Re: NYT:In Toll of 2,000, New Portrait of Afghan War
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CosmicCowboy
Found it. McCrystal requested 40,000+ and got 30,000 with restricted ROE.
Yes, another Obama fuck up. If he cannot commit the resources needed to do the job right, then we should get out.
Re: NYT:In Toll of 2,000, New Portrait of Afghan War
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ElNono
I think he issued an order to send 30K troops... not sure the military asked for more... but the underlying point is, what for? There's no "winning" in Afghanistan as there was no "winning" in Iraq.
Huh?
Which of our goals in Iraq didn't we achieve?
Re: NYT:In Toll of 2,000, New Portrait of Afghan War
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Winehole23
Shinseki told Bush he needed X number for Iraq. He got fired for the suggestion. "War on the cheap" is a pattern that precedes Obama.
Bullshit.
He had his retirement plans in a year before that took place.
Re: NYT:In Toll of 2,000, New Portrait of Afghan War
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Wild Cobra
Which of our goals in Iraq didn't we achieve?
What goals?
Exactly.
Re: NYT:In Toll of 2,000, New Portrait of Afghan War
Since when do you believe John Kerry?
CNN Fact Check
Quote:
Claim: Kerry said that former Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki was forced out for comments on Iraq troop levels.
CNN Fact Check: Kerry implies that Shinseki was forced to retire as a result of his comments about troop levels in Iraq, which is inaccurate. Shinseki served a full four-year term as Army chief of staff, and did not retire early. Since World War II, no Army chief of staff has served longer than four years.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld decided in April 2002 on who he would tap to succeed Shinseki, according to a Pentagon official, long before Shinseki's troop level comments in 2003. So by the time Shinseki made his comments on troop levels, it was already known that he would not remain in his post beyond his full four-year term. The Bush administration may not have been fond of Shinseki, who was appointed to his post by President Clinton, but it is inaccurate to say that he was forced to retire because of his comments on troop levels in Iraq.
What I can't believe is that it is CNN I this at!
Re: NYT:In Toll of 2,000, New Portrait of Afghan War
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ElNono
What goals?
Exactly.
We achieved our goals, therefore we won.
...
Oh wait...
Did you think it was for oil or something?
Re: NYT:In Toll of 2,000, New Portrait of Afghan War
Re: NYT:In Toll of 2,000, New Portrait of Afghan War
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TeyshaBlue
What were our goals?
:lol
Re: NYT:In Toll of 2,000, New Portrait of Afghan War
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CosmicCowboy
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when the military told Obama they needed X number of troops for the surge to be sure of working didn't he give them like 1/2x?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CosmicCowboy
Found it. McCrystal requested 40,000+ and got 30,000 with restricted ROE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Wild Cobra
Yes, another Obama fuck up. If he cannot commit the resources needed to do the job right, then we should get out.
You're wrong. Here's the correction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxNews
Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, is privately requesting between 30,000 and 40,000 more troops
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,...#ixzz24JnAOdlW
Please don't whine. You asked.
Re: NYT:In Toll of 2,000, New Portrait of Afghan War
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Wild Cobra
You got me on this one, WC. My memory is occasionally faulty. :tu