Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama orders more options on Afghanistan

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
unhappycamper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-31-09 10:24 AM
Original message
Obama orders more options on Afghanistan
Obama orders more options on Afghanistan
By Raw Story
Saturday, October 31st, 2009 -- 9:38 am

US President Barack Obama has asked the Pentagon for more options on troop levels in Afghanistan including sending less than the roughly 40,000 new soldiers requested, The Washington Post reported Saturday.

Citing two unnamed US officials, the newspaper said the request came at Obama's meeting with the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the White House on Friday.

The military chiefs have been largely supportive of a resource request by General Stanley McChrystal, the top US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, that would by one Pentagon estimate require the deployment of 44,000 extra troops, it said.

But opinion among members of Obama's national security team is divided, and he now appears to be seeking a compromise solution that would satisfy both his military and civilian advisers, the paper said.

The report said the president seeks a plan that would not require him to send as many troops. However, Obama "appears committed to adding at least 10,000 to 15,000 troops," the Post added.


Rest of article at: http://rawstory.com/2009/10/obama-orders-options-afghanistan/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-31-09 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
1. how bout ending the occupation? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unhappycamper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-31-09 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. That would be my choice also. n/t
Edited on Sat Oct-31-09 10:28 AM by unhappycamper
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-31-09 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. +1 nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-31-09 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
3. I bet we split the country in two...
Edited on Sat Oct-31-09 10:30 AM by Ian David
... and keep the half we need for Halliburton's giant oil pipeline.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-31-09 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
4. It's hard to watch
It's so dangerously naive to believe he can have it all in Afghanistan - just apportioning out the men, weapons, and mission between nation-building and our vengeful grudge match against the remnants and specters of 'al-Qaeda'. This train is bound for catastrophe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unhappycamper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-31-09 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Afghanistan is a slow motion train wreck in progress.
I'm amazed that Obama is buying the crap that the Pentagon puts out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orwellian_Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-31-09 10:38 AM
Response to Original message
6. The important thing to remember in all of this
is that increase is decrease.

Up is down.

More is less.

War is Peace.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-31-09 10:38 AM
Response to Original message
7. I'll say this. We should be out but at least he's not rushing headlong into disaster.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-31-09 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
9. "Committed to adding at least 10,000 to 15,000 troops" Just enough
Edited on Sat Oct-31-09 11:00 AM by tekisui
to be held fully responsible for any subsequent disasters. If the choosing any increase other than the one McChrystal asked for, he will be seen as didn't go all in. If he doesn't choose to begin a withdrawal, he will be seen as escalating the war.

The middle way is the worst political decision. He loses all support, except the narrow Democratic Hawks.

The right is given ammunition, and the left is ignored.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 11:16 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC