Got feedback on the new design? We're Listening! Send us Feedback

More US troops may go to Afghanistan this year »

Posted by: STONERS 1 month, 3 weeks ago

8.7

Scale of 1 to 10

Read: 173

Propped: 105

Comments: 36

Click Prop It to Raise Score

Prop it

Pentagon leaders on Wednesday signaled a surge in U.S. forces in Afghanistan "sooner rather than later," a shift that could send some units there within weeks, as officials prepare to cut troop levels in Iraq.

Read Full Story at news.yahoo.com

Join the Discussion

+ Add Comment

Comments So Far: 36

0%
STONERS1 month, 3 weeks ago

"Military leaders are weighing requests from commanders in Afghanistan for more troops, aircraft and other assistance. And they are trying to determine the right balance between the needs of the force in Iraq, versus troops in Afghanistan who are facing a Taliban resurgence."
"To date, the fight in Afghanistan has taken a back seat to Iraq, which has been the strategic priority. While Iraq will remains the top goal, it now appears the military believes there should be a more urgent emphasis on Afghanistan than there has been."

Reply
2 Replies
- 0%
  UnusualSuspect1 month, 3 weeks ago
  
  Hmmm...and I thought the government forgot all about Afghanistan...I mean, bin Laden was hiding there, wasn't he?...and he did claim responsibility for taking down the Twin Towers, didn't he?
  Huh...well, better late than never, I always say...
  Reply
  1 Reply
  - 0%
    lfergie8121 month, 3 weeks ago
    
    UnusualSuspect
    Don't you find it a coincidence that the talk is now about sending more troops to Afghanistan since Obama made the commitment to withdraw troops from Iraq and send more to Afghanistan?
    From a June 15th article.
    "Barack Obama yesterday pledged to increase US troops in Afghanistan by a third if he becomes president, sending 10,000 more to reinforce the 33,000 already there."
    Reply
0%
unome21 month, 3 weeks ago

I'm sorry, What exactly are we doing in Afganistan?
Reply
7 Replies
- 0%
  libsRfunny1 month, 3 weeks ago
  
  Only a goof would ask such a thing. Even liberals acknowledge the Taliban had a direct connection 9/11 by providing a safe haven for Bin Laden. When things weren't looking as good in Iraq as they are now, Democrats and liberals whined that we should focus on Afghanistan.
  Now many whine that we have no business there -- never mind the fact it is a NATO operation.
  Reply
  6 Replies
  - 0%
    sumptuousdigs1 month, 3 weeks ago
    
    By your reasoning, libsaretrulygenius, Saudi Arabia would be a good place to start...
    Reply
  - 0%
    lfergie8121 month, 3 weeks ago
    
    libsRfunny said: "Now many whine that we have no business there -- never mind the fact it is a NATO operation."
    Show me "many" comments that said we should not be in Afghanistan. You're taking on the characteristics of that propaganda station FOX by creating false news.
    I've been reading this forum for 2 years now and I have never seen anyone post a comment saying we should not be in Afghanistan. I have seen comments that we had no business in Iraq because we should have taken care of Afghanistan first but never any "whine" about Afghanistan.
    Reply
    3 Replies
    - 0%
      hyperbola1 month, 3 weeks ago
      
      Oh I'm willing to say that we should not be in Afghanistan any longer. For that matter Afghanistan's president Karzai increasingly condemns the actions of our troops there as murderous and counterproductive.
      Reply
      2 Replies
      - 0%
        lfergie8121 month, 3 weeks ago
        
        Congratulations, you're the first I've seen. .Read the current news.
        http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asi...
        The al Qaeda attack on American military base only proves that the situation is not settled there yet.
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2239573.stm
        All Bush has done, by not concentrating his efforts in Afghanistan, is give al Qaeda time to regroup. As for "Afghanistan's president Karzai increasingly condemns the actions of our troops there" he should be aware that they are after his posterior and should shut his pie hole.
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        0%
        hyperbola1 month, 2 weeks ago
        
        Nope, Karzai correctly points out that our troops there simply increase the level of violence and prevent a national reconciliation in Afghanistan.
        By the way, a good part of the resistance in Afghanistan has absolutely nothing to do with Al Qaeda. Indeed, we may well be again reinforcing Al Qaeda by our continued presence.
        Reply
  - 0%
    tkyrchncs1 month, 3 weeks ago
    
    That's just crap. Many of us have said all along that BOTH invasions are ill-conceived and unlikely to achieve anything positive for our nation, just as they HAVE NOT.
    Reply
0%
wujian1 month, 3 weeks ago

Until when the war will over?
Seems like never ending story here...

Reply
3 Replies
- 0%
  UnusualSuspect1 month, 3 weeks ago
  
  wu...
  We're trying to break the record set by England and France's 100 Year War (1337-1453). Bush has gotten us to a great start, and McCain, by gosh, if elected (doubtful) would keep us there a 100 years...
  Hey..we can win the Olympic gold...let's go for the "War" gold by getting a win in that category...
  Reply
  2 Replies
  - 0%
    newbie04201 month, 3 weeks ago
    
    By your logic in another 40 years or so we'd have been at war with Germany, Japan, Korea and many other countries for 100 years.
    Quit taking the man's quote out of context.
    Reply
    1 Reply
    - 0%
      lfergie8121 month, 3 weeks ago
      
      Duh!! Those wars are over unless you want to count the economic invasion that is in effect now. If you are counting the economic invasion you have to include China which has now joined forces with Germany and Japan.
      Reply
0%
DeadXXXManXXXTalkin1 month, 3 weeks ago

these Afghani stories seem to get neglected compared to the Iraqi ones
If there was a surge in Iraq, and now they'll be a surge in Afghanistan, I assume some troops will have to be redeployed from Iraq.
so what's that mean for Iraq? I wonder what a troop reduction will mean for that country

Reply
7 Replies
- 0%
  rightfromwrong1 month, 3 weeks ago
  
  Just means more Blackwater mercenaries
  Reply
  1 Reply
  - 0%
    sumptuousdigs1 month, 3 weeks ago
    
    We don't talk about them...
    Reply
- 0%
  libsRfunny1 month, 3 weeks ago
  
  "so what's that mean for Iraq? I wonder what a troop reduction will mean for that country"
  You must not pay attention to current events. Iraq is taking over more and more control of its own security, which has been the plan all along. We already began troop reductions there.
  Reply
  3 Replies
  - 0%
    DeadXXXManXXXTalkin1 month, 3 weeks ago
    
    well hell, obviously if nothing has changed yet in Iraq since this alleged troop reduction, it never will
    ''You must not pay attention to current events. Iraq...''
    my attention is only good for 3 years-4 at the outside...A D D generation I guess
    tell you what fella, when Iraq becomes a bed of roses and our troops are elsewhere, then you can do the victory dance all over my grave, and I'll smile up at the soles of your buster browns and nod
    deal?
    
    Reply
  - 0%
    UnusualSuspect1 month, 3 weeks ago
    
    Good...let's get on with it, then.
    When Obama's in the White House, we'll start seeing troop levels go down in Iraq, and go to Afghanistan, where they should have almost 7 years ago.
    Reply
  - 0%
    lfergie8121 month, 3 weeks ago
    
    "You must not pay attention to current events."
    ROFLMAO
    Since I don't process soothsayer's ability, current events is all I have to go on since everything that comes out of the White House is a lie. We have been told that the surge troops have been withdrawn which is a lie because they are still about the pre-surge level. The troop level now is 155,000 where the pre-surge level was 130,000.
    Reply
- 0%
  Natureboy1 month, 3 weeks ago
  
  Ain't no surges. They are troop escalations.
  Reply
ML2007Comment removed: User banned.
0%
hyperbola1 month, 3 weeks ago

Well, the US media doesn't tell you, but Afghans are increasingly fed up with our crimes there.
US Afghan bombing kills dozens of civilians

News â;; Dozens of Afghan civilians have been killed during aerial bombing by US forces in the western province of Herat.
http://news.propeller.com/story/2008/07/17/us-a...
Afghanistan's 'sons of the soil' rise up

Politics â;; The resilient Taliban have proved unshakeable across Afghanistan over the past few months, making the chances of a coalition military victory against the popular tide of the insurgency in the majority Pashtun belt increasingly slim.
http://politics.propeller.com/story/2008/07/12/...

Reply
0%
fsev411 month, 3 weeks ago

Well we've played "Whack-A-Mole" in Iraq for long enough. Now its time to branch out a little and do it in Afghanistan too.
Reply
0%
unome21 month, 3 weeks ago

The war on terror is make believe, the only terror is american military and blackwater goons killing civilians and making sweetheart deals for our corporate masters.
Now watch Bush's PR firms fire back at me for telling the truth.
Reply
1 Reply
- 0%
  crghss1 month, 3 weeks ago
  
  Why would anyone feel the need to fire back at you? Who the h3ll are you. A harmless child. This is one of the funnest things I've read out here in nutscape in a while.
  Reply
0%
nikkibabe1 month, 3 weeks ago

The Russians invaded, fought and left defeated battered and bruised after 10 years.
The crooks in WH and the Administration may not know their fate, but it will be what the Russians got in 1980's. So it 7 years and counting. US will leave defeated, battered and bruised in 2011.
You can win over people with cluster bombs and missiles. you got to talk to them and help them.
Reply
3 Replies
- 0%
  crghss1 month, 3 weeks ago
  
  The Afghans would have never won without US technology and money from US & Saudis.
  Afghanistan could well be on it's way to a peaceful existence if not for crazies like and your buddies. Why you're all so afraid of women I'll never know. Denying them equal rights, education and freedom. Why do they scare you so much?
  Reply
  2 Replies
  - 0%
    Natureboy1 month, 3 weeks ago
    
    Your knowledge of history is pathetic. It was the CIA that organized the mujaheddin and the taliban and taught them terrorist tactics in order to draw the Soviet Union into its own little vietnam. It was the U.S. that supported the Taliban.
    Afghanistan would be on its way to a peaceful existence if the US had never meddled in its affairs. Period.
    Reply
  - 0%
    crghss1 month, 3 weeks ago
    
    Really? That's a nice trick considering the Taliban didn't exist until 1994 5 years AFTER we left Afghanistan.
    If the U.S. hadn't "meddled in its affairs" they would still be Communists and the Berlin wall would still be standing.
    Who's knowledge of history is "pathetic".
    You just got to love it when nutscapers open their mouth and prove their ignorance. Its just to funny.
    Reply
0%
nikkibabe1 month, 3 weeks ago

The total idiot Bush and his bunch of war mongers NEVER LEARN.
Just invade Pakistan and get it over with ASAP. They will find AQ, Taliban, OBL, Mullah Omar and Zawahiri right there. They are, for god sake, not in Afghanistan.
Reply
0%
willottica1 month, 3 weeks ago

"military leaders believe they can find a number of smaller units such as aviation, engineering and surveillance troops that can be moved more swiftly"
Oh good, use engineers as foot-soldiers. There's probably a reason that they're not in combat right now; I would guess that reason has something to do with their being more valuable for their brains than their brawn.
Reply
0%
tkyrchncs1 month, 3 weeks ago

More US troops may go to Afghanistan this year
Bad idea. Very, very bad. If this idiocy really must continue, and this really IS a NATO mission, send someone else and give the US troops a break.
Reply
0%
Natureboy1 month, 3 weeks ago

Read about it here -
How the U.S. knowingly and deliberately precipitated the Soviet invaion of Afghanistan.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BRZ110A.html
Reply