PDA

View Full Version : Barack Obama's Presidential Address



Prez
1 Dec 2009, 06:43pm
New York Times/Reuters Article (http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/12/01/us/politics/politics-us-afghanistan-usa-1.html)

Barack Obama has just stated in his Political Address that he will send an extra 30,000 US Troops overseas to Afghanistan, and the Afghan-Pakistani border, in order to "take out" the Taliban and Al-Qaeda networks. He has also pledged that this surge of troops will only be an 18-month offensive, and they will start to send troops home by July 2011, and I believe it was around 2013 where he wanted all troops out.

There is much more to this story, but that's one main part of it. I just finished watching it on TV.


Thoughts about this, anyone?

Caution
1 Dec 2009, 08:52pm
Yay, can't wait to go to Afghanistan.

LegalSmash
1 Dec 2009, 09:21pm
I'll say this:

Afghanistan was our first stop on the war on terror, and in my mind, was the correct one to take. Similarly to our involvement in Vietnam however, we went about it the wrong way and distracted ourselves from the real goal: rooting out the Taliban while getting a secular government ready to lead its people.

Secular is not the end all be all to Afghanistan's problems, though, its a third world country, and people will believe what they will believe. Hopefully we'll correct the mission, and actually fund it properly, and gtfo as soon as possible

Caution
1 Dec 2009, 09:28pm
Secular is not the end all be all to Afghanistan's problems, though, its a third world country, and people will believe what they will believe. Hopefully we'll correct the mission, and actually fund it properly, and gtfo as soon as possible

Why help Afghanistan, though? Surely they can't be the only country with an unsuccessful government. Is there a specific reason to help them? Or is it just what the stereotypical answer is; oil?

Simmons1114
1 Dec 2009, 10:25pm
I can feel the change, definitely not something bush would do, sending more troops to Afghanistan is the kind of fresh new ideas we can all look forward too.

PotshotPolka
1 Dec 2009, 10:42pm
I can feel the change, definitely not something bush would do, sending more troops to Afghanistan is the kind of fresh new ideas we can all look forward too.

I pray to god that you're being sarcastic.


Why help Afghanistan, though? Surely they can't be the only country with an unsuccessful government. Is there a specific reason to help them? Or is it just what the stereotypical answer is; oil?

No, the plight that is radical islamic is widespread to the point it will obviously not cease to exist if Afghanistan were to be stabilized. It's just not kosher these days though to dismantle a country and then leave it that way and say "Mission Accomplished".

Simmons1114
1 Dec 2009, 11:05pm
i am being sarcastic

Kuro
1 Dec 2009, 11:43pm
at least he gave a pull out date

Drox
2 Dec 2009, 01:15am
That pull out date is funny, cause I remember him also saying we may have to stay there for another 8-9 years before "victory". Anyway tho, it's about time he made up his mind about the surge.

tank40175
2 Dec 2009, 05:46am
I hope this mini-surge will work. But, he is not giving what was asked for by the Commanders there. If 40,000 is what was asked for then he should have sent them 50,000. We either need to go in full force and finish it, or just pull out instead of half-assing it. Go to win or GTFO. I agree that we made the right call to begin with by going in, but if we are not going to finish what we began then bring our soldiers home and quit sacrificing any more for nothing. Being a vet, and having lost friends in both Afganistan and Iraq, there is nothing more noble than being willing to lay your life down for your Country, but at least finish the job for those who already given it all.

mNote
2 Dec 2009, 02:42pm
I am supposed to get deployed in 2011. I wonder how this will affect my deployment date.

Slavic
2 Dec 2009, 04:21pm
Why help Afghanistan, though? Surely they can't be the only country with an unsuccessful government. Is there a specific reason to help them? Or is it just what the stereotypical answer is; oil?

Ugh,

Oil in Afghanistan, really?

The reason we are helping them is because we are staging an operation there to root out the insurgent Taliban. Last thing you want to do with rooting out an insurgency is turning governmental supporters into insurgents themselves.

Voltage
2 Dec 2009, 04:27pm
I pray to god that you're being sarcastic.

Location: Alabama

I don't think so.

Omar
2 Dec 2009, 04:44pm
Ugh,

Oil in Afghanistan, really?

The reason we are helping them is because we are staging an operation there to root out the insurgent Taliban. Last thing you want to do with rooting out an insurgency is turning governmental supporters into insurgents themselves.

Meh... I don't get why USA gives 2 shits about the afghani civilians, even though they're being treated like shit by the taliban. MEh..MEHH:.... USA must benefit somehow? Taliban isn't a threat, don't they only operate in the middleast?

PotshotPolka
2 Dec 2009, 04:50pm
Meh... I don't get why USA gives 2 shits about the afghani civilians, even though they're being treated like shit by the taliban. MEh..MEHH:.... USA must benefit somehow? Taliban isn't a threat, don't they only operate in the middleast?

The last time around when 2000+ Americans were killed we launched two massive campaigns world wide and imprisoned an entire race in concentration camps. I think we toned it down a bit since then thank you very much.

RedOctober
2 Dec 2009, 06:27pm
The last time around when 2000+ Americans were killed we launched two massive campaigns world wide and imprisoned an entire race in concentration camps. I think we toned it down a bit since then thank you very much.

not to mention we nuked the hell out of the country that did it!

Drox
2 Dec 2009, 10:21pm
The last time around when 2000+ Americans were killed we launched two massive campaigns world wide and imprisoned an entire race in concentration camps. I think we toned it down a bit since then thank you very much.

oh those were the days alright. lol

LegalSmash
3 Dec 2009, 04:46am
Afghanistan has opium.

Regardless, its the radicalislam version of the cold war.

I'd prefer we help latin america, which is actually relevant to our interests.

Ganzta
4 Dec 2009, 12:36am
Personally, I believe that setting a pull-out date is not a great idea. Having a set date means that all the Taliban has to do is to lie low for 2 years then take over the Afghan government when the U.S. leaves. The real question is that will the Afghan force be trained well enough to defend itself when the time comes.

/dev/null
4 Dec 2009, 10:03am
It's pretty obvious that radical Islam is a threat. We'll never be rid of the threat. However, the US needs to work to minimize this threat, which is what Obama seems to be trying to do by sending more troops.

Italian Jew
4 Dec 2009, 10:13am
It's pretty obvious that radical Islam is a threat. We'll never be rid of the threat. However, the US needs to work to minimize this threat, which is what Obama seems to be trying to do by sending more troops.

We'll be rid of it when the fad dies out. It might take hundreds of years, but it will be gone for something more appealing. All we can do is hope to get the people who are over there to actually fight the war themselves rather than require the presence of a western power.

The goal is to really to make it a regional problem rather than a worldwide problem.

Prez
4 Dec 2009, 01:31pm
Personally, I believe that setting a pull-out date is not a great idea. Having a set date means that all the Taliban has to do is to lie low for 2 years then take over the Afghan government when the U.S. leaves. The real question is that will the Afghan force be trained well enough to defend itself when the time comes.

I'm pretty sure that's what he's trying to prevent with this. He's launching a major offensive, which, hopefully, will cut off their supplies, and minimalize their strength. Oh, and they want to find Osama Bin Laden, obviously. So the US government is really hoping that if all goes well, they will be able to start pulling out in July 2011.

Toxin
4 Dec 2009, 03:45pm
Is it just me, or was his presidental speed almost completely unrelated to Afghanistan?

roach coach
4 Dec 2009, 03:47pm
Here's some food for thought from a favorite author of mine. He travels to these places, and was the guy who discovered the American Taliban guy in '01.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/12/02/2009-12-02_taliban_karzai_will_prevent_a_us_victory.html

Italian Jew
4 Dec 2009, 03:48pm
Is it just me, or was his presidential speech almost completely unrelated to Afghanistan?

I don't know; didn't get to see it as I was in class that night. I've just been going with what people have been talking about.