| Submit your comments on this article |
| Afghanistan |
| Civilian, Military Officials at Odds Over Resources Needed for Afghan Mission |
| 2009-10-08 |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #7 amen BH6 |
| Posted by: Frank G 2009-10-08 21:17 |
| #6 Frank, Semper Fi to your boy. I go back to regular USMC Op forces next summer...I envision Douchebagistan is my next deployment...I did Iraq twice, at least we seemed to have an end state, whether anyone agreed how did it or not is another matter. Obambi wants plausible deniability and is looking for the classic clintonian triangulation methinx - totally unacceptable in a C-n-C wrt this type of conflict. COIN/SASO/Small Wars/Phillipine Insurrection are complex & difficult things to pull off - if the WH doesn't have the nads to accept the political hits from the far left loonies for the upcoming surge in U.S. casualties then we might as well pull out now. I may have not always agreed w/W on domestic policy but at least the dude had balls and stood like an oak tree against the winds of rasmussen polls. |
| Posted by: Broadhead6 2009-10-08 20:50 |
| #5 Amen, BH6 - my son's in the sandbox, but if he was in Afghan, I'd be pissed at the two-month drift while doofus completes his "receipt" of Gen. McC's letter, all the while, preparing to go All-Biden™. Make up your mind: defend at all costs, withdraw with subsequent encouragement of Islamists, or some nebulous wanna-e-world hybrid? Make up your f*ckin mind and take responsibility. No "present" here, no "Boooosh-blame", and don't leave our troops hanging without support, supplies, or a withdrawal plan. |
| Posted by: Frank G 2009-10-08 20:40 |
| #4 new strategy needed? How about one of our official civilian assholes read the Small Wars Manual and figure out if this place is worth it...also, what's the f*cking end state? I.E. commander's intent...instead of going on every other half-assed talk show and jetting off to copenhagen the fuckstick-in-chief can spend 10 min's and write one up...or, maybe Oprah can. |
| Posted by: Broadhead6 2009-10-08 20:06 |
| #3 U.S. intelligence officials say they believe there are few, if any, links between Taliban commanders in Afghanistan today and senior al-Qaeda members. The same intelligence people who declared that Iran wasn't seeking nuclear weapons. When bourgeois facts are inconvenient, go with revolutionary facts (aka lies). S.J.Res.23 One Hundred Seventh Congress of the United States of America AT THE FIRST SESSION Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, the third day of January, two thousand and one Joint Resolution To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States. Whereas, on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous violence were committed against the United States and its citizens; and Whereas, such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that the United States exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad; and Whereas, in light of the threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by these grave acts of violence; and Whereas, such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States; and Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force'. SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES. (a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons. (b) War Powers Resolution Requirements- (1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution. (2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution supercedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution. Speaker of the House of Representatives. Vice President of the United States and President of the Senate. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2009-10-08 10:23 |
| #2 Although the Taliban welcomed Osama bin Laden when it ruled Afghanistan, U.S. intelligence officials say they believe there are few, if any, links between Taliban commanders in Afghanistan today and senior al-Qaeda members. Obama's choice of words was not lost on members of the review team. They, too, argued that the United States should focus on al-Qaeda. Their final document made the point bluntly: "The core goal of the U.S. must be to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qaeda." There's the problem right there. Talibunny season should be all year. |
| Posted by: Lumpy Elmoluck5091 2009-10-08 09:20 |
| #1 Smartest man in the world caught unawares.....rereads white paper. |
| Posted by: Besoeker in Duitsland 2009-10-08 07:31 |