Meanwhile, over in freeper land, they're bitching that Obama has an exit strategy for Afghanistan.

[apnu]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2397697/posts

They seem to be harping on the fact that Obama's putting a time table on the Afghan war, and not the 30k of troops he's sending in the mean time, which everybody is bitching about here. Apparently with Afghanistan, Obama can't make anybody happy.

[tekisui]

1. He makes the generals and the MIC happy.

[TheWraith]

6. Thank you for your "concern." nt

[arcadian]

12. You're still playing THAT old game?

I thought that went out of style two years ago.

[tekisui]

15. And, it wasn't even a concern post I made.

:rofl:

It was a matter of truth.

[NJmaverick]

25. "It was a matter of truth."

:rofl:

[tekisui]

28. You seriously don't think that the generals want this?

You don't think the military industry isn't salivating and counting their profits?

Now that is funny.

[NJmaverick]

29. Do you know a general? Have you ever talked to one?

Yet you think you know what they want. Most generals that have spoken on the matter have had little good to say about the activity. They are none to thrilled about sending fine men and women to be killed or maimed.

[tekisui]

32. National Security Adviser James Jones:

"Generals always ask for more troops. Take it from me," Jones told SPIEGEL in an interview. "I believe we will not solve the problem with troops alone. The minimum number is important, of course. But there is no maximum number, however." General Jones explained: "You can keep on putting troops in, and you could have 200,000 troops there and Afghanistan will swallow them up as it has done in the past."

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,659903,00.html

[NJmaverick]

36. Asking for the people to get an assigned job done and getting that request fullfilled

is not the same as "making the generals happy". You comment implies that the generals have a personal stake in keeping the war going and expanding that war. Yet that is clearly not the case. Obama has given the Generals a mission to carry out in Afghanistan. They came back saying they needed 40,000 or more troops to complete that assignment. President Obama has studied the situation and has determined less can get the job done. I know the basic facts lack the tinfoil hat aspects you prefer, but it's important we are honest in the assessment.

[tekisui]

40. No tinfoil needed.

You give Obama too much credit on determining the final troop number. The generals wanted 80,000. Wars (and the troops to escalate wars) make careers for generals. It is an opportunity for them. Their business is war.

Obama is giving them almost all the troops we have. He was limited by the number available. It is physically impossible (without changing laws) to add more than 40,000. The troops simply do not exist.

[phasma ex machina]

38. Deleted

[NJmaverick]

26. A lot of game playing going on, including this post

:eyes:

[peace frog]

2. Obama can't make them happy

about any-damn-thing, and it's by design not on accident.

[Horse with no Name]

3. Why do you hang out in freeperville?

Is it a NEW "shock" everyday that they don't like Obama?
"Most" of us here feel okay with the man--but some of us disagree with the policy and are able to separate the two.
You KNOW they don't like the man, ergo they don't like the policy. Oh, and they hate him because he is black too.
So, why drag this shit here like you discovered something? You didn't. It is old news.
Not only that--you helped their website by "visiting". Good job.

[apnu]

7. Simple curiosity, that's all

I like to know what the other side (in terms of the Internet's chat warriors) thinks. I found their focus on the same issue interesting to post here.

In freeperland they're mad that he's looking to end this. In DU land, many are made that he's adding more troops as part of the end. I find that interesting.

As for "helping" them, no not at all, my couple of hit counts don't amount to anything much at all.

[YOY]

4. Us: he could make happy depending on his actions. Them: he can never make happy.

It doesn't matter what he does they will think the worst of it. He could do exactly what Bush did...and they wouldn't like it. They're dumb as fucking hammers that way.

Now us? Believe it or not, we can be placated.

[apnu]

9. Given the near instant pissing and moaning here about Obama since day one...

... I find it hard to believe DU can ever be placated. If that happens, I'll be pleasantly surprised.

[YOY]

10. If he repeals DADT like he said he would...you'll see it.

Many of us would have been happy with a Robust Public option in 2nd place of a single payer system and not this bullshit HCR non-reform.


Many of us would like to see spending on unwinable wars of attrition versus an enemy that doesn't give a shit about attrition.


It's not hard to placate us. We're only asking for a bit of sanity. It's not even far left. It's regular sane policy that is normal elsewhere.

[apnu]

23. Isn't the repeal of DADT on the table?

Or did I miss something? Besides, I thought the repeal of DADT something Congress has to start, its a law that Clinton signed yes? So to repeal the law (if not overturned by the SCOUTS) has to begin with Congress right?

Now I do agree that the HCR is some high bullshit, but I fail to see how that's Obama's fault alone. Where's the rage at Congress? I think its a crap bill, I think the House and Senate didn't even try to come up with anything good.

He's working to pull us out of Iraq now and he's going to give us an exit strategy for Afghanistan. Folks are still pissed off about it here. I find it funny that people here and the freepers are pissed at Obama on the same subject. Hence the "he can't please anybody" notion in regards to Afghanistan.

The "change" we were promised is coming, just slowly. But then that's how government usually operates, slowly.

[YOY]

39. When it's done and gone then you'll see it. Not when it's on the table.

I am well aware of how Government works...and well aware that we will capitualize on every goddamn progressive item as long as we have Republican lite leadership.

You will see a happy day at DU when DADT is gone. Not sooner.

[Horse with no Name]

11. Maybe if he abandoned republican ideals and embraced Democratic ideals

You might see some attitude adjustments.
Most of us thought we were getting a President who wanted to change REAL things....not just rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic.

[peace frog]

13. What a concept!

embracing truly Democratic ideals. Just when you hope it can happen,,,,, NAH.

[mopinko]

22. +1

when pigs fly

[Rosa Luxemburg]

5. why aren't the Freepers out on the front line instead of on their computers?

[apnu]

8. That's a good question, with a good answer: They're chickenhawks. (nt)

[montanto]

14. What timeline?

I read all about it this a.m. and didn't see a timeline.

[tekisui]

16. Latest report is that withdrawal will be in three years.

Obama is going to speed up the deployment: 30,000 troops in 6 months, and fix it quick.

Build an Afghan military, police force, infrastructure, legitimize the government, eradicate al-qaeda and the Taliban and leave----all before his re-election bid.

[apnu]

17. Yup, here's CNN's report on the matter

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/01/obama.afghanistan/index.html

[montanto]

21. Thanks.

[montanto]

19. Thanks

I hadn't seen anything so concrete as "three years."

[montanto]

24. All that stuff we're gonna do:

"Build an Afghan military, police force, infrastructure, legitimize the government, eradicate al-qaeda and the Taliban" sounds a little like the government mandated education standards that teachers are supposed to live up to. In that case, I have to ask: are the other raw materials of that reform in place? Or just our money and intentions? Because if our only resources are OUR money and OUR intentions we are doomed. The Afghanis have to want this more than we do. What are we doing to help them build their resolve I wonder?

[unapatriciated]

18. He can but he won't...

He can make us happy by ending our occupation

He will never make them happy - ever

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

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

[NJmaverick]

27. Truth of the matter is Obama took the middle ground

he is not going for an open ended commitment, that could lead to another Vietnam and he is not going to have a drastic and sudden pull out that will leave a power vacuum that would lead to the Taliban and Al Qaeda moving back in and declaring victory.

[apnu]

31. Yes he is and I believe, given the realities of the world, that's the best course to take.

I'm not upset with Obama's injection of 30K worth of troops, because he's giving them a mission and an exit. I'm OK with that. Afghanistan should never have lasted this long, if thinking men where leading this country. Bush and Cheney were neither thinkers or men, IMO

[NJmaverick]

37. Agreed

[TwilightGardener]

30. Yes, those Iraq timetables proved to be so devastating.

Not.

[apnu]

33. Well I wasn't saying the freepers are smart, or even aware of their surroundings...

I just found that thread amusing.

[TwilightGardener]

34. Wasn't shooting the messenger--I sneak a peek over there sometimes too.

[apnu]

35. Its all good.

:toast: