Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Fri 02/22/2008 View Thu 02/21/2008 View Wed 02/20/2008 View Tue 02/19/2008 View Mon 02/18/2008 View Sun 02/17/2008 View Sat 02/16/2008
1
2008-02-22 Home Front: Politix
Obama: Troops in Afghanistan Forced to Use Taliban Weapons
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Glith Gleart3851 2008-02-22 01:02|| || Front Page|| [11130 views ]  Top

#1 Talking with my brother, he said that Obama is non-other than the WALRUS! After all his speeches seem along this line


I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together.
See how they run like pigs from a gun, see how they fly.
I'm crying.

Sitting on a cornflake, waiting for the van to come.
Corporation tee-shirt, stupid bloody Tuesday.
MAN, you been a naughty boy, you let your face grow long.
I am the eggman, they are the eggmen, I am the walrus,
goo goo g'joob
Posted by bruce 2008-02-22 07:58||   2008-02-22 07:58|| Front Page Top

#2 Blogistan is starting to chew this one up, and asking the Milbloggers to confirm/deny. Skepticism levels are about at UFO levels.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/255463.php

http://charliefoxtrotblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/obama-meet-milblogs.html

Posted by Anonymoose 2008-02-22 08:13||   2008-02-22 08:13|| Front Page Top

#3 "You know, I've heard from an Army captain who was the head of a rifle platoon...

Wouldn't that, as Donald Sensing pointed out elsewhere, the job for a lieutenant?
Posted by eLarson 2008-02-22 08:21|| http://larsonian.blogspot.com]">[http://larsonian.blogspot.com]  2008-02-22 08:21|| Front Page Top

#4 I'm also going to hold my breath until Obama goes to the Senate and demands more money for the effort in Afghanistan.

Ready? Go!
Posted by eLarson 2008-02-22 08:22|| http://larsonian.blogspot.com]">[http://larsonian.blogspot.com]  2008-02-22 08:22|| Front Page Top

#5 you would think more than one person could support this claim if it where true
Posted by  sinse 2008-02-22 08:26||   2008-02-22 08:26|| Front Page Top

#6 Any names, any details, or does he just expect us to be unquestionly blinded by the light?
Posted by tu3031 2008-02-22 08:28||   2008-02-22 08:28|| Front Page Top

#7 So that Captain got sacked and is doing a 2nd Lt's job, manning up a Rifle Plt?

And on top of htat, they split a company and sent its soldiers to 2 different AO's, that in this day and age of unit cohesion.

Busted. Lying. I hope it was "Seared" into you mind like Kerry's fake Cambodia mission. Empty suit A-hole.

And the press is giving him a free ride of course.

Whats next? Hey Barak heard that Ferris Bueller is sick?

Barak Obama: Um, he's sick. My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with the girl who saw Ferris pass out at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it's pretty serious.
Posted by OldSpook 2008-02-22 09:01||   2008-02-22 09:01|| Front Page Top

#8 And here I thought recycling was a good thing. Libs - go figure.
Posted by doc 2008-02-22 09:07||   2008-02-22 09:07|| Front Page Top

#9 I can buy soldiers using captured weapons -- happens all the time -- but the idea that it was because of a shortage of ammo is laughable.
Posted by Rob Crawford">Rob Crawford  2008-02-22 09:13||   2008-02-22 09:13|| Front Page Top

#10 its up to the consie press - weekly standard, NR, WSJ, Fox, to pursue this.

Want to know why they wont? Read George Will this AM. Georgie-boy addresses the Clinton attacks on Obamas in experience, by reminding us that James Buchanan was experienced and a failure, followed by inexperienced Lincoln. Its incredible enough when the Obamaniks call him Lincoln, but Will is too?

fact is your big guys hateses Hillary more than anything, and wont go neg on the Messiah till shes been completely staked through the heart. And even then, theyre all pretty ambivalent, at best, about McCain. Better 4 (or 8) years of Obama, than letting a "RINO" get control of the GOP, right? Keeping the vehicle for the right being more important than the security of the nation.

Feh!!
Posted by liberalhawk 2008-02-22 09:42||   2008-02-22 09:42|| Front Page Top

#11 This story and lie has so many holes you could run a Chinese armored regiment through it.

Obama is a disgrace and not even close to being fit and mentally able to lead our nation in a time of war.

Oh, and just for the record, they aren't called "rifle platoons" anymore. You have light infantry (which is ironic since they carry everything everywhere), mechanized infantry and special operations platoons. Light infantry are the specialized units, i.e. airborne, air assault, 10th mountain, etc. Mechanized is, well, mechanized. For the dhimocrat dipshits, that means they ride into battle in the back of armored carriers. Special operations are usually rangers, although Special Forces can work in units as large as a platoon.

Oh, and at least as far as the 101st was set up back in '91 (Might have changed since then), a platoon is around 38 soldiers. Three 9 man squads with a weapons squad. Then you have your Platoon daddy (E-7) and the lieutenant. I say around since replacement rates change and you can have anywhere from 41 to 24 guys in the platoon at any time. And they never split up a platoon for deployment either. The guys on medical sick call, like surgery and broken bones stay behind and man the phones at the base. The rest ship out with the rest of the COMPANY. Battalions might be split for transport, but not sent piecemeal to other Operational Theaters. The exception is the special operation groups, but even they usually are shipped to one theater only. Keeps confusion to a minimum.

In short, what a doofus.
Posted by DarthVader">DarthVader  2008-02-22 09:46||   2008-02-22 09:46|| Front Page Top

#12 Maybe the Army Captain was a Winter Soldier?

I've never served, but my B.S. detector went wild with the notion of splitting up a platoon and just melted before my very eyes with the notion of insufficient ammo.

Calling him a doofus is an isult to real doofuses everywhere! More like, not even a moron; he's a less-on.
Posted by Bobby 2008-02-22 10:21||   2008-02-22 10:21|| Front Page Top

#13 btw, the defense of Obama Im hearing now, is that maybe it was a USMC captain.

Would it make more sense for the USMC? Im skeptical, but dont know enough to say.
Posted by liberalhawk 2008-02-22 10:27||   2008-02-22 10:27|| Front Page Top

#14 btw, the defense of Obama Im hearing now, is that maybe it was a USMC captain.

Would it make more sense for the USMC? Im skeptical, but dont know enough to say.
Posted by liberalhawk 2008-02-22 10:27||   2008-02-22 10:27|| Front Page Top

#15 According to a commenter at Flopping Aces, both Hilly and B.O. voted against funding the war, thus encouraging troops to scrounge ammo
Posted by Bobby 2008-02-22 10:27||   2008-02-22 10:27|| Front Page Top

#16 fact is your big guys hateses Hillary more than anything, and wont go neg on the Messiah till shes been completely staked through the heart. And even then, theyre all pretty ambivalent, at best, about McCain. Better 4 (or 8) years of Obama, than letting a "RINO" get control of the GOP, right? Keeping the vehicle for the right being more important than the security of the nation.

OTOH, you want a candidate who will continue to support all your favorite economic policies, up to and including exporting the american oilfield, and a couple hundred billion dollars a year in revenue, to Saudi Arabia, but who has the guts to send our ten lousy little divisions overseas to try to save you from the consequences of that.

Twenty years ago, we were at 40% of our oil use imported. Now we're at 60%. I don't know what 70% looks like, but maybe we should bring the boys home before then.

Is there any real strategic difference between bringing the boys home and sending them out but in a position where all they can do is bleed in place?

I've had more or less seven straight years of "How many of those poor American boys are you going to murder" coming from the TV and the mandarin class using the necessary evils of the lesser-of-the-two-evils against us.

We made a big mistake out here in flyover country when we decided that the Big Population Center's problems were our problems.
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2008-02-22 10:30||   2008-02-22 10:30|| Front Page Top

#17 I've never served, but my B.S. detector went wild when I heard muBarack's lips had been moving.

Just a wee bit o' the plagiarism.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2008-02-22 10:31||   2008-02-22 10:31|| Front Page Top

#18 As Mark Twain said: "It is often better to keep one's mouth shut and appear stupid than to open it and remove all doubt."
#14. Then, maybe it was a navy captain, LH.
Posted by GK 2008-02-22 10:31||   2008-02-22 10:31|| Front Page Top

#19 Starfleet.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2008-02-22 10:33||   2008-02-22 10:33|| Front Page Top

#20 It may be that the Afghan portion of the rifle platoon was short of Humvees and ammo for a few days until the logistics caught up with the deployment modification.

And for those few days, they may have used some of the Taliban weapons in training exercises before serious combat operations.

Posted by mhw">mhw  2008-02-22 11:30|| http://hypocrisy-incorporated.blogspot.com/]">[http://hypocrisy-incorporated.blogspot.com/]  2008-02-22 11:30|| Front Page Top

#21 Captain D-Ill

Hey, we are still trying to find the 9,986 other people who the brave ship ludicrus said died in the Greensburg tornado.

-Or maybe they were using their weapons on purpose during raid to confuse the enemy? Nevermind it is bho who so it just bs-
Posted by swksvolFF 2008-02-22 11:35||   2008-02-22 11:35|| Front Page Top

#22 Keeping the vehicle for the right being more important than the security of the nation.

Feh!! - LH

How deep is that memory hole there o'LH

From the Washington Post -

Sen. Clinton Hedges Lieberman Support

Associated Press
Wednesday, July 5, 2006; Page A02

ALBANY, N.Y., July 4 -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), a longtime supporter of Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, said Tuesday that she will not back the Connecticut Democrat's bid for reelection if he loses their party's primary.

"I've known Joe Lieberman for more than 30 years. I have been pleased to support him in his campaign for reelection, and hope that he is our party's nominee," the former first lady said in a statement issued by aides.

"But I want to be clear that I will support the nominee chosen by Connecticut Democrats in their primary," Clinton added. "I believe in the Democratic Party, and I believe we must honor the decisions made by Democratic primary voters."

Right party over national security. You got it.
Posted by Procopius2k 2008-02-22 11:57||   2008-02-22 11:57|| Front Page Top

#23 procopius

I support Joe very much and despised Ned Lamont. But the difference in whom would be Senator from Connecticut has a far smaller impact on our national security than the Presidency. And Hillarys endorsement in the end had little impact on the Conn campaign.
Posted by liberalhawk 2008-02-22 12:21||   2008-02-22 12:21|| Front Page Top

#24 I dont understand #16. What does he mean selling the US oilfield, and what policies does he suggest that would have kept the US more energy self-sufficient?
Posted by liberalhawk 2008-02-22 12:23||   2008-02-22 12:23|| Front Page Top

#25 The bullshit and cowpuckie amply flowed last night. Truth took a holiday. Between Hildebeast's promises for everything for everyone, and BO's campaign of hope, hope, and more hope, and the many promised socialistic programs that the taxpayers can't afford, it was a sad night. I can't believe these potential voters applauded at this crap. Where the hell do they think all this money is going to come from--ITS THE TAXPAYERS? Hillary won the earmark contest. The "borrowed statements" (plagiarism) contest was a draw. I don't think either one of these buffoons could run a lemonade stand--in fact neither one of them has. All both have ever known are government jobs or some other BS socialistic sounding job. Elect either one of these socialist communists and we are in a world of hurt. Folks the donks will tell you anything, ANYTHING to get elected.
Posted by JohnQC 2008-02-22 12:30||   2008-02-22 12:30|| Front Page Top

#26 I can't believe these potential voters applauded at this crap.

They weren't average voters. Each audience member was a party bigwigs and operatives. The public was warned on the evening news not to even try to get tickets.
Posted by Unomorong Peacock6524 2008-02-22 12:43||   2008-02-22 12:43|| Front Page Top

#27 George will is an effite snob. He is a personification of the "Country Club" a-holes who are conservative only when it suits them.


George will needs to stick to writing about baseball. He's out of his depth and damned near irrelevant in conservative politics, at least to anyone that's not a half-with Northeastern blue blooded snob.

Posted by OldSpook 2008-02-22 12:48||   2008-02-22 12:48|| Front Page Top

#28 OldSpook

Once I was at a minor league game where George Will was throwing out the first ball. He took a big windup and then pitched a fast one in the dirt about 30+ feet in front of the catcher where it just had enough momentum to roll to near home plate. I could tell he felt embarrassed (probably he practised for an hour the previous night) but I found it amusing.
Posted by mhw">mhw  2008-02-22 12:59|| http://hypocrisy-incorporated.blogspot.com/]">[http://hypocrisy-incorporated.blogspot.com/]  2008-02-22 12:59|| Front Page Top

#29 I dont understand #16. What does he mean selling the US oilfield, and what policies does he suggest that would have kept the US more energy self-sufficient?

I mean that US production would not have dropped 30% the way it did if most of both the eastern and western seaboards, land areas in coastal California, and large parts of Alaska were off limits to offshore oil drilling.

I also believe that the moratorium on construction of nuclear energy plants over the last thirty years has greatly hampered the emergence of both coal synfuel and oil shale extraction industries. (Since we wind up needing the coal for power instead and oil shale extraction takes energy).
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2008-02-22 13:37||   2008-02-22 13:37|| Front Page Top

#30 I like how Obamma-Mamma pronounces Tolly-E-bond... maund! a Hoot!

It's true! George Bush screwed us it's true! we were even forced to scrounge Tolly-E-baund night-dresses and turbans from the Tael-E-bond... maund.

And fer yer edifications it's not easy to coordinate the camo paint patterns between the the top and bottomn..
Posted by Capt Obama Poltroon">Capt Obama Poltroon  2008-02-22 13:52||   2008-02-22 13:52|| Front Page Top

#31 29
First, I think you are incorrect about off shore oil policy, esp wrt to the East Coast.

second your next paragraph makes no sense. Coal for power is still fairly cheap, and high sulfur coal (which could be used for synfuels) dropped in value dramatically after the clean air act forced substitution of low sulfur western coal. The problems with Coal synfuels are largely technical.
Posted by liberalhawk 2008-02-22 14:05||   2008-02-22 14:05|| Front Page Top

#32 God save the United States of America, for surely we need it.
Posted by liberalhawk 2008-02-22 14:05||   2008-02-22 14:05|| Front Page Top

#33 First, I think you are incorrect about off shore oil policy, esp wrt to the East Coast.

Precisely. You want a candidate who's going to tell you you're right about all of your sacred cows and then go send some guys to the Middle East to get mangled by IED's in the process of saving you from the various ripple effects of your decision.

Obama is just ignoring one more level of ripple effects and saying we don't have to send guys to Iraq. If he'd wise up and figure out that the Afghans didn't carry out the 9/11 attacks and we don't need troops there...

(Yes, Afghanistan is a proxy war against the countries that did sponsor them. But it's a proxy war, and the Dem party has been ignoring that Iraq was also a proxy war in the same manner, during the last five years of its attacks on the subject. It's going to add up).
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2008-02-22 14:13||   2008-02-22 14:13|| Front Page Top

#34 wtf? Al Qaeeda did 9/11, and they were based in Afghan and protected by the Taliban, with whom they were practically co-running the country. Did you manage to miss that?
Posted by liberalhawk 2008-02-22 14:16||   2008-02-22 14:16|| Front Page Top

#35 Oh, please. The taliban were installed by Pakistan, during that time period Afghanistan was a client state of Pakistan, and NONE of the 9/11 plotters were Afghanis.

It was just a convenient satellite state of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia for them to rent a post office box in.
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2008-02-22 14:53||   2008-02-22 14:53|| Front Page Top

#36 You had Saudis (Saudi Arabia not invaded in the wake of 9/11), Lebanese (ditto), Egyptians (ditto), Yemenis...

They might have had knife-fighting lessons in Afghanistan, but they also had flight lessons in Florida.
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2008-02-22 14:56||   2008-02-22 14:56|| Front Page Top

#37 If you're wondering why I'm saying this about Afghanistan now... well, it's all technically true, and it's also technically leading to a false conclusion: that there's no reason for US troops to be in Afghanistan.

For the past five years when democrats like Barack Obama made that exact same technically-true-but-in-a-larger-sense wrong argument about Iraq, Hillary just gave her glassy-eyed smile and nodded and said the vast majority of hawks were incompetent liars but alone of all the people who voted for the war in Iraq she was truthful and competent.

She (and McCain) have been running on a platform of "all the hawks are idiots (or idiots and liars) _except for me_, so vote for me."

This isn't a very tenable political position and onne that gives massive advantages to the non-hawks.

She could have decided to start pushing back against these people three or four years ago and she'd be ahead in the campaign but it would have meant giving up the daily five-minute hate against Bush.
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2008-02-22 15:10||   2008-02-22 15:10|| Front Page Top

#38 Oh, please. The taliban were installed by Pakistan, during that time period Afghanistan was a client state of Pakistan, and NONE of the 9/11 plotters were Afghanis.

which is relevant, how?
Posted by liberalhawk 2008-02-22 16:08||   2008-02-22 16:08|| Front Page Top

#39 Hillary just gave her glassy-eyed smile and nodded and said the vast majority of hawks were incompetent liars but alone of all the people who voted for the war in Iraq she was truthful and competent.

She (and McCain) have been running on a platform of "all the hawks are idiots (or idiots and liars) _except for me_, so vote for me."

If I say I want a pizza, and pal Barack, says, NO, Pizza is bad for you it will give you a heart attack, and I say - pizza is good - and then my friend Don says I will make the pizza, and he adds peanut butter, and sets the oven to 700 degrees, and the peanut cheese horror goes up in flames, and I say "pizza is good, but YOU, Don, are an idiot" I may well be wrong (cause like no recipe ever goes perfectly, and no recipe survives the first encounter with the oven, yaddah yaddah) but the fact that my friend barak dislike pizza cause of the cholesterol, but inconsistently loves steak, had NO bearing on my criticism of Dons cooking. IS THAT CLEAR???
Posted by liberalhawk 2008-02-22 16:12||   2008-02-22 16:12|| Front Page Top

#40 and man, David has finally come into fix up the pizza, remove the peanut butter, scrape away the burnt parts, and Barack is about to toss the pizza in the garbage.
Posted by liberalhawk 2008-02-22 16:14||   2008-02-22 16:14|| Front Page Top

#41 All I wanted was a sub (SSGN) with the works to go.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2008-02-22 16:39||   2008-02-22 16:39|| Front Page Top

#42 Get back on your meds before you wander off to some college campus armed to the teeth.
Posted by wxjames 2008-02-22 16:46||   2008-02-22 16:46|| Front Page Top

#43 "which is relevant, how?"

Well, we seem to have all these troops in Afghanistan and not Yemen or Lebanon or Saudi Arabia.
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2008-02-22 17:23||   2008-02-22 17:23|| Front Page Top

#44 Ace of Spades does some research.
Posted by Deacon Blues">Deacon Blues  2008-02-22 19:09||   2008-02-22 19:09|| Front Page Top

#45 Abdominal Snowman, it seems to me back in WWII we invaded Africa before Germnay, and we didn't go straight to the Japanese home islands either. On the other hand, Al Qaeda, which did plan and execute the 9/11 attacks, was based in Afghanistan, and the Taliban were protecting them. Saddam Hussein was the biggest supporter of terrorism when we invaded: not so much funding like the Saudis, but training in hijacking, explosives, and chemical and biological attacks. Remember the split facilities at Salman Pak? One side for Iraqi special forces, the other for Arab/Muslim terrorists of all stripes? The Saudi money was only good once the volunteers had the appropriate skills. The Lebanese generally work locally; the Egyptians take leadership roles in Islamist/Muslim Brotherhood organizations; the Yemenis...what have they done besides blow up the USS Cole and stage a few kidnappings?
Posted by trailing wife ">trailing wife  2008-02-22 19:36||   2008-02-22 19:36|| Front Page Top

#46 I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together.
See how they run like pigs from a gun, see how they fly.
I'm crying.

Sitting on a cornflake, waiting for the van to come.
Corporation tee-shirt, stupid bloody Tuesday.
MAN, you been a naughty boy, you let your face grow long.
I am the eggman, they are the eggmen, I am the walrus,
goo goo g'joob

Is that "Free Verse" or have you taken LSD?
Posted by Redneck Jim 2008-02-22 20:00||   2008-02-22 20:00|| Front Page Top

#47 Yes, TW, I know. I was trying to illustrate the difference between the real truth and a carefully edited version of the truth.

The "carefully edited version of the truth" doesn't support going into Afghanistan any more than it does going into Iraq.
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2008-02-22 21:03||   2008-02-22 21:03|| Front Page Top

#48 The incident happened five years ago, at the time of the Iraqi attack. The 4th ID unable to enter from the north (thanks to State's embarrassing the Turks). The transfer of troops and to Iraqi ops was logical. So was the logistics-emphasis.

At the very least, the fact that it happened in 2003 should have been mentioned.
Posted by Pappy 2008-02-22 21:29||   2008-02-22 21:29|| Front Page Top

#49 Yes, TW, I know.

Thank you, Abdominal Snowman. I was shocked. I'm not good at detecting subtlety, I'm afraid, unless it's plainly marked. ;-)
Posted by trailing wife">trailing wife  2008-02-22 21:49||   2008-02-22 21:49|| Front Page Top

23:56 trailing wife
23:54 trailing wife
23:52 JosephMendiola
23:46 JosephMendiola
23:46 trailing wife
23:43 JosephMendiola
23:40 Abdominal Snowman
23:38 JosephMendiola
23:36 Blinky Omereth6252
23:35 JosephMendiola
23:29 OldSpook
23:28 JosephMendiola
23:27 trailing wife
23:20 Iblis
23:09 regular joe
23:07 RD
23:04 regular joe
22:58 regular joe
22:49 regular joe
22:44 Muslims Against Sharia
22:42 regular joe
22:41 Eric Jablow
22:26 OldSpook
22:16 JosephMendiola









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com