Osama Bin Laden

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
21

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
oboffill wrote:
…

The truth is that we CUT AND RUN in Afghanistan. Mission WAS NOT Completed. The U.S. GOVERNMENT has FAILED us.

…

We are still in Afghanistan as are our many. many allies.

If you had half a clue you would know that.

The key to Afghanistan is keeping the troop levels low so we do not turn the country against us yet high enough to fight the Taliban.

oboffill is mostly typing garbage, but this isn’t true either. It’s that kind of thinking that may well lose both the war in Afghanistan and the one in Iraq. Unfortunately, it’s thinking that is embraced by our inept Secretary of Defense and the nearly as bad President.

Frederick Kagan puts it well:

One of the reasons for this reluctance is the conviction, reinforced by the first battle of Falluja in early 2004, that coalition forces cannot really perform such missions. Generals John Abizaid, George Casey, and many others have argued that the mere presence of U.S. forces is an irritant, and their active operations against insurgents alienate more Iraqis than they win over. Yet a number of developments in 2005 should have called this assumption sharply into question.

Coalition forces partnered with Iraqi units were able to put down an uprising in Sadr City, a huge predominantly Shiite district of Baghdad, in early 2005 and then clear out a major insurgent stronghold in Tal Afar in September. In both cases, skillful preparation, the intelligent and discriminate use of force, and attention to vital “nonkinetic” parts of the operation (efforts to change local attitudes by improving water and sewer systems, building schools and clinics, handing out military rations, and so on) led to great and lasting success. These operations seriously undermine the argument that only the Iraqis can successfully prosecute such clear-and-hold missions, though they also show that the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) will not be ready to conduct them on their own for the foreseeable future. In fact, the present course of “muddling through” while attempting to draw down as rapidly as possible is almost certain to prolong the insurgency, and with it the American troop presence in Iraq…

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/241kdhyv.asp[/quote]

You just confirmed my point. The Afghanis and Iraqis need to win it with our help.

We cannot fight it for them. Sticking a million men on Afghanistan would cause huge problems. Afghanistan is not a densely populated country and does not need the same troop level as Iraq.

BTW who is muddling through while trying to draw down as fast as possible in Iraq? That is not our present course. We have not been drawing down.

The writer is mixing facts and fiction.

22

[quote]oboffill wrote:
[center]I thought it couldn’t get any simpler than

COPY AND PASTING FROM BUSH’S SPEECHES[/center]

I gave factual, non-opinionated statements. Reading comprehension folks.

Obviously, you guys are so out of touch with reality that there is no getting through to you. You’ve bought into this partisan bullshit and it has affected our country for the bad.

Those in power have used terrorism to propagate whatever agenda they may have. The sad truth is that they don’t even have to hide behind their lies anymore. They know that their pawns (read: “Republican” base) will buy into it because they have complete trust in the government. Hell, I’ve proven this fact with this very thread. You guys are worthless peons in their game.

Out.[/quote]

You cherry picked phrases taken out of context.

Jeff posted the whole speech. The speech made perfect sense and did not say what you were claiming it said.

You are the one that is out of touch with reality, but that has been clear from the other crazy shit you have posted over the last few months.

23

Come on everyone, offobill has you all dead to rights.

Have we learned nothing from the past few years? If you make a mistake, that makes you a liar. So Russia told Bush Iraq had WMD’s. So our intelligence agency told Bush Iraq had WMD’s So Great Britton told Bush Iraq had WMD’s.

We went in there a few months later, and found only small quantities of WMD’s, and the biggest WMD program in the world ready to start at a moments notice, and that obviously makes Bush a liar.

Come on, it’s not like Iraq would actually try to hide evidence, or even move the WMD’s, after all Saddam was a loving caring individual who never harmed anyone.

And it is so obvious that when we went into Iraq, we took everyone out of Afghanistan. Yup, no soldiers in Afghanistan. Nobody ever looked for Osama, nope.

You don’t actually think he is hiding do you? Why would he do that? Don’t be ridiculous.

We find people we are looking for all the time. Just look at how easy it was to find the unibomber. Or how about the BTK killer? Found only minutes after his first crime in 1974. They just didn’t announce it until 30 years later.

See, all these people are easy to find.

If everyone only understood the constitution:
Freedom of Liberal speech,
The right to control arms,
Freedom of non-Christian religion,
Free abortions for all,

Doesn’t anyone understand that we need to quit thinking for ourselves? What we need to do is listen to all the other countries say, and do what they tell us to do, then we will be popular. You know, like in high school.

Fer Sher.

24

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
oboffill wrote:
…

The truth is that we CUT AND RUN in Afghanistan. Mission WAS NOT Completed. The U.S. GOVERNMENT has FAILED us.

…

We are still in Afghanistan as are our many. many allies.

If you had half a clue you would know that.

The key to Afghanistan is keeping the troop levels low so we do not turn the country against us yet high enough to fight the Taliban.

oboffill is mostly typing garbage, but this isn’t true either. It’s that kind of thinking that may well lose both the war in Afghanistan and the one in Iraq. Unfortunately, it’s thinking that is embraced by our inept Secretary of Defense and the nearly as bad President.

Frederick Kagan puts it well:

One of the reasons for this reluctance is the conviction, reinforced by the first battle of Falluja in early 2004, that coalition forces cannot really perform such missions. Generals John Abizaid, George Casey, and many others have argued that the mere presence of U.S. forces is an irritant, and their active operations against insurgents alienate more Iraqis than they win over. Yet a number of developments in 2005 should have called this assumption sharply into question.

Coalition forces partnered with Iraqi units were able to put down an uprising in Sadr City, a huge predominantly Shiite district of Baghdad, in early 2005 and then clear out a major insurgent stronghold in Tal Afar in September. In both cases, skillful preparation, the intelligent and discriminate use of force, and attention to vital “nonkinetic” parts of the operation (efforts to change local attitudes by improving water and sewer systems, building schools and clinics, handing out military rations, and so on) led to great and lasting success. These operations seriously undermine the argument that only the Iraqis can successfully prosecute such clear-and-hold missions, though they also show that the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) will not be ready to conduct them on their own for the foreseeable future. In fact, the present course of “muddling through” while attempting to draw down as rapidly as possible is almost certain to prolong the insurgency, and with it the American troop presence in Iraq…

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/241kdhyv.asp

You just confirmed my point. The Afghanis and Iraqis need to win it with our help.

We cannot fight it for them. Sticking a million men on Afghanistan would cause huge problems. Afghanistan is not a densely populated country and does not need the same troop level as Iraq.

BTW who is muddling through while trying to draw down as fast as possible in Iraq? That is not our present course. We have not been drawing down.

The writer is mixing facts and fiction.[/quote]

There’s a world of difference between saying the Afghans and Iraqis ultimately need to save their own countries, and the stupid footprint argument.

We’re not doing much more at the strategic level beyond muddling through and looking for a way out. That’s not the way to win a war. Maybe Bush is obstinate to want us to stay in Iraq in serious numbers for a long time, but military rotations, Karl Rove, and Republican Congressmen terrified of losing their seats are not on his side.