SUBSIM Radio Room Forums

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)
-   General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)
-   -   New Afghanistan policy (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=158795)

JU_88 12-02-09 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikimcbee (Post 1212104)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...fghanistan-war

Well, what did you think of the speech?

If we're going to set a timeline, I say get rid of all these silly RoE and let the troops do their job. IMO. But now that I think about the RoE thingy, that didn't work out so well for the soviets.:dead: Nobody plays meaner than the Russians. I say we just build a big wall around the place and say nobody leaves. I think that would be cheaper. They get there islamic utopia and we keep them contained, away from everybody else. If they climb over the wall, kill them on the spot.:yeah: Kinda like hotel kali-fornia.

So much for freedom

SteamWake 12-02-09 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens (Post 1212301)
The pullout timetable is to appease the liberal ostriches, and give Hope to the Taliban that all they need to do is lay low 18 months and they can move back in. :nope:

Precisley the reason no timeline has been set... .untill now.

Skybird 12-02-09 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JU_88 (Post 1212310)
So much for freedom

Indeed. We have our freedom from them, and they have their freedom from us. Fair deal.

JU_88 12-02-09 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna (Post 1212278)
The bit I don't understand is the announcement of an additional 30,000 troops allied to a timescale for withdrawal.

What's the point?


Supposedly so they can go on the offensive for the last 18 months, and also train the afghan military and police to defend themselves. (hmmmm)

Same was done in Vietnam by Nixon in 1973, he anounced that the South Vietnamese army was strong enough to defend Saigon, and with drew the US military - but the south govenment collpased in 75. (two years was pretty good going though)

But in the case of Vietnam the majority of the population where behind Ho Chi Mihns communist govenment anyway, so there was never any hope for the South & the U.S. That is ultimatly why the U.S failed in Vietnam.
(And I am not going to argue about this fact either, that is what i have read, so if you dont belive it - I dont care)

I dont know how it will work in Afgahnistan. I guess it partly depends on how far the the Taliban have been pushed back, and partly how well the 'hearts & minds' thing has paid off on this occasion.....

Time will tell anyway. i just hope the loss of human life is minimal.

SteamWake 12-02-09 09:58 AM

I dident really make this connection untill now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Der Spiegel
Just in Time for the Campaign

For each troop movement, Obama had a number to match. US strength in Afghanistan will be tripled relative to the Bush years, a fact that is sure to impress hawks in America. But just 18 months later, just in time for Obama's re-election campaign, the horror of war is to end and the draw down will begin. The doves of peace will be let free

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...664753,00.html

JU_88 12-02-09 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteamWake (Post 1212361)
I dident really make this connection untill now.



http://www.spiegel.de/international/...664753,00.html

Yep, doesn't surprise me at all. Thats most politicians for ya, always looking out for Number 1 in the long term. :dead:

Sea Demon 12-02-09 10:21 AM

I wonder what the leftwing anti-war protesters are going to do...now that Obama has gone "neocon". :DL

nikimcbee 12-02-09 10:24 AM

Didn't obama campaign on invading Pakistan to chase the taliban?

I guess this sounds like Prez Johnson part II:shifty:. Well, you get what you vote for:shifty:.

the bottom line is we need to beat the taliban and make it crystal clear to all the other islamic nutjobs that are violent not to mess with the West. And if you do, we're gunna kick yer a$$, bomb your weapon caches, oops I mean mosques, kill you leadership, etc, etc.
We have got to stop coddeling (sp?) these guys and really beat the crap out of them, so they hopefully they'll stop causing trouble for the rest of the world.

Like I said before, PCness is going to be the death of us all.:shifty:

Jimbuna 12-02-09 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens (Post 1212301)
The pullout timetable is to appease the liberal ostriches, and give Hope to the Taliban that all they need to do is lay low 18 months and they can move back in. :nope:

I was thinking similarly around the Taliban laying low.

Not being an American....Is this not also a political ploy by the White House to make it easier for Obama to gain a second term in office? :hmmm:

Onkel Neal 12-02-09 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna (Post 1212456)
I was thinking similarly around the Taliban laying low.

Not being an American....Is this not also a political ploy by the White House to make it easier for Obama to gain a second term in office? :hmmm:

Yeah, it could be.

Me personally, I cannot see how the West can ignore this situation like Iran. This is nothing to play politics about. Oh well, as long as it ends up with Obama out of office in 2012, I'm good.

AVGWarhawk 12-02-09 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens (Post 1212465)
Yeah, it could be.

Me personally, I cannot see how the West can ignore this situation like Iran. This is nothing to play politics about. Oh well, as long as it ends up with Obama out of office in 2012, I'm good.


Jim makes a good point. A sitting president is not normally voted out of office when a war is being conducted. So yes, could be a clever ploy and a bad one at that. However, we are dealing with a Chicago politician. :shifty:

SteamWake 12-02-09 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens (Post 1212465)
Yeah, it could be.

Me personally, I cannot see how the West can ignore this situation like Iran. This is nothing to play politics about. Oh well, as long as it ends up with Obama out of office in 2012, I'm good.

But playing politics is all he knows. It's what he grew up with, its what he does for a living, its 'in his blood'.

Change... pfffft.

Jimbuna 12-02-09 12:43 PM

Another potential political voting angle/stunt could be "Look at me I've brought all our fine young boys and girls home safely"

There is something just not right about this POTUS....I can't put my finger on it but I can definitely feel the disturbance in my bladder :hmmm:

AVGWarhawk 12-02-09 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna (Post 1212480)
Another potential political voting angle/stunt could be "Look at me I've brought all our fine young boys and girls home safely"

There is something just not right about this POTUS....I can't put my finger on it but I can definitely feel the disturbance in my bladder :hmmm:

He is all about himself Jim. He did not get the title "Rock Star President" for his looks.

Thomen 12-02-09 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk (Post 1212508)
He is all about himself Jim. He did not get the title "Rock Star President" for his looks.

Indeed. The address left a bitter taste of "it is all about Me". After the obligatory and thinly veiled "blame Bush" came the announcement of 30,000 more troops and the following bug-out, followed by a big kthxbye. :shifty:

At least, the cadets didn't seem to be that impressed by it.

On a side note: Anyone willing to take a bet that some of the cadets are going to clean toilets with toothbrushes today for falling asleep during the speech? :D


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:56 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.