When General McChrystal was first reported as requesting 40,000 additional troops for Afghanistan, many people balked at the massive number. Not long after, the number was quietly revised to 45,000. Last Friday it became clear that the general had actually requested over 60,000.
Now McClatchy Newspapers is citing officials in the Obama Administration and military as saying that the General’s “low-risk” option was actually even higher, asking for 80,000 additional troops for the war in Afghanistan.
All the while, the 40,000 number has remained out there as a “medium-risk” option. The once massive escalation, suddenly reimagined as a “compromise” position in the face of outrageously large demands that have since been made. McChrystal reportedly isn’t thrilled with 40,000, which he has described as the absolute minimum needed.
The rub, however, is that with 68,000 US troops already in Afghanistan and 120,000+ still in Iraq, in addition to all of America’s assorted other imperial requirements around the world, the US military simply doesn’t have anywhere near the number of additional troops just lying around that the general wants to throw at the eight year long conflict. Officials are now saying that, even with the disastrous economy making wartime recruiting remarkably easy, they can only send about 30,000 more troops without putting undue strain on the Army and Marine Corps.
This is absurd. This is a war that no one can win and we need to withdraw. Innocent lives are being destroyed on BOTH sides. Wake up America and GET OUT!
Sad thing is that instead of 80K troops he'll get 1.8K additional troops and end of having more loss of life because of the fact that he didn't have 80K troops.
Sad? I hoped he'd get zero and then resign. Better to get out and leave Afghanistan forever than shed a drop of anyones blood. Saying that he should get more is the equivalent of saying we should all be taxed again and again, ad nausem, "just because I say so". We're all being bled to death by these evil fools.
I have a much easier plan:
1) Leave
2) Never come back
Commander and Chief sets the policy and the Generals do it.
The only people who are benefiting from these wars are those who are making tons of money off of war but not participating in them in any way. That being said, what we need is a nationwide draft, and we need it now. The longer we go without a draft, the longer This country will be without a genuine anitwar movement that would put a stop to this insane waste of lives and national treasure, just as it did during the Vietnam fiasco.
Heaven forbid we do anything to succeed as a military and a nation. A military victory, to a liberal, is even more poisonous than having to listen to the truth. The only way to achieve peace in this complex world is through superior firepower.
"The only way to achieve peace in this complex world is through superior firepower."
What's so complex about the world that the most powerful nation on earth has to invade one of the poorest, weakest country on earth in order to achieve peace?
I'm sure there are plenty of Afghanis who agree with you; thinking if only their firepower was superior to the US there would be peace in their land…
Sweden and Switzerland have been at peace for 200 years. The Republic of Ireland has been at peace since it became an independent country in the 1920's. The way to have peace is to have a non-interventionist foreign policy like these countries do. America sticks its nose in other countries business and goes looking for trouble.
Ireland at peace since the 1920s? That's a bit generous! Civil War in 1923; fighting between the IRA and government throughout the 1930s; air raids against Ireland during WW2; Bloody Sunday in 1972; IRA fighting again from 1970-ish to 1994–point being, even though Ireland attempted neutrality, it's impossible to stay neutral if you have foreign and domestic enemies who are, well, attacking you.
Liberals, conservatives and everyone else in between need to start living in reality and offering pragmatic solutions instead of reeling the overly generalized concepts of neutrality and national defense. The constant drivel over whose ideals are better is like listening to 10-year-old kids fight over what superhero is the best.
Of course, everyone wants wars everywhere to end and for America to be protected from attacks. Discussion should be on how to keep us safe and get our troops home ASAP given the fact that we have enemies who aren't, and won't, play by our rules.
Oh yeah, only 80…..Jeez…isn't it really 400 that you need to kick their asses [IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY] I was around for VietNam…. numbers only create more opposition……. Wasn't it not too long ago that the 'CONSERVATIVES' were pointing out how the [Clinton] feredal Government was useless….. but how does the 'uselessness' of 'central' governent translate when the sharp end of the stick of "Occupational government" resides thousands of miles and decades of years if not cnturies AWAY from those whom this government wishes to CONTROL, and tell 'them' how their women should be treated…. Isn't this the same fantasy recycled that was the problim in Viet Nam….
Namely……that we can…. and [or] should tell people half way around the world what they should do [or not do] and occupy them to strenghten our control OVER them……..And isn't it a fools DREAM??
OR TO PUT it ANOTHER WAY,,, what would we do if they INVADAD and OCCUPIED …US…???!!!
Duh, we would kill all of them we could and when they were gone we would kioll EVERYONE taht collaborated with them regardless of their reason……PERIOD…!!!!!!!!!
I say we send 150,000 troops over there. But first, I think we should send ALL the liberals over there and arm them with rocks. First line offense, to save the lives of the worthy combatants. It would help things a lot back home, plus it would use up some of the enemy's ammunition.
wouldn't it make more sense to send all the loudmouth chickenhawks – you for instance – to the front lines, since they are the ones who are the most enthusiastic about fighting this war? you know, put your money where your mouth is and all that…
What we really need to do is bring all the troops home- we need them in D.C.
So you have to be in the military in order to offer an opinion about war now? Remember, military service is still voluntary. Nobody is being "forced" into military service.
And no. it really does make more sense to send the liberals (at least, the ones who hate this country so much but are still here the next day) to die and bring home the folks who truly love this country. They really ought to be deported to a communist country since that's what they are trying to create here, but it would be better for them to die for the US, so that decent and respectable people don't have to, than to go die in a communist country.
They love wars in DC. Don't believe the hype. Keeps the people polarized and keeps the military too busy to come to DC and take care of business like they ought to. The current and prev administrations are using the military as a business arm for the NWO.
More troops might not be the answer. All it really does is confirm that we are the crusaders that we are accused of being. We don't have any enemies over there, well, not until we went over there anyway.
4 steps to subvert and brainwash a nation:
1. demoralize (9/11)
2. destabilize (economic collapse, gov't takeovers…)
3. confuse (media control, propaganda war)
4. normalize (how do you like your change mao, America?)
No troops, period. Send both liberals, conservatives and their own flesh and blood to die, who see nothing but nails to be hit with a hammer paid for by out of work Americans and their children and a tab that never goes down or ever goes away.
Since you are so eager to fight why don't you go do so.
Oh yeah, only 80…..Jeez…isn't it really 400 that you need to kick their asses [IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY] I was around for VietNam…. numbers only create more opposition……. Wasn't it not too long ago that the 'CONSERVATIVES' were pointing out how the [Clinton] federal Government was useless….. but how does the 'uselessness' of 'central' governent translate when the sharp end of the stick of "Occupational government" resides thousands of miles and decades of years if not cnturies AWAY from those whom this government wishes to CONTROL, and tell 'them' how their women should be treated…. Isn't this the same fantasy recycled that was the problim in Viet Nam….
Namely……that we can…. and [or] should tell people half way around the world what they should do [or not do] and occupy them to strenghten our control OVER them……..And isn't it a fools DREAM??
OR TO PUT it ANOTHER WAY,,, what would we do if they INVADAD and OCCUPIED …US…???!!!
Duh, we would kill all of them we could and when they were gone we would kill EVERYONE that collaborated with them regardless of the reason……PERIOD…!!!!!!!
Of course I don't support any occupation, I was just a bit confused by the logic that people who don't support the wars ought to be forced to fight in them, while those who ostensibly support them should stay at home playing keyboard kommando. Funny how a chickenhawk's mind works.
Where are we going to get another 80K troops from? We are still tied down in Iraq, and the drawdown there will be slow. Our Great Obama, an official Nobel "man of peace", will have to draft them. How will all his young and foolish supporters take that in 2012?
What gives with this McChrystal character? Is he a general or is he a polititian?
If he wants a public voice, he should give up his stars and go to Washington and raise his colours. Otherwise he needs to shut his mouth and get on with the task he's been given with the tools his masters give him.
Logic in America circa 21st century. Strong central Government Afghanistan = Good. Strong central Government USA = Bad. Our Afghanistan Goals = 1) Push Taliban out of office = done. 2) Rid Afghanistan of Al Qaeda = done. 3) Strengthen central government to prevent return of Taliban & Al Qaeda = WARNING LOGIC PROBLEM. If Pakistan central gov. is not strong enough to keep out the Taliban and Al Qaeda, then our goal must be to make Afghanistan central gov. stronger than Pakistan's? How long? – Answer = FOREVER. Potential affect on regional geo-politics = Catastrophic. i.e. What are we accomplishing in Afghanistan? Answer = THE DESTABILIZATION OF PAKISTAN.
Be next on your block to have your child die to defend the "central" government of Afghanistan while you agitate against a strong central gov. right here at home. It's the only logical thing to do.
A message for the establishment's Afghan hit man, McChrystal: 80,000 more troops for Afghanistan?! America is broke, you moron. Look at the trillions of dollars in deficit spending that is being used to finance all of the establishment's damned endless wars of imperialism and their worldwide network of over 800 military bases. You and the rest of the political-military-industrial complex are bankrupting America; fiscally, morally and spiritually. But I thank God that there was at least one military officer who once had the guts to stand up tall and tell the American people the truth and admit that "War is a Racket." His name was Maj. General Smedley Butler – USMC. He won the Congressional Medal of Honor, twice! He was the genuine article. He was a real man, a real hero and a real American patriot who loved the Constitution. But as for you McChrystal? Why you're nothing more than the establishment's ass-kissing, bivouacked, ribbon-bedecked, cowardly little pussy that orders real men to their deaths for nothing more than blood-soaked corporate profits.