belief that wealth-power is a sign of God’s election. That is, out of the masses of people and the multitude of nations, wealth, in and of itself, is thought to indicate God’s approval on men and nations whereas poverty and sickness reflect God’s disapproval.

(It was not until I read this article that I realized that this is a fundamental tenet of Dominionists.

Worldly wealth and power are signs of God's favor -- to attempt to limit or decrease one's wealth and power is to disrespect God.

On the contrary, God's elect on Earth are called upon to increase their wealth and power.

It is not sufficient for a man to be a millionaire, or for a country to have sovereignty within its borders -- a man must strive to increase his wealth as much as possible, and a Dominionist government's behavior toward its neighbors must be "invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity".

Furthermore, any attempt to decrease a person's or a country's wealth and power -- to take from the rich to give to the poor, to reduce military spending and power -- is a direct attack on God.)

If “Secular Humanists are the greatest threat to Christianity the world has ever known,” as theologian Francis Schaeffer claimed, then who are the Humanists? According to Dominionists, humanists are the folks who allow or encourage licentious behavior in America. They are the undisciplined revelers.

Put all the enemies of the Dominionists together, boil them down to liquid and bake them into the one single most highly derided and contaminated individual known to man, and you will have before you an image of the quintessential “liberal” -- one of those folks who wants to give liberally to the poor and needy -- who desires the welfare and happiness of all Americans -- who insists on safety regulations for your protection and who desires the preservation of your values -- those damnable people are the folks that must be reduced to powerlessness -- or worse: extinction.

What would a “reconstructed” America look like under the Dominionists? K.L. Gentry, a Dominionist himself, suggests the following “elements of a theonomic approach to civic order,” which I strongly suggest should be compared to the Texas GOP platform of 2002, which reveals that we are not just talking about imaginary ideas but some things are already proposed on Republican agendas.<60> Dominionism’s concept of government according to Gentry is as follows:

“1. It obligates government to maintain just monetary policies ... fiat money, fractional reserve banking, and deficit spending.

“2. It provides a moral basis for elective government officials. ...

“3. It forbids undue, abusive taxation of the rich. ...

“4. It calls for the abolishing of the prison system and establishing a system of just restitution. *...

“5. A theonomic approach also forbids the release, pardoning, and paroling of murderers by requiring their execution. ...

“6. It forbids industrial pollution that destroys the value of property. ...

“7. It punishes malicious, frivolous malpractice suits. ...

“8. It forbids abortion rights. ... Abortion is not only a sin, but a crime, and, indeed, a capital crime.”<61>
. . .

* Gary North describes the ‘just restitution’ system of the bible, which happens to reinstitute slavery,
like this:


“At the other end of the curve, the poor man who steals is eventually caught and sold into bondage under a successful person. His victim receives payment; he receives training; his buyer receives a stream of labor services. If the servant is successful and buys his way out of bondage, he re-enters society as a disciplined man, and presumably a self-disciplined man. He begins to accumulate wealth.” ...snip”
comment… this is proof how much they are in control... the richest 1% have 42% of Americas Financial Wealth, 6 TIMES what the bottom 80% Americans only have at 7% of the nations financial wealth !! and they say Socialism sucks.. and cry baby about Liberal Wealth Redistribution

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth....

document presents details on the wealth and income distributions in the United States, and explains how we use these two distributions as power indicators.

Some of the information might be a surprise to many people. The most amazing numbers on income inequality come last, showing the change in the ratio of the average CEO's paycheck to that of the average factory worker over the past 40 years

The top 1% richest Americans hold 42% of the Nations Financial wealth, the bottom holds 7% of Financial Wealth and 72% of private Debt.. SOOO…1% has 6 times the wealth of the bottom 80%
the top 20% holds 93% of Financial Wealth.. now is it plain why there is a recession and no jobs..??

it's no joke.. the END is near..!! like one paycheck away, one election away..!!

The Dogs aren't the problem.. it's the Rabies..!

[liberalmike27]

68. So Cancel your insurance

Max out, cut up your credit cards, and ignore those phone calls from the creditor, cancel the cable, cut off the phone.

Don't join the military, and all soldiers should stop going back.

Seriously, there's going to be a lot of trained poor folks back-stabbing their "owners" in the new slavery scenario.

Yea, I think our country, mindlessly hooked on the crack of war, and the tool of military aquisition for corporations, is going down, as we just can't seem to quit the Empire. Maybe we should plant our revolution gardens too.

[liberalmike27]

69. I'm wondering, Could we use Strauss's logic

Using that same logic, that the rich are rich because of God's favor, then if a poor person knocks off a rich person, then God must've wanted them dead.

Seriously, I'm not threatening here, but it seems that the logic of both of these ideas are the same.

Personally, I've already seen evidence of an extreme breakdown in society, through an increase in crime. I maintain hope, but it's very thin. I personally just want to keep putting the idea out there to any thieves, robbers, or those who'll flow into criminal occupations as those who are unemployed, homeless, and quite rightly feeling betrayed, to seek out not other people with similar problems and incomes. No, they need to look directly to the upper, upper echelon to seek their pound of flesh, or jewels and money.

The really irritating thing about this "planned" demise of our world is that instead of our population seeking out those who f_'d them, they prey on one another at the lower levels.

[Amonester]

18. 18 months, eh?

I see the MIC still want to continue raping the U.S. Treasury for four more years.

[Hardrada]

19. Yes. It's not a matter of winning a war. It's about sucking up the remaining

$$ China will lend us.

[Amonester]

20. And to think I must have made too many enemies on DU

... promising I would tell them "I told you so." next summer...

I was wrong on the date.

[Skittles]

27. SCHEDULING AMONESTER FOR ASS KICKING

you thought they'd wait until NEXT SUMMER? Not, er, AFTER THE ELECTION? *EGREGIOUS*

[laughingliberal]

21. Well, yeah. And they'll have all our lovely SS money to spend on it. nt

[DesertFlower]

22. good point. they've been

raiding the fund for years.

[DoctorK]

83. what did you think politicians would do with the money?

save it?

LOL hard!

It amuses me to no end that the 'fixes' for Social Security inevitably require us to start with trusting the politicians to not blow the new taxes on something else...

[gadjitfreek]

29. Meet the new boss...

Not surprised, but definitely disappointed. It's disgusting. Makes me look with wistful fondness to Canada...but when President Palin invades Canada in 2013, it won't be safe there either.

[OnlinePoker]

52. Why? We're in Afghanistan, too.

And from reports a couple of days ago, the intention is to leave 600 troops there after combat operations end next summer "to train the Afghani Army and police". Well, the only way you can do that is to go out in the field with them.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ixion]

32. exactly

[democrank]

31. Goodness gracious, what a shock!

[FlyByNight]

33. Well, that was fast (but not terribly surprising)

From article: "De-emphasizing deadlines also allows the administration greater flexibility in responding to conditions in Afghanistan." Frankly, I suspect Obama never wanted the US to leave (anytime soon) anyway. The tragic R victory in the House gives him cover - of course.

Vietnam will like a quick, orderly withdrawal after this fucking MICC-sponsored debacle is "complete" (whatever "complete" means). The republic will continue to bleed lives and money until we can't anymore. In a way, this may hasten fundamental Pentagon "reform" and downsizing which is desperately needed. The current and future imperial posture is clearly unsustainable.

To say I'm disappointed is a gross understatement. And the administration wonders why Dems stayed home (sadly) for the mid-terms? The republic is doomed.

[florida08]

35. self delete

[The Wizard]

34. This is Obama's exit strategy

from the White House.

[florida08]

36. 2nd that

[Nay]

40. Yep. I can't see how he can win re-election if he can't even get us

out of those insane wars. The pubs would have to run a complete idiot. Oh, wait, ALL THEIR PEOPLE ARE COMPLETE IDIOTS.

[Loge23]

64. It's time to think about 2012's nominee

I really think Obama does not want the job.
This is not meant as a criticism, although there's plenty of low-hanging fruit on that tree!
I really believe he (and his family) can't wait to get out of the WH.

[indy legend]

43. It's the first strategy I've seen him apply that will actually work.....

...And he won't even have to compromise with the pukes on this one. "Thanks for the fucking change" All hail the compromiser-n-chief.

[Dinger]

46. *DUzy* Nominee!

Perfect response.

[madrchsod]

37. the soil of afganistan has soaked up the blood of would be conquers for centuries..

there are plenty of young men and women who are willing to shed their blood for the glory of the empire.

[happi1]

38. drone

I woander what the fear is for families on the border..that a predator will strike soon. I can't imagine.

[Citizen Worker]

41. Welcome to Vietghanistan, graveyard of empires.

[MannyGoldstein]

42. They said 'just kidding' the day after it was announced

Clinton and Gates were doing the talk show rounds saying that the withdrawal wouldn't be a withdrawal. Gates said:

And they are not leaving-- in July of 2011. Some handful or some small number or whatever the conditions permit, we'll begin to withdraw at that time.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/05/clinton-gates-...

[Exilednight]

44. I would usually write something witty and funny about how all too predictable this .............

was, but there's no humor to be found in spending another three years at war.

It breaks my heart. Not just because it's yet another broken promise, but because of how many more lives will be wasted fighting a war that should of never have been waged.

[2critical]

45. Dismantling the American Empire? Nah!

Obama has shown himself, time and time again, to be a member of the plutocracy. That man is a disappointment on so many levels.

[Solly Mack]

49. Yeah?

Hmm

[Pab Sungenis]

50. Does he REALLY want to chase away the 40% of his base he still has left?

I can't believe that the President is being this stupid.

[Dr Fate]

75. Everyone knows that the REAL DEM base are Regan Democrats & conservative swing-voters.

Pony wishing, professional left types are but a teeny, tiny sliver of our base. Hell, I'd say they are not even our base, b/c I think that deep down they all want to vote for Nader.

No no no- our REAL base consists of guys who go to bowling alleys, red necks who watch lots of cable TV, and people who shop at Wall-Mart. Not tatooed liberals from San Francisco, but the real salt of the earth Americans.

These voters support the war and we need to make sure that we cater to them until they finally realize that they are our base.

The REAL BASE that we want will never agree with the people who are serious about spending more in the USA and less in foreign deserts. That's far left stuff.

[Catherina]

110. Well done, that was satire right? n/t

[creon]

51. very few

This is the ignored war.

There are not very many who will take notice. If they do, very little will be said.

[donco6]

53. *Maniacal Laughter*

Because that's just pushed me over the edge.

[doc03]

54. How will this be paid for? Suspending the tax cuts on the rich,

I don't think so. My guess cut SS.

[Vinca]

55. Grandma will be giving up breakfast for bullets.

[doc03]

61. I am 62 and retired myself, my job moved to China and to

the right-to-work south but luckily I have a pension and have health insurance from my employer (if they don't decide to drop it) until I reach Medicare age. I own my own home and my car is paid for. I can't imagine how anyone can survive on SS alone and pay rent, medical expenses and maybe don't have a reliable car and other bills.

[Dr Fate]

76. Centrists & good conservatives do not count war spending as regular spending.

The best way to look at any war spending is to just pretend that money is already spent, or was never there.

Come on now- America is a center right country- we have to start thinking like center-rights or we are going to lose elections.

[lumpy]

97. The SOBs are working on cutting SS already and god knows

what else they have in store for us peasants.

[harun]

136. Yah, SS $$.

[crim son]

56. Ahhhh...

This is one time it would be a pleasure to have been mistaken. However I have a small hope that the media is now making a concerted effort to utterly discredit Obama before 2012 and this story is more hype than anything else. After all, the article says nothing substantial, not really.

"Compromiser-in-chief." Aint' it the truth? People, it's time to pick a challenger: this man has outlived his usefulness in office.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[doc03]

58. +1

[SammyWinstonJack]

59. +2

[MissDeeds]

65. +1000 n/t

[Ganja Ninja]

70. I won't vote for him ever again.

[Frisbee]

60. That's my President!

[GOTV]

62. Certainly THIS will bring Dems back to the polls.

[ProSense]

63. Not according to these reports:

US eyes strategy for Afghanistan transition, withdrawal

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The United States remains committed to a strategy to draw down US forces in Afghanistan starting next July but is studying the "pace" of the transition, a senior official said Tuesday.

US President Barack Obama "has been clear that we will begin in July of 2011 a responsible transition to Afghan security forces from American combat forces," the official said on condition of anonymity.

"What's not clear... is the pace of that transition. And the degree to which (US troops are withdrawn) and how far we go how fast."

The official said an annual review of the US strategy is being prepared which "will help the president and his national security team make assessment about the pace of the transition that begins next summer."

more

AP source: US reviewing its Afghanistan war plan

By ROBERT BURNS, AP National Security Writer Robert Burns

WASHINGTON – The Obama administration has begun its review of whether the administration's Afghan war strategy is working well enough to start withdrawing U.S. forces in July, an official said Tuesday.

The review is being conducted so the White House can measure whether Obama's 2009 order to commit 30,000 more troops has resulted in progress in the decade-old conflict.

It will be presented to the president in mid- to late-December, said a senior administration official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal White House deliberations.

Obama said his troop escalation was needed to break the momentum of the Taliban insurgency and to bolster the Afghan government. The review is supposed to determine whether the war strategy is on track and whether it is progressing as rapidly as possible.

Numerous senior military commanders and administration officials, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates, have said they are encouraged by signs of gradual progress in the battle against Taliban militants. But they also have said a lot more needs to be done before Afghanistan can stand on its own.

more

[zipplewrath]

72. The key sentence

"Obama promised to begin bringing U.S. forces home in July 2011 if security conditions allow that."

As much as I can believe the OP, this tug of war has been going on since the policy was first announced and there isn't much in the McClatchy report that goes beyond speculation. We really should wait for some more concrete action on the part of the White House before declaring it a done deal. Yes, this is very reminiscient of what went on with the public option, I know. None the less this really is a different animal.

The quoted sentence is the "other shoe" waiting to drop. The caveats on the withdrawl have always been very vague with people within the administration suggesting that it could be as small as 2000 troops or less. We'll know more in January, but the original commitment was weak, with little more than the "start" date being announced. There is plenty of room here for Obama to "keep" his promise of July, and do little else. Conversely, there has always been a fair amount of wishful thinking both in DoD and in the State Department that Obama could have his mind changed. Biden seems to think otherwise. As I say, I don't really think we'll know much until January. And the fact that the British PM came over here and said that they would be gone by 2015 suggests that we'll be there a long time regardless of what happens in the next 6 months.

[ProSense]

73. Yes, it's key

but it has nothing to do with the spin in the OP.

[zipplewrath]

88. It's no more spin than the AP article

There is a tug of war going on between the White House and the DoD, not to mention State. It's been there since the first day the policy was announced. This is merely the continuation of that conflict. Whether the White House point of view is dominating, or the DoD remains to be seen. You are seeing articles being written based upon the information provided by the different participants in the struggle. As I say, we won't know until January at the earliest, and really until well after July.

[jgraz]

96. Bookmark this post

The US will still be in Afghanistan at the end of 2011

The US will still be in Afghanistan at the end of 2012

The US will still be in Afghanistan at the end of 2013

The US will still be in Afghanistan at the end of 2014

The US will still be in Afghanistan at the end of 2015

The US will still be in Afghanistan at the end of 2016


Meanwhile, the retirement age for working Americans will be pushed to 70 by the end of 2010.

[TBF]

112. I used to say the more things change the more they stay the same,

now I've got to change it to "the worse they get".

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DirkGently]

67. Uh huh. Can't wait to hear that we're also "walking toward" open war in Pakistan.

[Dr Fate]

74. This will surely impress moderates & swing voters to vote for DEMS.

Obama's war & defense spending policies have been and will continue to be very popular with not just his base, but a majority of voters.

[Winston Wolf]

77. "You're Nearly A Laugh...

...but you're really a cry." - Pink Floyd, Pigs (Three Different Ones)

Kicked and recommended.

[Catherina]

78. Not good. Not good at all.

Email from a friend

Let's see just in the past week what hath Team Obama done to reinforce the brilliant decision by the Nobel committee to award the Peace award to Obama:

1) Went to land of Gandhi to negotiate 6th largest weapons deal in history;

2) Sec. of Defense for Team Obama said they would be pleased to help out (occupy) in Iraq for years to come- but only if invited of course;

3) Stated that U.S. will continue to slaughter Afghanis beyond the appropriately called "deadline"- with only noble intent to bring democracy of course;

4) Returns to the place where he grew up promising military cooperation- continued support of assassination squads etc.; (Documents Leak from Notorious US-Backed Unit as Obama Lands in Indonesia)

5) Claims Unchecked Authority to Kill Americans Outside Combat Zones.

It is only mid-week so there is lots more to come! Not bad for a peace prizer eh?

I am becoming mute.

[Fearless]

79. Surprize!

[AngryOldDem]

81. I think it was folly to believe it in the first place.

We will always have a military presence there.

But still, I'm coming to the conclusion that this President's word is less than golden on just about anything, anymore. Whatever it took to get elected, and then to shore up his support early on, he said. Trouble is, you can only ride that horse so far before people start expecting you to actually follow through on what you say.

And if we and the rest of NATO believe a word that comes out of Karzai's mouth...well, I just don't know what to say about that/

[Javaman]

82. We. Are. Never. Leaving.

haven't you all gotten that by now?

[NuttyFluffers]

85. oh, we'll leave of course. just not of our nation's own volition...

that's the tragedy.

*sigh* Obama... disappointing!

[area51]

90. I fear you're right. n/t

[Aramchek]

86. Your headline is a lie. But I doubt that concerns you much.

[Newsjock]

87. If you don't like the headline, take it up with McClatchy

Or, better yet, the White House. Not me.

[totodeinhere]

99. Who is the real liar? We shall see. n/t

[Kablooie]

89. War - it's what's for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and all meals in between.

[Matariki]

91. Endless War.

[placton]

92. another day, another lie revealed

*yawn* taint our country anymore folks

[Vidar]

93. Moving from "Cornpone's Disaster" to "Cornpone's Catastrophe".

My apologies to casts and crews of "L'il Abner" everywhere.

[TrogL]

98. Canada's staying on longer as well by reframing the debate.

I think we're calling it "training" this week.

[BlueIris]

100. There is only one agenda for this administration.

It's not a social agenda, or even an economic one. It is a military objective and this is its core. This administration will do anything to protect it, and the individuals (read: agencies) who want it to continue from even the slightest discomfort. It doesn't matter how unpopular it is with the American people, how badly it damages the Democratic Party's credibility, or our credibility internationally.

Ugly. Shameful and just wrong.

[sarcasmo]

102. So much for change, what a JOKE!

[and-justice-for-all]

103. Everyday I get a little more pissed off...nt

[readmoreoften]

104. Duh.

That was just a talking point. We're not building embassies the size of 80 football fields to abandon our mission of opening the middle east to capital markets.

[QC]

116. Just yesterday people were telling us this was a damnable lie!

I'm shocked, I tells ya. Shocked.

[meow mix]

124. fucking scammers

liars and cheats. really starting to hate the leaders.

i mean i knew this was coming up... but pre-knowledge doesnt seem to help quell any anger.

[TheWatcher]

105. New Propaganda Buzzword. "Tweaks."

Just another day in the Hell that was the formerly Free United States Of America.

We now end our Broadcast Day.

Your Daily Dose of Lies, Propaganda, and Brainwashing will resume at 6AM.

Sleep Well, Citizens.

[ProudDad]

122. Except for rich, white, male property holders

there has never BEEN a "free united states of america"...

[panzerfaust]

106. GITMO was closed though

And we have universal healthcare, and no more illegal wiretaps, DADT is dead, and the Bu$h war crime syndicate is under indightment.

So cut Obama a little slack. One man can only do so much.

Oh.

Right.

[Sky Masterson]

107. What if he isn't really planning on staying that long and is using

this "Tweak" to demoralize the opposition.
Or probably not

[City Lights]

111. Perpetual war, huh, what is it good for?

Absolutely nothin'!

(Other than the MIC, of course.)

[conspirator]

113. War is Peace!! n/t

[sarcasmo]

115. If you want to reduce the deficit stop being the World's Police.

[nalnn]

134. +1

For that one. That we are begged in some cases to police the trouble spots of the world and then criticized for it baffles me. In this statement I equate UN with US because we carry the weight of the peacekeeping forces both financially and militarily.

Flame away.

[Creative]

117. They have tweaked that troops in Korea thing a few times as well.

[StarsInHerHair]

118. how can we afford to stay so over-long?

we cannot afford their war pipe-dream.

[ProudDad]

119. Hell, troops are still going to be in IRAQ in 2014...

and 2024 and 2034 and 2044...

[ProudDad]

120. Why We Fight...

"Why We Fight describes the rise and maintenance of the United States military-industrial complex (originally called the military-industrial-congressional complex by Eisenhower) and its fifty-year involvement with the wars led by the United States to date, especially its 2003 Invasion of Iraq. The documentary asserts that in every decade since World War II, the American public was misled so that the Government (incumbent Administration) could take them to war and fuel the military-industrial economy maintaining American political dominance in the world. Interviewed about this matter, are politician John McCain, political scientist and former-CIA analyst Chalmers Johnson, politician Richard Perle, neoconservative commentator William Kristol, writer Gore Vidal, and public policy expert Joseph Cirincione."

Why We Fight documents the consequences of said foreign policy with the stories of a Vietnam War veteran whose son was killed in the September 11, 2001 attacks, and who then asked the military to write the name of his dead son on any bomb to be dropped in Iraq; and that of a twenty-three-year-old New Yorker who enlists in the United States Army because he was poor and in debt, his decision impelled by his mother's death; and a female military explosives scientist who arrived in the U.S. as a refugee child from Vietnam in 1975."

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=921985882642198...

Thanks for this, Eisenhower -- why didn't you do something about it, fucker? Why didn't you warn about the MIC in your Inaugural address instead of your farewell address -- after Nixon lost to Kennedy who out saber-rattled you republicans...

[ProudDad]

121. Washington Rules...

Washington Rules by Andrew Basevich...

Best description of the "Permanent War Economy(tm)" that I know of...

"Andrew Bacevich has written another authoritative and well written book examining the U.S. military and its influence on the United States. His writing, as with his earlier works, is provocative, challenging, well researched, informative, and logically argued. Only someone thoroughly imbued with the rhetoric of U.S. benign stewardship of global affairs and ignorant of many key events within recent and current U.S. foreign affairs might be able to ignore Bacevich’s presentations and contentions about U.S. foreign policy and U.S. militarism."

This most recent work, Washington Rules, is appropriately titled and well focused on the one main theme that ‘Washington’ - the political and military structures of U.S. government - is responsible for and the only country capable of maintaining world peace through global leadership and the only means to do so is through military might. This leads to Bacevich’s “trinity”: a global military presence, global power projection, and global intervention. The route this trinity takes through successive governments from Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon through to Bush, Clinton, and more Bush demonstrates that it is neither a Democratic nor a Republican ideal but is instead a government institutional ideal that all presidencies have bought into up to and including Obama. The media presents presidents as being the “…Decider, a president all too often becomes little more than the medium through which power is exercised.”"

http://www.palestinechronicle.com/view_article_details....

Obama too was blinded in his insecurity by all the bloody ribbons and military bullshit...

[meow mix]

123. make that 2020, at least.

half a democratic term left, and then 2 republican terms again

[tomg]

126. If this is the case, then

I am done. I marched in the streets against Johnson before I marched against Nixon. I guess this time, it is the reverse, Bush to Obama.

[sarcasmo]

127. In related news, the new Congress says we have to up retirement age to keep paying for these

wars because we have borrowed you're Social Security check.

[Octafish]

128. Gosh. Why?

There is no good reason for their presence there now.

All the oil in the world won't bring back a single life lost in war.

Besides, since when is Robert Gates the Commander-in-Chief?

[Imagevision]

129. And 50,000 will remain in Iraq - betcha didn't know that?

[BlueIris]

133. But, but this president is *anti* war!! He cares about peace,

about as much as he cares about rights for GLBTIQ citizens.

[jeanpalmer]

130. If the generals won't give him permission

how is he supposed to leave?

[No Elephants]

131. In other news, lasting mid-east peace seems elusive.

[BlueIris]

132. Obama's true objective.

Everything, and I mean everything else, is designed to usher this along and cover it up.

This? Is unacceptable and unsustainable.

[harun]

135. Fail