It Looks Like Obama is Going to Have Over 100,000 Troops in Afghanistan

[tekisui]

How do you feel about that?

In addition to the 68,000 US troops already there, he is set to add another 34,000. Out of the 102,000 total that will be in Afghanistan, Obama will have sent over half, 55,000, of them to the battlefield.

Make no mistake. This is President Obama's War. How and why it started 8 years ago is immaterial to the current expansion. The decision to escalate now is as bad a decision as the initial invasion into Iraq.

He is setting himself, the military and the Democratic Party up for failure.

[TheCowsCameHome]

1. No matter who is in power, this country never seems to learn, does it?

[tekisui]

3. The US is addicted to War.

[TheCowsCameHome]

6. Because those who live off of war call the shots.

(No pun intended)

Of course the military is going to advise escalation. It's like asking a 6 year-old if he wants another bag of candy.

D'oh.

[HughBeaumont]

33. Have you seen this?

http://www.amazon.com/Addicted-War-U-S-Cant-Militarism/dp/1904859011/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257778483&sr=8-1

Doesn't matter who's in office - the Pentasewer MUST get theirs.

[tekisui]

43. I'll check that out, for sure.

Thanks.

[RKP5637]

8. The US seems to love war. My entire life the US has been at war with someone or

thinking about it...

[Me.]

2. Sick

Those two wars would more than pay for health care

[Rosa Luxemburg]

4. Let's get it done by February and then get them out

[tekisui]

5. Obama's latest escalation probably won't even begin by then.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

35. NATO can do it all (with few US troops)

[tekisui]

50. Huh?

Do what all?

And, the US will be providing the lion's share of troops.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

53. no lionshare

I said few

[tekisui]

54. You are mistaken. We will be the majority(by far) of the force.

We already are. And, you still haven't defined what, exactly, it is they will get done.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

70. they must be making sure a pipeline is being built or defended

[bobbolink]

73. Kinda like the Russians did?

It's so sad to me that this generation knows nothing of history. :(

[ThomCat]

14. Get WHAT done by February?

The still don't have any concrete achievable objectives. They don't know what "done" means, or what it would look like. Just just think they will recognize victory when they find it. :(

[TheCowsCameHome]

17. February of when?

Not any February in this quarter-century

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

26. "Get It Done By Feb"????? Riiiiiiiggght

Empire, meet the graveyard.

[walldude]

68. Get what done exactly?

The same thing none of the other Empires could do in a thousand years? Or maybe you are talking about securing the leadership of the man who won in a fixed election?

There is nothing to "get done" in Afghanistan unless you are one of the "kill em' all" people.

The only smart thing to do is pull out and take anyone who feels their life will be in danger when we leave with us.

[JVS]

72. I think your namesake just rolled a little bit from that one.

[Stinky The Clown]

7. A new day in America ..... forecast to be a little cloudy, though.

[spanone]

9. how do you know that before anyone else???

[ThomCat]

15. Adding troups has been in the news already.

This isn't any big surprise. :shrug:

[spanone]

30. the 'possiblility' of adding troops has been in the news.

[ThomCat]

34. When the pentagon spokespeople talk about the posibility

they already have the plans drawn up and they are already pushing for final approval. Haven't you been paying attention since, oh, Vietnam?

If you accept every disclaimer that the official spokespeople give you, then nothing controversial is ever really happening until suddenly it is already done somehow.

:shrug:

[spanone]

45. no shit, the pentagon wants to increase troops? color me surprised. have you been paying attention

the pentagon ALWAYS wants to increase troops

[ThomCat]

69. What does that response have to do with anything?

You ask where his information comes from as if the OP was impossible. I point out the way the pentagon misleads in their press conferences to imply that they aren't sure if troops are being rolled out when in fact it is in fact already planned out and in the works. You apparently didn't know this, and you should.

Now you are asking if I'm paying attention about the pentagon wanting to send out troops?

Dude, chill. Clearly you are spouting off just to 'hear' yourself.

Yes, I know that the pentagon always wants to send out more troops. They're the pentagon. That's and give away money to defense contractors is what they do.

Next time you are clueless, and someone posts information you knew nothing about, read it and learn something instead of challenging people as if only you are supposed to know anything. :eyes:

[tekisui]

48. All Afghan War Options by Obama Aides Said to Call for More Troops

And here is the latest from McClatchy:

Obama leaning toward 34,000 more troops for Afghanistan

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama is nearing a decision to send more than 30,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan next year, but he may not announce it until after he consults with key allies and completes a trip to Asia later this month, administration and military officials have told McClatchy.

As it now stands, the administration's plan calls for sending three Army brigades from the 101st Airborne Division at Fort Campbell, Ky. and the 10th Mountain Division at Fort Drum, N.Y. and a Marine brigade, for a total of as many as 23,000 additional combat and support troops.

Another 7,000 troops would man and support a new division headquarters for the international force's Regional Command (RC) South in Kandahar, the Taliban birthplace where the U.S. is due to take command in 2010. Some 4,000 additional U.S. trainers are likely to be sent as well, the officials said.

The first additional combat brigade probably would arrive in Afghanistan next March, the officials said, with the other three following at roughly three-month intervals, meaning that all the additional U.S. troops probably wouldn't be deployed until the end of next year. Army brigades number 3,500 to 5,000 soldiers; a Marine brigade has about 8,000 troops.

more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/78516.html

[tekisui]

20. It is all over the place.

Every plan being offered by every aid includes an increase of troops. The number that has been most reported is 30,000-34,000.

[LWolf]

10. I feel fury.

I carry a deep well of anger towards fellow democrats who nominated and elected another war president.

[NOW tense]

11. What I would like to know is

How many more contractors are going too? We don't even know how many are there....


http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gvQlyHowpvHMFiUYAVZxfGZ8oCyA
The Pentagon in April counted about 160,000 contractors mainly in Iraq, Afghanistan and Kuwait but Central Command recorded more than 242,000 contractors a month earlier.

[Ozymanithrax]

12. Surprised by this, I am not.

We are the empire.

An empire does what an empire does.

End this agreesion, you want?

End the empire.

[Mari333]

13. he does, and he is toast. I wont vote for him again, ever,.

he will be on my shitlist asap. I will consider him another george bush and another neocon.

[closeupready]

38. +1

n/t

[SammyWinstonJack]

52. +1.

:thumbsup:

[SIMPLYB1980]

16. I'm fine with it.

About time we got serious with the real fight against terrorism.

[Mari333]

18. george bush and dick cheney, halliburton and XE and Triple Canopy

all thank you for your support. the oil companies thank you.

and they thank you for believing their propaganda.

[BeHereNow]

59. +1

Unreal, eh?
BHN

[TheCowsCameHome]

19. Wow.

Just wow.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

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

[SIMPLYB1980]

23. So you finally put me on ignore?

:rofl: :popcorn:

[SIMPLYB1980]

22. To bad it's my opinion and I have made it

quite clear that I have always supported Afghanistan. If you don't like it that's to bad. Obama is going to do what he thinks is right regardless of what people post on DU.

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

27. Go! Fight! Kill! Woohoo!

Yup, yer a liberator!

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

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

[QC]

32. Here you go:

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/pdf/enlistment.pdf

[SIMPLYB1980]

37. Funny did that ever work when you used it on a republican?

Oh yeah we are still in Iraq and Afghanistan. Why don't you go join the peace corps and try and stop it that way?

http://www.peacecorps.gov/

[QC]

40. Nope, never worked on the Republicans, either. n/t

Chickenhawk bloodlust is a powerful thing.

[QC]

39. wrong place

[madrchsod]

25. really? we are going to win the war on terrorism?

interesting.......

[madrchsod]

24. we have been at war since 1941......

[AzDar]

28. It's stupid.

"The Graveyard Of Empires".

[Algorem]

31. Obomba lama fofama

bing bang bobomba,Obomba

[TexasObserver]

36. His war policy is a disaster.

He's become a clueless toadie for the military-industrial complex, a lackey in their never ending war against our US budget.

[rusty fender]

41. Yup, they own him.

We are War, Inc.

[Butch350]

42. And you are a Political advisor to who again?

What's the matter? You just want everybody without a job. At least people in the military are working.

[tekisui]

44. Are you serious?

I really can't tell.

[montanto]

46. Yay, the sooner we bankrupt ourselves

completely the sooner we stop fucking around with stuff we don't understand and never could have fixed anyway.




:sarcasm: just in case

[unhappycamper]

47. At a million dollars per soldier per year, this is gonna get expensive pretty quickly.

Coming soon, to a port near you:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

49. The "New Strategy". When stuck in hole dig deeper. Same one LBJ had.

[latebloomer]

55. "We're waist deep in the Big Muddy"

"The big fool says to push on."

[Individualist]

51. DLC and the military industrial complex go hand in hand

DLC and war profiteering
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/12/1/52221/7678

[rd_kent]

56. Link? Proof? How do YOU know this?

[tekisui]

67. I've been following the story.

And here is the latest from McClatchy:

Obama leaning toward 34,000 more troops for Afghanistan

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama is nearing a decision to send more than 30,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan next year, but he may not announce it until after he consults with key allies and completes a trip to Asia later this month, administration and military officials have told McClatchy.

As it now stands, the administration's plan calls for sending three Army brigades from the 101st Airborne Division at Fort Campbell, Ky. and the 10th Mountain Division at Fort Drum, N.Y. and a Marine brigade, for a total of as many as 23,000 additional combat and support troops.

Another 7,000 troops would man and support a new division headquarters for the international force's Regional Command (RC) South in Kandahar, the Taliban birthplace where the U.S. is due to take command in 2010. Some 4,000 additional U.S. trainers are likely to be sent as well, the officials said.

The first additional combat brigade probably would arrive in Afghanistan next March, the officials said, with the other three following at roughly three-month intervals, meaning that all the additional U.S. troops probably wouldn't be deployed until the end of next year. Army brigades number 3,500 to 5,000 soldiers; a Marine brigade has about 8,000 troops.

more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/78516.html

[bdamomma]

57. all this money for wars and none for Healthcare, what total BS!!

why aren't we out in the streets???

[BeHereNow]

63. Taking to the streets wont help or happen.

The MIC is a monster truck rolling over us, the ants.
BHN

[BeHereNow]

58. Not to mention the unknown numbers of private contractors there...

that we, the people pay for.

FUBAR cluster fuck to "$$$$ benefit $$$$" the few at the cost of many.

BHN:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

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

[BeHereNow]

61. Welcome to DU

Unfortunately, there is no "win" in Afghanistan-
Unless you are a stockholder in the the myriad of
corporations behind perpetuating this cluster fuck in the ME.

BHN

[harun]

65. What would a "win" be?

[happy2bhere]

62. well the CIA needs help harvesting their opium

Humanity is far beyond the need to kill people just because they cannot communicate, need to make money etc, it is time for the politicians to catch up.

A few years ago I was thinking to myself, can't these greedy bastards find ways to steal money without killing people? Then along came the bank bailout where they took trillions without having to do all the work of making up lies, writing forgeries etc. Now they have taken everyone's houses, they are charging 30% on credit cards, stealing more through insurance companies and overcharging on oil, food etc. I wish they would just focus on this and at least stop killing people. Is that too much to ask?

[BeHereNow]

64. Welcome to DU

We are so far gone as a country- people just haven't caught up with
the outrageous financial looting of the PTB- people are starting to wake up, but I think
it is far too late and the worst is yet to come.
Just wait until the effects of climate change hit full force among
the poverty stricken populations of the world, which by then, will include
the majority of Americans.

BHN

[Vattel]

66. I've tried hard to find a coherent justification for escalation,

and I still hope Obama knows something I don't, but as far as I can see there is no justification for continuing to send Americans there to die and kill at the cost of 2-3 billion per month. At a fraction of the cost, wonderful things could be accomplished without killing anyone. Imagine an America committed to purely defensive uses of military power and to, say, radically reducing infant mortality in Africa, or ensuring affordable healthcare for all Americans, or . . . Would we be less secure? Would it be easier or harder to recruit terrorists to attack us? Would we have more or less cooperation from our allies? Would more innocent persons die or fewer? I'd like to find out, but let's face it: Americans are addicted to killing.

[bobbolink]

71. It's a shame he's too young to see he's repeating the mistakes of Johnson.

I saw this coming, but......

:cry: