2 Sep

More Deaths In Afghanistan Under Obama Than Under 8 Years Of Bush

                                       

(h/t Gateway Pundit)

The utter hypocrisy in our media and on the left is on display with the above graph.

The United States has now lost more military men and women in Afghanistan under President Obama than during 8 years of the Bush Administration.

We couldn’t go a day without frontpage headlines emblazoned across every paper and on every nightly newscast about the death toll in Iraq. Each new report vilifying Bush.

Now?

Not so much blame for our current President.

Hmmmmm, I wonder why?

Proof at Say Anything:

A couple of years ago, every casualty in Iraq was front page news. Tallies of casualties could be seen on the front pages of newspapers, commentators would slowly recite the names of the fallen, even Doonesbury would print a list in the Sunday comics. It was Bush’s war then, and people needed to see just how heartless he was wasting the precious lives of our service men and women over there!

Where is Code Pink? Where are the Cindy Sheehans of the Left? Why is no one camped out on the road to Martha’s Vineyard, or his Hawaiian vacation villa, or the many golf courses he frequents? Is it that there are just too many of them? Or was it never really about the deaths of soldiers for the Left? Was it all just a crass excuse to try to gain and retain political power for themselves and their cronies by playing on our sympathies?

Hopey-Changey got elected and now the death count ain’t all that big a deal.

Ridiculous hypocrisy.

About Curt

Curt served in the Marine Corps for four years and has been a law enforcement officer in Los Angeles for the last 24 years.
This entry was posted in Afghanistan, Barack Obama, Bush 43, Bush Derangement Syndrome, Media, Military, MSM Bias, Politics, War On Terror. Bookmark the permalink. Thursday, September 2nd, 2010 at 5:00 am
| 1,416 views

148 Responses to More Deaths In Afghanistan Under Obama Than Under 8 Years Of Bush

  1. Patvann says: 101

    The more I think about this, the more I feel sick to my stomach. This is far beyond any “rage” I have ever felt in my life, and yet all my usual methods of calming don’t seem to be doing anything to bring me back.

    My music seems lifeless, and my distractions feel false.

    I want my son back, and my guilt for cheering him on, is overwhelming me.

    what have i done?

    ReplyReply
  2. Old Trooper 2 says: 102

    @ Patvann, your Son is doing the right thing and you Sir have every right to be proud of him.

    Do not take stock of your fears at this point.

    ReplyReply
  3. suek says: 103

    Patvann…

    I have one there as well. He’s in Iraq, and probably safer than yours, but the fact is that nowhere over there is safe.

    I agree with OT2..do not take stock of your fears. Besides – in spite of your cheering and encouraging, it was his decision, unless he’s less of a man than you think he is.

    Although the cost is horrific, I think in the long run, America will come out on the winning end of this – no matter what the apparent outcome. These young men will come home to be the leaders of the country for tomorrow. What they see and what see needs to be done, and what they see from the government that sent them will instruct and support them, and the nation will be the better for them. I honestly believe that.

    But it will be hard to hold on to that till they come back…

    ReplyReply
  4. Skookum says: 104

    PV, I and many others here at FA stand with you and feel at least a portion of your anguish.

    You are not alone. Skook.

    ReplyReply
  5. PATVANN: hi, YOU know that your son is where HE choose to be,
    HIS young days of admiring a brave father , shaped his mind ‘
    to fight to protect the freedom,and for what you gave him as a father’s love,
    that’s what he wanted, and would not change anything,
    IT’s normal for a father to be submerged with doubt and regrets
    those are genuine emotions from that great love between father and son.
    IT is hard to shake, and dont try to, but it will diminish in intensity and
    become eazyer to face them , I for one know that MUSIC heal the emotions,
    put some on right now,it’s time to listen to good music. bye SR, with all my respect to you.

    ReplyReply
  6. Smorgasbord says: 106

    @Old Trooper 2: #99 When you said, “The War is just an unpleasant distraction….”I don’t know if you meant that you thought it was a distraction or that you meant Obama thought is was a distraction. I know who’s side Obama is on, and it ain’t ours.

    The only peace talks that will work with the Taliban is the one a bumper sticker says. It says, “It’s God’s job to judge the terrorists… It’s our mission to arrange the meeting!” U. S. Marines.

    ReplyReply
  7. Skookum says: 107

    OT, I had a relative drink himself to death after six and a half decades because he fought for the winning side and still lost the war. Oh, he was very successful, but a quart of vodka a day takes its toll on a body sooner or later.

    I am speaking of one of the few survivors of the Polish Squadrons who only lived to kill more National Socialists. He still talked of not being allowed to march in the Victory parade in London because Stalin had a death sentence for all those who ran to fight for the allies and he might have “Put Out” at the sight of the few remaining Poles actually marching in the Victory Parade, even if the represented a group with a 2.5% survival rate.

    Did we win the Peace? I am afraid that is one thing that I must argue with you. Stalin had his personal agents well placed in the US government, confirmed by the Verona Cables, so well placed that Roosevelt was being personally advised by a Communist Agent at Pottsdam.

    The Hell that Eastern Europe suffered behind the Communist Curtain can hardly be considered a Victory. Like many families, we had multiple warriors in that great conflict, but in some strange way, that one man’s betrayal reminds me of the betrayal of our troops in the ME who are being marginalized with an attitude that is even worse than the one that forbade our Polish Warriors permission to march in a stupid parade.

    In that conflict we were fighting two wars for our very existence. Lately, we or more appropriately- you, have been fighting in one of two wars, in which strategy and logistics have been manipulated to gain Domestic Political Advantage. This is a criminal act in my opinion and if our brave patriots like yourself had the cynical attitude of Democrats or the Polish Squadron survivors, this country would be on the verge of collapse because of the incompetence and political corruption within the present administration.

    Can we win the War and Peace? Not unless this war continues until we have a new President, this one is all to ready to hand us defeat to accomplish another Marxist coup within our own borders, victory means nothing to him. Roosevelt may have been advised by Soviet Agents, but our enemies don’t need well entrenched agents, they only need to wait.

    ReplyReply
  8. Old Trooper 2 says: 108

    @ Smorgasbord, Amen Bro but I was not a Marine. My unit from 75th Ranger Regiment jumped into Kandahar to start this fight a couple of years back and the only thing that I feared was the local water, if you get my drift. 8-O

    @ Patvann, not to worry. Your Son is in good hands and under competent Leadership over there.
    I have been to the Stans twice and Iraq, Somalia in my younger hard charging days and the Balkans. You are as safe with Your Pardners in the Stans or safer than waiting on a bus on the streets of Chicago. I have about 2,800 Pardners there now and many sons & daughters of my friends. Take heart and not the stock of your fears. If I was 20 years younger I would be deployed again and with 5th Group or my beloved Rangers out looking for the Taliban and kicking some tail.
    Your Son is no different and is a part of America’s Second Greatest Generation.

    Be He Army, Navy, Air Force or Marine, it is a Joint Forces OP and take pride in his efforts and let the worrying take care of itself. Regardless of Who resides at the White House, We take Care of Our Own as I trained my Officers and NCOs to do.

    Kandahar is not a Sunday School picnic but it is not East St. Louis, Chicago or Downtown Detroit either. Take a knee and repeat this Prayer…”Though I walk through the Valley of Death, I will Fear no Evil because I am the Meanest SOB in the Valley” AMEN!

    ReplyReply
  9. Smorgasbord says: 109

    @Patvann: #101 One thing we all can do is that in all of the future elections we should demand that we have a president and Congress that wants the biggest and baddest military so that any country or terrorist organization will know that if they come after us they will be destroyed.

    One way to do this is to get politicians who will agree to introduce a bill that would fund the government by the numbers. Each agency will be given a number rating. The military will be #1. It will be the only #1. This would include the VA. After #1 is funded, then they go to #2, then on until the money runs out. The agencies who aren’t getting as much money as they want will start looking for any pork barrel spending in the agencies that got their funding. This would help end the pork barrel spending which should not be allowed in the first place.

    If you and others think the funding by the numbers is a good idea, please contact your politicians and suggest it to them. I don’t see the incumbents doing it for obvious reasons, so we would have to ask the ones running to replace them to do it.

    Most of us know that Bill Clinton balanced his budget by reducing the military and intelligence agencies so much that we had some soldiers overseas living in buildings that had been condemned. We had to pull our two agent out of Iraq because of this.

    We need to make sure that the military gets funded enough to be a deterrent before we are attacked so that soldiers like your son will have less worry about going into a combat situation.

    If it weren’t for the ones who went “over there” in each war we have had, I wouldn’t be speaking English right now. The ones who do the actual fighting to keep me free should get the best training, equipment, etc. They should also get lifetime medical care without having to prove that something on the battlefield probably made them sick years later. I will gladly pay higher taxes to make sure the ones keeping me free are taken care of properly for the rest of their lives.

    Again, the idea is for our military to be known around the world as something not to mess with. Can anyone else remember that if a country messed with an American civilian unjustly that country was in serious trouble? We need to bring back that attitude.

    ReplyReply
  10. Old Trooper 2 says: 110

    @ Skookum, I will get with you by email on the Hungarian Revolt in 1959.I will have dinner tonight with the Grand Niece of a Hungarian Patriot of that era. Ms Sonja Dobos will eat my cooking tonight.

    No snickers from the FA bunch. My Daughter likes her.

    Amazing how Democrats never finish a War with Freedom in mind for Allies. Obama is just following an old Democrat Tradition.

    Stalin was quite the guy and NOT someone that I would talk terms with. .45 ACP is what he would understand. I keep a few 1911s about the house.

    Off to get a great American Meatloaf out of the oven.

    BTW, that troublesome Morgan gelding, named Mike, will wear a pack tomorrow. A couple of my Hands will pack him up heavy and lead his rude @ss up to OP#3 that is about a 40 minute ride all uphill. That should give “mike” the work ethic no doubt.

    Fall round up is the movement of about 2K head of beef to Winter pasture. Grub, Horses, tack, potable (Adult) beverages, long guns & ammunition and keen lodging provided. Free Enterprise lives in Montana. But not in Detroit, Cleveland, NYFC or other refuges of Mandatory Charity.

    ReplyReply
  11. Old Trooper 2 says: 111

    @ rich wheeler, You supported that. Don’t play Mr. stupid with me Mr. USMC Semper Fi one tour Marine.

    I know better and so do You. Come to Montana, ride a horse and bring your Bride to see America at it could be or be someone that served Once and has your blinders on.

    ReplyReply
  12. Skookum says: 112

    OT, I will be anxious to hear about the Hungarian Revolt, I remember looking at those pictures of war for the first time back before magazines became propaganda rags. It was shocking for a twelve year old to see men attacking tanks with Molotovs and pistols.

    Good luck with the meat loaf and the romantic dinner, oh to be a young man once again!

    Glad to hear you are going on with Mike. The 140 pound plus packs can take the starch out of many of them. I used to pack them for three days and them climb aboard, they were so glad to have live weight instead of those packs they were often anxious to please and ready to start with a blank slate. It is extremely hard to buck on an uphill grade. Once the rider replaces the packs, the horse is usually too tired to resist, but you can start reining the horse as you follow the trail, directing the horse around each boulder and tree with the reins, it is boring work since the horse must go around each obstacle anyway, but the horse will learn the basics of reining in a subliminal manner in one or two days.

    I misread your post, I thought it said 40 miles, oh well. Packing salt in the high country is excellent work for a hooligan. Concerning the biting, try to keep yourself in a good position without appearing defensive. If they sense your defensive posture it will only re-enforce the behavior, they love to evoke emotion in humans. That way they can judge you and know where you stand, they are excellent judges of humans and if they can get you to reveal your emotions so much the better for them. The guy who can do everything without emotion will keep a horse much more respectful. None the less, biting is unacceptable, a swift and powerful response without emotion and then acting as if you have forgotten the offense immediately will cue the horse to stop the habit. Just as we have contempt for a dog that is a fear biter, a horse has the utmost disrespect for someone who lashes out over and over from a position of relative safety, if a horse loses respect for you or is afraid of you, make sure your medical is paid up.

    He may buck the packs off two or three times, put them back on and he will begin to get tired. If you adjust them lower on his ribs, he will find it harder to get his air, of course you will need a diamond with at least a small top pack over them to make this work. If they are too low and too tight he might collapse, as always judgement is required. I like to restrict the air a bit on a tough one in the higher elevations.

    Cheating is allowed with hooligans.

    Have a good evening in God’s country.

    ReplyReply
  13. SALTY ONE Re.#111 WHAT ARE YOU ACCUSING ME OF NOW?

    BTW One 13 month combat tour is exactly one tour more than many flag waving pontificators here at F.A. have experienced.

    ReplyReply
  14. another vet says: 114

    A little behind here but-

    johngalt #61- Looks like a pattern.

    rich wheeler #71- I based my statement on a FOX news report on their web site that had it as one of their top stories around 29 October 2009 when the visit to Dover happened. They even had the Bush administration’s response to the accusations stating that President Bush frequently met with the troops’ families but it was policy not to have the press there out of respect for privacy to the families. I believe Ari Fleischer delivered the response. Two other people I talked to today remember the statement being made including ‘Randy’ who also posts here. I’ll try to get a copy of the story just to make sure we didn’t misread something like it being a third party making the statement instead of someone in the Obama administration.

    Old Trooper 2- I agree 100% with all of your assessments. Too many sacrifcies were made and will continue to be made for this to result in a victory for the other side. Victory for us is the ONLY answer. Unfortuantely POTUS still doesn’t get it.

    Patvann- Tell your son thanks for his service and I wish him all the best.

    ReplyReply
  15. Old Trooper 2 says: 115

    Your Complicated whine may not be served up with Cheeses to your satisfaction.

    Bugger off !!!

    ReplyReply
  16. Randy says: 116

    OT2,
    Here you are in my back yard with out a how are ya while I am in Gardner looking for cows with an X lazy M!

    ReplyReply
  17. Randy says: 117

    Patvan,
    My son is in Afghanistan. He is there because “he wasn’t smart enough to get a scholarship to Harvard”. He really is there because he at 22 has more patriotic blood in him than most of congress and much more than our current president. You did the right thing to encourage your son. He will come back with a look at life that everyone needs to have. It is much harded having your son in a combat zone than it is being their myself. I would have gone, but I reached that mandatory retirement date!

    I wrote an article while I was in Iraq in 2003 while the Dems were acting like their ignorant selves. I said that those of us who were in Iraq knew the truth and understood the reason we were there. I also said that we vote and will compete for office with those who seek only political position. Both proved true.

    OT2- I listen to you. Responding to jerks like John Ryan and his supporters is a waste of time. When we know the truth, we do not need to defend it. Others need to try to destry it!

    ReplyReply
  18. Randy says: 118

    This came from a friend who has a son in Iraq. Think there was another political spin on the troop withdrawl from Iraq?
    Randy

    Hey, everybody! I just wanted to send a quick update and give y’all the REAL story on what’s going on over here with the troop withdrawal. The picture is of my crew and I on a break during a mission. The guy to the far left is my gunner (Burks) and the guy in the middle is my driver (Mizell). They go with me on every mission and are great guys. The reason I’m sending this out is because I have had a few people ask if I left Iraq early because all of the combat troops are out of Iraq and I wanted to let everyone know the real deal. It’s kind of ridiculous how the news is saying that the last of the “combat” troops are out of Iraq because of Pres Obama. He says that it was his campaign promise. Take our Brigade for example. We were originally called a HBCT (Heavy Brigade Combat Team). Well, since Obama said he would pull all of the “combat” troops out by Aug, all they did before we left was change our name from a HBCT to a AAB (Advise and Assist Brigade). We have the same personnel/equipment layout as before and are doing the same missions. The ONLY difference is that they changed our name from a HBCT to an AAB and that’s how he is getting away with saying that he has pulled all of the “combat” troops out. It is really ridiculous what he’s doing and he has ticked a lot of people off. And it’s funny how the media is buying all of it, too. So no the last combat troops are not out of Iraq . We are still here. There are other Brigades just like ours that are doing the same missions that are still over here. Sorry for going on about it but we are just sitting over here watching it and are like “You’ve got to be kidding me!” So anyway now you know the REAL story, so that’s why I’m not coming back early. You have to watch those liberals, they’re sneaky!

    Anyways I hope everyone is doing well and I’ll see you soon!
    Travis

    ReplyReply
  19. Smorgasbord says: 119

    @Randy: #118 I’m a little concerned about including names in the letter sent. If the wrong people see it they might want to bring charges against the sender. I couldn’t talk about Clinton with my son while he was president. As you know, you aren’t supposed to say ANYTHING negative about the president while you are in the service.

    ReplyReply
  20. Randy says: 120

    Smorgasbord these are nicknames.

    ReplyReply
  21. Patvann#73 “very sure when he (Obama)has the opportunity to use the deaths of our warriors to gain political points he will visit them again as much as nescessary–”

    Would suggest you read that statement slowly and ask yourself as a good Christian if you truly mean it or you’re just pissed off because your son is in harms way.

    He has had the training of a United States Marine.He has a shield of brothers who are strong,proud and extremely protective of their own.He’ll be home in Nov.and he will be a better man and you a better father for the experiece.

    Semper Fi Richard

    ReplyReply
  22. Randy says: 122

    In Iraq under President Bush, we had rules of engagement that were developed in theater. A good leader lets the folks on the ground develop the rules of engagement so they can be successful. When Obama took over, his administration passed the rules of engagement down to the troops on the ground. Obama has used the deaths of our service members if you were not short of memory. He used that as a reason to not approve the Iraq surge.

    ReplyReply
  23. Obama was against the surge because he didn’t believe in the strategy.Colin Powell shared this belief.They were wrong.Does this mean Obama as CIC doesn’t care about our fighters in Afghan.?I don’t believe that.

    ReplyReply
  24. Randy says: 124

    The point was he used the deaths of Americans. When was Colin Powell right? Colin Powell was not even the Sec of State at that time. He couldn’t handle the job!

    ReplyReply
  25. Patvann says: 125

    @ Rich

    I meant every word, and would say it even if John was now a firefighter living next door instead of a Marine in the rockpile on the other side of the planet.

    I know he is among the best, and they got his six, but I also know this president used that night to fluff his nest, and not for any altruistic feelings he has for fallen warriors, and he delayed making decisions to HELP the ones still alive, because he wanted to use it as a club to pass the Healthcare bill.

    He is a piece of garbage who uses our best to score political points. Write and complain to him, not me. All I can do is yell on blogs and hope I never get one of his pre-printed condolence cards, whereas he might actually need some of your spiritual advise, after hangin out with the American-hating preachers for 20 years.

    In regards to my words about Obama…my conscience is clean.

    My “fear” regarding John, is that this CiC won’t let our guys win, and then everything they’ve been through will be for nothing, and that 5-10 years from now the leftist history books will say him and his lost the war, just like they do about Viet Nam now. (I have a brand-new high school history book beside me now, and I just checked.) I see how that historical manipulation affects that generation of warrior, and I don’t want that for him.

    ReplyReply
  26. Old Trooper 2 says: 126

    1. Crapped up ROE imposed by folks that are neither Commanders on the Ground or familiar with conditions on the ground place Troops at risk.

    2, Sending 30,000 fewer Troops than what the Commander on the Ground requested puts Troops as well as the Mission at Risk.

    3, It was not a Strategic decision, it was a Political one so lets stop the BS on that right now.

    4. Obama wanted to keep a Campaign Promise to END the War, not Win it. He is not up to the job.

    I was in AFPAK when the request was made and I assumed responsibility for allowing My Officers,
    if engagement was imminent, to ignore crapped up ROE that result in Casualties. An 0-6 can do that and I did it.

    Colin Powell was one of the folks that insisted in placing overwhelming force on the ground for Desert Shield/Storm but did not have squat to do with the “Surge” in Iraq or the Stans.

    ReplyReply
  27. Smorgasbord says: 127

    @Randy: #119 I wasn’t thinking so much about the nicknames, but I am guessing that is the trooper’s name that wrote the letter at the bottom. You know how our King-in-Chief likes to get even with people who go against him.

    ReplyReply
  28. Skookum says: 128

    OT, damn, that was awe inspiring, an officer who will risk it all for his men has the utmost respect and again you are something else.

    ReplyReply
  29. Smorgasbord says: 129

    @Randy: For many years I have been saying there are certain things that the Joint Chiefs of Staff should decide. The Rules Of Engagement is one.

    ReplyReply
  30. Old Trooper 2 says: 130

    @ Smorgasbord, I am of the opinion that the JCS is too far above the Fight to decide.
    Commanders on the Ground must have that prerogative as they have the local dust
    on their boots and are Ultimately Responsible for any outcomes of said ROE. The blame for poor judgment in field Operations rests on those that take Responsibility on a Personal Level and must look their Troopers in the Eye every day, not some Puzzle Palace Politician that visits and is still pissing Stateside water.

    ReplyReply
  31. Smorgasbord says: 131

    @Old Trooper 2: #130 I agree with you. My meaning was that I don’t think the president should decide things like ROE. It should be done by the ones who have been there and know how it is. My feeling is that the Joint Chiefs of Staff would decide in favor of whatever it takes to protect our troops. After all, they never come up for reelection. Some of them could have even lost buddies in battle.

    ReplyReply
  32. Skookum says: 132

    I met the man who guarded General Westmoreland’s Ice Cream: you can read that again, but it will read the same. This leader who was so far beyond the life of the ordinary grunt that he expected salutes and starched utilities, he was in country and in charge, but with the presence of mind to assure himself a continuous supply of ice cream.

    Candy Assed Bastard!

    ReplyReply
  33. Old Trooper 2 says: 133

    Kinda brings to mind this gold plated turd that was promoted way above his abilities:

    Wesley Clark: Bush’s ‘surge’ will backfire

    http://securingamerica.com/node/2091

    ReplyReply
  34. Randy says: 134

    Let me remember. Obama was against the surge because his vast knowledge and experience of military tactics. Rich, if you had a brain or were interested in understanding why the surge was suggested, you would know who H. R. McMaster is. Do you have any idea what he accomplished in Tal Afar?

    By the way, the surge worked before the surge was implemented. One reason was the time in theater was extended and experienced troops did what they do best, kill bad guys. They also helped the Iraqis kill bad guys.

    Obama has not made one decision since he held public office that was designed to benefit anyone but himself. In IL, he voted “present”. In the Senate, he voted with his party. As president, his decisions were all politically caculated.

    Anyone who voted for him expecting anything else is either ignorant or have less than a 25IQ.

    ReplyReply
  35. Old Trooper 2 says: 135

    Placing the Credit where it is due:

    In advance of President Obama’s Tuesday night speech on Iraq, Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the House Republican leader, was set to remind thousands of veterans attending the national convention of the American Legion that Mr. Obama and other Democrats had opposed the military escalation credited with gains in Iraq.

    “This day belongs to our troops, whose courage and sacrifices have made the transition to a new mission in Iraq possible,” Mr. Boehner said in excerpts of the speech he was to deliver Tuesday at the legion’s national convention in Milwaukee.

    “Some leaders who opposed, criticized, and fought tooth-and-nail to stop the surge strategy now proudly claim credit for the results,” Mr. Boehner’s speech said.

    The top U.S. Marine general made a sharp departure from the White House’s talking points on Afghanistan, saying President Barack Obama’s promised July 2011 deadline to start withdrawing troops from the country had given “sustenance” to the Taliban.

    “We know the president was talking to several audiences at the same time when he made his comments on July 2011,” Gen. James Conway told reporters on Tuesday. “In some ways, we think right now it’s probably giving our enemy sustenance….In fact, we’ve intercepted communications that say, ‘Hey, you know, we only have to hold out for so long.’”

    ReplyReply
  36. there’s no doubt, this guy on the top job,has side up with anything call Muslim,
    they help him win, he is paying back the favor: I was reading that they are on the process to reinstate the TALIBANS, IT said that thoses talks have been going on for quite a while,
    and prez KARZEI is all for it,

    ReplyReply
  37. Old Trooper 2 says: 137

    @ ilovebeeswarzone, Karzai does not have the full support of the Tribal Leaders and knows that the clock is ticking. He has been in negotiations with the Taliban for some time now. I can easily see Karzai entering into a Coalition Government with Former and Present Day Taliban to stay in power since the Timeline has been announced.

    At present I cannot see Afghanis embracing a Central Government while their loyalties are both Tribal and Provincial. There are corruption issues there as well. Iraq is a different story entirely as Iraq has infrastructure that Afghanistan lacks.

    Neither the Current US Regime or the US State Department appear to have done their homework at this point. US resources and NATO resources are not infinite either. Iran has a hand in the outcome as well.

    Alexander the Great and the British Empire were repelled by the Tribal Folks there over centuries. Is Afghanistan ready for Democracy? Nope. Not at this point. Hold all the elections you want but a Central Government flies in the face of both Provincial and Tribal loyalties.

    One “sticky wicket” at best. It does not take a degree in International Relations to figure that out.

    Like the Man said, All Politics are Local. As Gen. Petraeus said, the will of the Afghan People will determine the end Strategy and the Military can only do so much to facilitate Security or Economic success. My guess is that the Withdrawal Timeline is Bogus if We expect a harmonious outcome.

    Just my take on it. Will the US stay the course? It all depends on Congress. They can pull the plug on Funding and AFPAK will be Vietnam Redux.

    ReplyReply
  38. Randy says: 138

    OT2 That is so true. I see the State Department wants $2B more to create Iraqi jobs. The military showed them (State Department, USAID and the Department of Agriculture) how to employ 55% of the Iraqis. Fix the irrigation ditches and help them set up agricultural cooperatives. Unfortunately, everyone else knows more than the military. So, it costs the US tax payers $2B more than it should.

    ReplyReply
  39. OLD TROOPER 2: hi, YOU mentioned CORRUPTION, yes, THE DEPUTY PROSECUTOR was to charge THE TOP PROSECUTOR [his boss] and some other MINISTERS of CORRUPTION
    AND was fired with KARZEI agreement right before.

    ReplyReply
  40. another vet says: 140

    “In some ways, we think right now it’s probably giving our enemy sustenance….In fact, we’ve intercepted communications that say, ‘Hey, you know, we only have to hold out for so long.’”

    Almost sounds treasonous.

    ReplyReply
  41. Randy That should be “has” less than a 25IQ genius.

    Tony Snow said 80% of “W”S closest advisors were against the surge.Do you believe him?

    Over 65% of the American people were against it.

    Colin Powell a civilian was against it. Ofcourse he was still pissed at the Bush admin for putting him in front of the U.N. with bogus intell.

    We are all glad the surge worked.The Awakening in Anbar began before the surge and was HUGE in the big picture.GOD LOVE THE CORPS.

    ReplyReply
  42. Randy says: 142

    Colin Powell had the same intel as everyone else. Iraqi Generals thought Iraq had nuclear weapons. Did you look up H. R. McMaster? Have you read his book? Might give you a few insights into your 13 month tour. Do you know what he did in Iraq? How do you think the awakining happened? Was it an accident?

    A person with an IQ of 25 is capable of repeating the same phrase over and over if someone helps him.

    ReplyReply
  43. Missy says: 143

    @rich wheeler:

    Tony Snow said 80% of “W”S closest advisors were against the surge.Do you believe him?

    So what if he said it, 80% of W’s closest advisors were wrong. He also said something to the effect that it was chilling for him to see the president stand up to those in his administration for something he believed in.

    Over 65% of the American people were against it

    Not anymore.

    Colin Powell a civilian was against it. Ofcourse he was still pissed at the Bush admin for putting him in front of the U.N. with bogus intell.

    Colin Powell has been wrong and harmful to the OIF effort a number of times. Keeping his mouth shut about the ‘ahem’ Plame leak throughout the Libby trial was….not honorable.

    Back to the sidebar, Senate Select Committee Phase II amendments:

    (U) Conclusion 12: Statements and implications by the President and Secretary of State suggesting that Iraq and al-Qa’ida had a partnership, or that Iraq had provided al-Qa’ida with weapons training, were not substantiated by the intelligence. Intelligence assessments, including multiple CIA reports and the November 2002 NIE, dismissed the claim that Iraq and al-Qa’ida were cooperating partners. According to an undisputed INR footnote in the NIE, there was no intelligence information that supported the claim that Iraq would provide weapons of mass destruction to al-Qa’ida. The credibility of the principal intelligence source behind the claim that Iraq had provided al-Qa’ida with biological and chemical weapons training was regularly questioned by DIA, and later by the CIA. The Committee repeats its conclusion from a prior report that “assessments were inconsistent regarding the likelihood that Saddam Hussein provided chemical and biological weapons (CBW) training to al_Qa’ida.”

    Amendment 119 – strike the above conclusion and insert

    Conclusion 12: Statements by the President and Secretary Powell that Iraq had provided al-Qa’ida with weapons training were supported by the intelligence. Numerous intelligence assessments stated that Iraq had provided al-Qa’ida with weapons training and specifically training in poisons and gases. While some DIA reports raised questions about the credibility of this reporting and one CIA report noted that the source may have exaggerated his reporting in a separate area, the CIA did not raise questions about the source’s weapons training reporting and., in fact, provided and approved the use of this language in both the President’s and Secretary’s remarks.

    Comments – None of the statements provided in this report suggested or implied that Iraq and al-Qa’ida had “partnership.” Additionally, while there were policymakers who commented that Iraq had provided al-Qa’ida with weapons training, those comments were fully supported by the intelligence. The al-Libi reporting on CBW training was never questioned by the CIA and the information was approved by the CIA for use in both the President’s Cincinnati speech and Powell’s UN speech. In the case of the Powell speech CIA actually provided the information to him to use in the speech in the draft of the speech the CIA wrote. Furthermore, the conclusion as drafted says that intelligence community “assessments were inconsistent” so accordingly, how can the Committee judge policymakers to not have any statements substantiated by the intelligence?

    http://www.floppingaces.net/2008/06/11/key-points-senate-select-committee-on-intelligence-phase-ii-investigation-report-on-pre-war-intelligence-regarding-saddams-iraq/

    Anbar Awakening was huge because our troops set the stage for it, that helped set the stage for the surge. It was a success that Petraeus could then use to convince the President that Iraq could possibly be turned around:

    http://www.army.mil/professionalwriting/volumes/volume6/april_2008/4_08_3.html

    ReplyReply
  44. Randy Oor country and the POTUS are fortunate to have great warriors like Petraeus.Mattis and McMaster in service.Godspeed to all in this most difficult of wars

    I am very aware that Anbar Awakening was no accident with much credit to Army and Marine commanders on the ground.

    ReplyReply
  45. Pingback: “You could have serious violence in places like Pakistan or Afghanistan.” | The Human Element

  46. Pingback: Left Behind

  47. knoH
    welcome, yes this is AN EXCELLENT BLOG,
    I guess you are RUSSIAN am I right?

    ReplyReply
  48. Lungfrish says: 146

    @proof: @proof
    You said that if there was a tenth the anger, the MSM wouldn’t be able to help but stumble over it, but it took massive numbers for the anti-war movement of a decade ago to be noticed at all. I say this having been in marches that would only make the news if they blocked enough traffic. Occupy Wall Street, for example, faced a media blackout by the MSM for nearly a week. I’ll concede that there’s far less outrage or that the outrage has a lot less rage – I haven’t gone to any marches except the first few. But my contention is that this is not at all because all liberals are hypocrites or because the main stream media is liberal – GE is the most influential of the 6 companies that own almost all our media, and they profit from war. I’d say GE is as liberal as Clinton, and I’d say he’s as liberal as NAFTA and bombing an Asprin factory in Sudan… the lack of outrage has far more to do with war weariness and a feeling that protest and outrage achieves nothing – something I would expect the left to be applauded for realising by the right instead of called hypocrites – but then, it’s a binary struggle of teams, and the other side is always wrong.

    War is just a fact of life now. Even as we continue to draw down in Iraq, we will maintain a larger presence of private military contractors (mercenaries) larger than the world has ever seen. We will continue to collect resentment from the rest of the world for being the global police that is above global law as we use drones to attack countries we aren’t even at war with, collateral damage be damned. It only takes one angry kid to be convinced to blow himself up in a mall in Minnesota, and if he shouts Allah Akbar while he does it, we’ll have boots on the ground in Yemen and Somalia so we can start all over. And everyone who makes bombs or covers wars on national TV wins.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>