• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Tom Friedman Op-Ed on Middle East Trip

Steve

Well-known member
“As somebody who ordered an additional 17,000 troops into Afghanistan,” said Mr. Obama, “you would be hard pressed to suggest that what we are doing is not backed up by hard power.

but the "generals" asked for 31000 troops.. then Obama fired General David McKiernan,

McKiernan’s dire assessment of conditions in Afghanistan is similar to those given by Obama and other senior administration officials. But he was more explicit in describing the task as a long-term problem that will require higher force levels indefinitely.

Like Shinseki, McKiernan doesn't think the war can be won on the cheap.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
"We have a joke around the White House,” the president said. “We’re just going to keep on telling the truth until it stops working ...."

That is funny as heck... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Obama telling the truth in the first place, let alone more than once.... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Good grief. :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
“As somebody who ordered an additional 17,000 troops into Afghanistan,” said Mr. Obama, “you would be hard pressed to suggest that what we are doing is not backed up by hard power.

but the "generals" asked for 31000 troops.. then Obama fired General David McKiernan,

McKiernan’s dire assessment of conditions in Afghanistan is similar to those given by Obama and other senior administration officials. But he was more explicit in describing the task as a long-term problem that will require higher force levels indefinitely.

Like Shinseki, McKiernan doesn't think the war can be won on the cheap.

Where they going to find these troops :???:
In the Congressional Hearings I've watched- all the Generals and Military leaders say that the US Military is stretched to its utmost- with all kinds of suicide, divorce, and discipline problems because of extended and multiple tours in Iraq...Which have left the moral the lowest its been....
I even heard they locked an army base down the other day until they could get some counselers in there because of the high suicide rates...

Testimony by Gen. Casey was that Gates and Obama are now trying to add additional forces/brigades- to the point they can get guaranteed two years rotational time home - except in emergencies- but it will take time....

Rummy's smaller/lighter/faster military idea- along with fighting wars we shouldn't have been in- didn't work....

But nothing that crew said was going to work did :roll:

"It's hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam’s security forces and his army. Hard to imagine." –Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, testifying before the House Budget Committee prior to the Iraq war, Feb. 27, 2003
"Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties." —President Bush, discussing the Iraq war with Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson, after Robertson told him he should prepare the American people for casualties

"I would be surprised if we need anything like the 200,000 figure that is sometimes discussed in the press. A much smaller force, principally special operations forces, but backed up by some regular units, should be sufficient."
- Richard Perle, Chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, 7/11/02

"I don't believe that anything like a long-term commitment of 150,000 Americans would be necessary."
- Richard Perle, speaking at a conference on "Post-Saddam Iraq" sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute, 10/3/02

"I would say that what's been mobilized to this point -- something on the order of several hundred thousand soldiers are probably, you know, a figure that would be required."
- Gen. Eric Shinseki, testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, 2/25/03

"The idea that it would take several hundred thousand U.S. forces, I think, is far from the mark."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 2/27/03

"I am reasonably certain that they will greet us as liberators, and that will help us keep [troop] requirements down. ... We can say with reasonable confidence that the notion of hundreds of thousands of American troops is way off the mark...wildly off the mark."
- Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, testifying before the House Budget Committee, 2/27/03

"It's hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam's security forces and his army. Hard to image."
- Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, testifying before the House Budget Committee, 2/27/03

"It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could be six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 2/7/03

"The idea that it's going to be a long, long, long battle of some kind I think is belied by the fact of what happened in 1990. Five days or five weeks or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 11/15/02

"I think it will go relatively quickly...weeks rather than months."
- Vice President Dick Cheney, 3/16/03
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Didn't Obama get some additional troop support when he was over in Europe?

They said they were successful in gaining support from other countries.
 

Steve

Well-known member
even heard they locked an army base down the other day until they could get some counselers in there because of the high suicide rates...

it is called a stand-down.. it happens alot in the military... when they see an increasing problem,.. be it safety, rights or suicide,, they take corrective action and hold training,

we had an extensive standdown at Little Creek I was recently transferred to as it has two suicides in a month.. it was after the first Gulf war... they were downsizing and many soldier / sailors were unable to cope with the news and unrecognized PTSD at the same time...

the stress of the military takes it's tolls for many reasons... it is not an excuse to fail...
 

Steve

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
Didn't Obama get some additional troop support when he was over in Europe?

They said they were successful in gaining support from other countries.

yea he got like eight french police trainers.. :roll: :roll: :wink: (sarcasm)
 

Steve

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Steve said:
“As somebody who ordered an additional 17,000 troops into Afghanistan,” said Mr. Obama, “you would be hard pressed to suggest that what we are doing is not backed up by hard power.

but the "generals" asked for 31000 troops.. then Obama fired General David McKiernan,

McKiernan’s dire assessment of conditions in Afghanistan is similar to those given by Obama and other senior administration officials. But he was more explicit in describing the task as a long-term problem that will require higher force levels indefinitely.

Like Shinseki, McKiernan doesn't think the war can be won on the cheap.

Where they going to find these troops :???:
In the Congressional Hearings I've watched- all the Generals and Military leaders say that the US Military is stretched to its utmost- with all kinds of suicide, divorce, and discipline problems because of extended and multiple tours in Iraq...Which have left the moral the lowest its been....
I even heard they locked an army base down the other day until they could get some counselers in there because of the high suicide rates...

Testimony by Gen. Casey was that Gates and Obama are now trying to add additional forces/brigades- to the point they can get guaranteed two years rotational time home - except in emergencies- but it will take time....

Rummy's smaller/lighter/faster military idea- along with fighting wars we shouldn't have been in- didn't work....

But nothing that crew said was going to work did :roll:

"It's hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam’s security forces and his army. Hard to imagine." –Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, testifying before the House Budget Committee prior to the Iraq war, Feb. 27, 2003
"Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties." —President Bush, discussing the Iraq war with Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson, after Robertson told him he should prepare the American people for casualties

"I would be surprised if we need anything like the 200,000 figure that is sometimes discussed in the press. A much smaller force, principally special operations forces, but backed up by some regular units, should be sufficient."
- Richard Perle, Chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, 7/11/02

"I don't believe that anything like a long-term commitment of 150,000 Americans would be necessary."
- Richard Perle, speaking at a conference on "Post-Saddam Iraq" sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute, 10/3/02

"I would say that what's been mobilized to this point -- something on the order of several hundred thousand soldiers are probably, you know, a figure that would be required."
- Gen. Eric Shinseki, testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, 2/25/03

"The idea that it would take several hundred thousand U.S. forces, I think, is far from the mark."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 2/27/03

"I am reasonably certain that they will greet us as liberators, and that will help us keep [troop] requirements down. ... We can say with reasonable confidence that the notion of hundreds of thousands of American troops is way off the mark...wildly off the mark."
- Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, testifying before the House Budget Committee, 2/27/03

"It's hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam's security forces and his army. Hard to image."
- Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, testifying before the House Budget Committee, 2/27/03

"It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could be six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 2/7/03

"The idea that it's going to be a long, long, long battle of some kind I think is belied by the fact of what happened in 1990. Five days or five weeks or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 11/15/02

"I think it will go relatively quickly...weeks rather than months."
- Vice President Dick Cheney, 3/16/03

You know Obama short changed the General on his troops request and then fired him.. but instead of saying Obama is wrong..

you show a bunch of quotes from people who were wrong then... to justify Obama doing the same thing wrong now?
 

Steve

Well-known member
Rummy's smaller/lighter/faster military idea- along with fighting wars we shouldn't have been in- didn't work....

actually that was Clinton's smaller military

and while some units needed to be faster and lighter and fight on the fly, what was needed most were the brigades Clinton slashed...

The problem isn’t doctrine but culture. Since at least the 1993 debacle in Somalia, it has been clear that our force was not properly configured for what we now call peace and stability operations. We lack sufficient civil affairs, special forces, military police, engineer, translator, and psychological operations assets. To it's credit, the military began to change this a few years ago. But the speed and scope of the change has been inadequate to the operations tempo.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
Oldtimer said:
Steve said:
but the "generals" asked for 31000 troops.. then Obama fired General David McKiernan,



Like Shinseki, McKiernan doesn't think the war can be won on the cheap.

Where they going to find these troops :???:
In the Congressional Hearings I've watched- all the Generals and Military leaders say that the US Military is stretched to its utmost- with all kinds of suicide, divorce, and discipline problems because of extended and multiple tours in Iraq...Which have left the moral the lowest its been....
I even heard they locked an army base down the other day until they could get some counselers in there because of the high suicide rates...

Testimony by Gen. Casey was that Gates and Obama are now trying to add additional forces/brigades- to the point they can get guaranteed two years rotational time home - except in emergencies- but it will take time....

Rummy's smaller/lighter/faster military idea- along with fighting wars we shouldn't have been in- didn't work....

But nothing that crew said was going to work did :roll:

"It's hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam’s security forces and his army. Hard to imagine." –Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, testifying before the House Budget Committee prior to the Iraq war, Feb. 27, 2003
"Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties." —President Bush, discussing the Iraq war with Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson, after Robertson told him he should prepare the American people for casualties

"I would be surprised if we need anything like the 200,000 figure that is sometimes discussed in the press. A much smaller force, principally special operations forces, but backed up by some regular units, should be sufficient."
- Richard Perle, Chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, 7/11/02

"I don't believe that anything like a long-term commitment of 150,000 Americans would be necessary."
- Richard Perle, speaking at a conference on "Post-Saddam Iraq" sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute, 10/3/02

"I would say that what's been mobilized to this point -- something on the order of several hundred thousand soldiers are probably, you know, a figure that would be required."
- Gen. Eric Shinseki, testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, 2/25/03

"The idea that it would take several hundred thousand U.S. forces, I think, is far from the mark."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 2/27/03

"I am reasonably certain that they will greet us as liberators, and that will help us keep [troop] requirements down. ... We can say with reasonable confidence that the notion of hundreds of thousands of American troops is way off the mark...wildly off the mark."
- Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, testifying before the House Budget Committee, 2/27/03

"It's hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam's security forces and his army. Hard to image."
- Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, testifying before the House Budget Committee, 2/27/03

"It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could be six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 2/7/03

"The idea that it's going to be a long, long, long battle of some kind I think is belied by the fact of what happened in 1990. Five days or five weeks or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that."
- Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, 11/15/02

"I think it will go relatively quickly...weeks rather than months."
- Vice President Dick Cheney, 3/16/03

You know Obama short changed the General on his troops request and then fired him.. but instead of saying Obama is wrong..

you show a bunch of quotes from people who were wrong then... to justify Obama doing the same thing wrong now?


Because they don't have the troops- without taking them right out of Iraq- and sending them straight to Afghanistan-- or calling up a whole bunch more Guard/Reserve units- or units that just rotated home after 2-3-4 extended tours already....
And according to Casey/Mullen- its going to take time to build up the infrastructure (housing etal) to handle even the 17,000....

General McKiernan had his shot- and hasn't been successful- altho I put some of the fault on GW for not backing him the last year...Gates and Admiral Mullen said it was their decision- and their recommendation to replace McKiernan because they saw they needed new direction...
And personally I like the replacement General McChrystal- mainly because of his knowledge/experience in Special Operations- which is what Afghanistan is going to take- imho and that of the military planners...
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
And personally I like the replacement General McChrystal- mainly because of his knowledge/experience in Special Operations- which is what Afghanistan is going to take- imho and that of the military planners...

Read a good story about General McChrystal, not sure if I can find it. They credit his tactics with the turn-around in Iraq.

It's a feather in Obama's cap to backtrack on his past opinions on how the war in Iraq was managed, and adopt a Bush Administration strategy for Afghanistan.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Steve said:
Oldtimer said:
Where they going to find these troops :???:
In the Congressional Hearings I've watched- all the Generals and Military leaders say that the US Military is stretched to its utmost- with all kinds of suicide, divorce, and discipline problems because of extended and multiple tours in Iraq...Which have left the moral the lowest its been....
I even heard they locked an army base down the other day until they could get some counselers in there because of the high suicide rates...

Testimony by Gen. Casey was that Gates and Obama are now trying to add additional forces/brigades- to the point they can get guaranteed two years rotational time home - except in emergencies- but it will take time....

Rummy's smaller/lighter/faster military idea- along with fighting wars we shouldn't have been in- didn't work....

But nothing that crew said was going to work did :roll:

You know Obama short changed the General on his troops request and then fired him.. but instead of saying Obama is wrong..

you show a bunch of quotes from people who were wrong then... to justify Obama doing the same thing wrong now?


Because they don't have the troops- without taking them right out of Iraq- and sending them straight to Afghanistan-- or calling up a whole bunch more Guard/Reserve units- or units that just rotated home after 2-3-4 extended tours already....
And according to Casey/Mullen- its going to take time to build up the infrastructure (housing etal) to handle even the 17,000....

General McKiernan had his shot- and hasn't been successful- altho I put some of the fault on GW for not backing him the last year...Gates and Admiral Mullen said it was their decision- and their recommendation to replace McKiernan because they saw they needed new direction...
And personally I like the replacement General McChrystal- mainly because of his knowledge/experience in Special Operations- which is what Afghanistan is going to take- imho and that of the military planners...

well OT,.. either Obama is wrong on Iraq, saying we could pull out early... or he is wrong on shortchanging the troops requested in Afghanistan... or he is wrong on BOTH.
 

Steve

Well-known member
And personally I like the replacement General McChrystal- mainly because of his knowledge/experience in Special Operations- which is what Afghanistan is going to take- imho and that of the military planners...

that's nice.. but the fact remains... Obama is bragging about committing 17,000 soldiers when the fact is the generals in Afghanistan asked for 31,000, and then Obama fired the general,...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
And personally I like the replacement General McChrystal- mainly because of his knowledge/experience in Special Operations- which is what Afghanistan is going to take- imho and that of the military planners...

that's nice.. but the fact remains... Obama is bragging about committing 17,000 soldiers when the fact is the generals in Afghanistan asked for 31,000, and then Obama fired the general,...

They were screaming for more troops when Bush was President too-- but he didn't send them either- mainly because there isn't enough.....And he put more precedence on his Oil War.....
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Steve said:
And personally I like the replacement General McChrystal- mainly because of his knowledge/experience in Special Operations- which is what Afghanistan is going to take- imho and that of the military planners...

that's nice.. but the fact remains... Obama is bragging about committing 17,000 soldiers when the fact is the generals in Afghanistan asked for 31,000, and then Obama fired the general,...

They were screaming for more troops when Bush was President too-- but he didn't send them either- mainly because there isn't enough.....And he put more precedence on his Oil War.....

And he won that oil war that the liberals wanted to turn tail on and run away from.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
Oldtimer said:
Steve said:
that's nice.. but the fact remains... Obama is bragging about committing 17,000 soldiers when the fact is the generals in Afghanistan asked for 31,000, and then Obama fired the general,...

They were screaming for more troops when Bush was President too-- but he didn't send them either- mainly because there isn't enough.....And he put more precedence on his Oil War.....

And he won that oil war that the liberals wanted to turn tail on and run away from.

And in doing so may have lost the real war on terrorism in Afghanistan-- or at the least made it to where the Generals are saying its going to be very difficult to win.....And totally destabilized the entire mid east- with a Pakistan in shambles and an Iran getting more powerful every day because they no longer have to fear Iraq....
 

TSR

Well-known member
BRG said:
If we need more troops, maybe we shouldn't be cutting our military budgets then. :roll:

BRG I think we all are for America having the strongest miitary in the world but google "defense spending" and the look at the stats on Wikipedia. Its hard to believe cuts can't be made somewhere without compromising our status, especially in light of the finacial mess we're in. Secretary Gates seems to think so anyway.
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
TSR said:
BRG said:
If we need more troops, maybe we shouldn't be cutting our military budgets then. :roll:

BRG I think we all are for America having the strongest miitary in the world but google "defense spending" and the look at the stats on Wikipedia. Its hard to believe cuts can't be made somewhere without compromising our status, especially in light of the finacial mess we're in. Secretary Gates seems to think so anyway.
If the rest of the world would step up and help us deal with the evil in the world, we could save some money.
 
Top