| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Obama Adviser Says More U.S. Troops May Be Needed in Afghanistan |
| 2009-08-10 |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #4 This of course being the same Jim Jones who said: During the briefing, Nicholson had told Jones that he was "a little light," more than hinting that he could use more forces, probably thousands more. "We don't have enough force to go everywhere," Nicholson said. But Jones recalled how Obama had initially decided to deploy additional forces this year. "At a table much like this," Jones said, referring to the polished wood table in the White House Situation Room, "the president's principals met and agreed to recommend 17,000 more troops for Afghanistan." The principals -- Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton; Gates; Mullen; and the director of national intelligence, Dennis C. Blair -- made this recommendation in February during the first full month of the Obama administration. The president approved the deployments, which included Nicholson's Marines. Soon after that, Jones said, the principals told the president, "oops," we need an additional 4,000 to help train the Afghan army. "They then said, 'If you do all that, we think we can turn this around,' " Jones said, reminding the Marines here that the president had quickly approved and publicly announced the additional 4,000. Now suppose you're the president, Jones told them, and the requests come into the White House for yet more force. How do you think Obama might look at this? Jones asked, casting his eyes around the colonels. How do you think he might feel? Jones let the question hang in the air-conditioned, fluorescent-lighted room. Nicholson and the colonels said nothing. Well, Jones went on, after all those additional troops, 17,000 plus 4,000 more, if there were new requests for force now, the president would quite likely have "a Whiskey Tango Foxtrot moment." Everyone in the room caught the phonetic reference to WTF -- which in the military and elsewhere means "What the [expletive]?" |
| Posted by: Pappy 2009-08-10 21:45 |
| #3 Early in 2002, I posted on Little Green Footballs, that if our restraint evaded the necessary destruction of the enemy and practised nation-building, then the theater would turn into an "Afghanifada" that would weaken NATO's position. Further, I said that NATO would eventually leave the country as did the Soviets, "like the beaten dog, with its tail between its legs." Let me say it again: limited war, vs disproportionate retaliation, is a jihad subsidy. |
| Posted by: Unitle Borgia4836 2009-08-10 20:23 |
| #2 But he's not going to let them shoot. |
| Posted by: Hellfish 2009-08-10 20:09 |
| #1 45,000. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2009-08-10 19:34 |