History Tonight...

[CatCity]

Tonight obama speaks at west point, about sending 30,000+ troops to Afghanistan....

jimmy ur thoughts on your hero?

[$lmjimy311]

hes not my hero, never has been

[$ayzak]

Sam, GTFO of the military.

[Jordan311]

jimy sure is looking like an idiot now, aint he?


But then again thats not much different than how he's always looked



Later

[CatCity]

wow...such bullshit. so we would like to defeat the taliban? but there is an end date. so why don't they just chill out for awhile and then come back to power when we leave?

how do people still support this puppet?

[Jordan311]

all the obama supporters from the last topic sure are quiet now..


Later

[greenmonkey911]

wow...such bullshit. so we would like to defeat the taliban? but there is an end date. so why don't they just chill out for awhile and then come back to power when we leave?

how do people still support this puppet?

i agree. what's another 18 months if their mission is 1000+ years old.

but if he's GONNA send in more troops, why not go with the larger recommended amount instead of making the same mistake Bush made with Iraq?

plus, weed out the corrupt leaders? Afghanistan's president is the most corrupt of them all LOL. his bro's a friggin' drug lord!

[CatCity]

[/quote]


but if he's GONNA send in more troops, why not go with the larger recommended amount instead of making the same mistake Bush made with Iraq?
[/quote]


but they did ask for more than 30,000

[coast2coast]

You know what's kind of funny about all of this is how little attention the SOFA agreement got when it was signed earlier this year in Iraq. That document had it all, a time table for handover and pullout of combat outpost and ultimately the larger FOB's. It was signed by the Iraqi Government, the Iraqi Security Forces and the U.S. Government. It was a pretty big deal when we there and was a big talking point to the unit coming in to replace us which was the PA Natty Guard. The document brought about really big changes in the way we do things over there. Every patrol had to be joint with the Iraqi Army with the Coalition Forces strictly in overwatch. Also, we don't have free rain to go ball up anybody we think is a terrorist anymore without an Iraqi warrant.

The culminating event had to be election day in January where even the Sunni's voted. There wasn't one violent SIGACT the entire day! I found that unbelievable considering the Iraqi's had the lead in security.

The funny thing about it all it was that it was signed under the Bush administration. I always wondered what the reception in the U.S. was like and was really surprised to get home and see that no one seems to know anything about it.

Anyway, can't wait to see the Obama fanatics worshipping him when the troops in Iraq pullout sometime in mid 2011 for following a document that was singed in late 2008.

[HizzY]

"now you gon' eat your cornbread yah hear?!"

[greenmonkey911]

but if he's GONNA send in more troops, why not go with the larger recommended amount instead of making the same mistake Bush made with Iraq?

but they did ask for more than 30,000

That's what I'm saying. In 2003 Bush didn't provide enough troops in the initial Iraqi surge, and he/the troops suffered because of it.

Now, Obama has half a toe in the water. He may as well start pulling out like he promised instead of sending in the less-than-recommended number of troops. He's basically sending them to slaughter.

Not to mention it will take at least six months for the U.S. to air-drop all 30k because there are no roads/infrastructure, so for a while they'll be sitting ducks.

Nobel Peace Prize my ass.



And coast2coast, that was an interesting post. I'll have to read up on that agreement.