Nobel President Obama OK's 13,000 more troops to Afghanistan

by djermano | October 13, 2009 at 03:54 am

492 views | 28 Recommendations | 21 comments

Rev. Jermano

Nobel President Obama today Oct. 13th quietly approved an additional 13,000 troops to Afghanistan. In March he authorized 21,000 troops to go, and this addition has bumped the number up to 34,000 troops...very close to the 40,000 troops Gen. Stan McCrystal advised.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/12/AR2009101203142.html?hpid=topnews#...

So the Alfred Nobel Norwegian Committee really lost the hope they hoped would inspire Obama to reduce the number instead of put under the gun by the US Military Industrial Complex. The world is under seizure by the out of control US Military Complex...who will commence bombing and raids throughout Afghanistan targeting innocent civilians, children and the elderly.

This act by the Obama administration will only increase the determination of Afghan's and the people in the region to resist the US occupation and take over of the religious state of Afghanistan. Obama the journeyman to ex-President Bush is carrying on the hidious crime in using the military to pump up the fear pressure in Afghanistan, and creating a lasting hatred to resonate in the hearts of the people. We have not learned lessons of wars in the past that are still being fought, such as the recent said conclusion of the conflict between Turkey and Albania...which is clearly still on going since WWI.

Obama has just signed his own last term as President...while Americans are now considering his fate toward impeachment because of his lies to the people. Obama clearly has made a regretable mistake of judgement.

Rev. Jermano

0 See all footage | View Slideshow

Share: email story | add to any | | facebook | stumbleupon

recommend Add a comment

albertacowpoke

at 04:47 on October 13th, 2009

Rev I believe you missed the second part of that article in the Washington Post. General McChrystal's request is in addition to those troops already deployed there which would bring the total to 108,000 I believe.

It doesn't change the intent of your article. Just a clarification.

McChrystal's request, which the administration is considering, would be in addition to the troops Obama has approved. The request reportedly includes different options for adding troops for combat, training and support, with one option totaling about 40,000. The ability of the Army and Marine Corps to meet the request would depend on the type and number of troops McChrystal asked for, and when he wants them. A significant troop increase in Afghanistan early next year -- similar to the 2007 increase in Iraq -- would be difficult to sustain given the current size of the Army and Marine Corps and ongoing troop demands in Iraq, officials said.

djermano

at 16:30 on October 13th, 2009

I discount that number as reality AcowP because they inflate numbers to a ridculous amount to make Obama look good for sending so few...but in reality Obama came close to the original 40,000 that McCrystal wanted.. Bush's sidekick Obama is a Republican...you didn't know that.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091013/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/bc_us_us_afghanistan....

Rev. Jermano

Babel-Fish

at 05:01 on October 13th, 2009

Oh my, my!

I really don't think the military including the total United Nation force is attentional targeting civilians thought war is a very dreadful thing. I am very sure that Obama does want this war to end but its all down to the common sense factor. First what is the agreement with the Afghanistan people and government and more importantly the UN plus its agreement with Parkistan, yes its got one? Stabilize the country before leaving the country to its own demise I expect.

With all respect Obama can not order the troops home when the troops are in contact with the enemy and are trying to driving them back to wards the Pakistan border. The troop comander on the ground wants these troops he probaly wanted three times as many.

I am also a peace activist but one that knows that you just can not up sticks, march away and think well we are not responsible now.

The proble is not how many citizens are dying whilst the present war is going on yes its damn nasty but the ten fold that could be killed if USA withdraws and does not take any further responsibility.

That responsibility was taken on when Bush and his cronies had Afghaniostan invaded by UN troops then placed what was thought to be an ideal puppet government. Now there has been an election and the new government has been declared as being elected using fraudent methodlogies. For all you or me know there is the possibilities of another election shortly and that would take months mean while Obama has troops fighting a war. He needs a stable government to hand over to. That means he could not remove the troops anyway untill there is a responsible stable government to hand over to.

Meanwhile his general on the ground is moaning about the need of more troops, equipment and the amount of troops being killed because of a lack of strength and substand equiptment.

He has got the British saying they want to remove their troops and its all a pig of a problem. He is doing want his commander on the ground requested sending more troops and this does not mean he has changed his mind about bringing the troops home soonest not just from afghanistan but from Iraq.

Things are never what they seem and its only when you look at all the problems you can get a knowledge what is possible the reason for the reinforcement of the military. I bet I am right.

albertacowpoke

at 05:21 on October 13th, 2009

Just a little correction here Babel. It was Obama that said the focus has to be on Afghanistan not Iraq. That was in his Hope and Change Election platform.

He send General McChrystal there in March of this year with a counterinsurgency strategy in mind. The troops are there now are some of those that were drawn down in Iraq. General McChrystal has now made his recommendations and he is the Commander on the Ground.

I know if I was deployed as a grunt there, I would want to know what the goal is. The troops need a decision and not in weeks. This bunfight has to be very demoralizing to the troops. You know and I know that indecision is the worst enemy for morale of troops.

Incidentally, I saw a report yesterday where there is a lot of disgruntled troops already. I believe it was on ABC news who had send a team in with the troops dealing with the Taliban at an Outpost near the Pakistan border.

Bush also had already agreed on a withdrawal timetable with the Iraqi government. This agreement was formalized before Obama took power.

To now go after Bush and his so-called chronies is a little puzzling to me. Afghanistan is Obama's war. He escalated it in March and now has to deal with it. Obama has been in charge for 9 months now and Bush is long gone. Has anything changed? Hell NO

This war, as sad as it is, is far from over.

Babel-Fish

at 06:00 on October 13th, 2009

We must not forget who imposed this war even if its now Obama responsibility he did not start the damn thing. I ask is there now a stable government in ready to take power?

I would be waiting to ask questions why the troops are not coming home when that Afghanistan government is completely ready to take over power. I will venomously do so.

Meanwhile someone has still got to keep the Taliban at bay... You just can not march the troops out and you got to try to make them strong and equipped and well supported as possible. I couldn't in fact see them win this war the terrain is more advantaged to gorilla warfare, something that the Taliban do well.

albertacowpoke

at 06:26 on October 13th, 2009

Bob, Obama agreed with this war all along. It was part of his election campaign. You can no longer blame this on Bush. If things were going well you also wouldn.t give Bush credit. What's fair is fair.

Democrats, including the Clintons were behind Bush when the decision to invade Afghanistan was made. So were many Western governments that disagreed with Iraq, including Canada.

We don.t know how Obama felt about Iraq, because he was not in the Senate at the time. All I can tell you that in Illinois if you don.t want to vote yay or nay on an issue or bill you can vote Present and Obama voted present a lot. Does this look like fence sitting to you?

I'm not a Bush fan either, but I think it's time for the President and those that support him to take responsibility. The buck stops at the top, always has.

djermano

at 05:21 on October 13th, 2009

Bob..it is total bs on your part to make excuses for these lying Military hucksters. First of all the Taliban were the government at the time, before the invasion. The US and UN recognized them, even helping them to fight the Russians a time ago. Don't tell me that the Taliban are not the legitimate govenment. Bush put the puppet Karazi in, without consideration to what the majority of the people want. Karazi also is pro oil pipeline...so you know what this war is about....it's about oil....and it's about securing that pipeline for the flow of oil to the USA. What makes you think another election will be legitimate? This whole thing is fraud and they are not about to let truth set their destiny... Obama is the new Liar in Chief... The War has been escalated by Obama, and be sure.....they will kill civilians...I wish Russia would intervene to help the Taliban....because now the Taliban know they made a terrible mistake by helping the US in the first place. Russia could be a key to ending this.

Rev. Jermano

Babel-Fish

at 06:41 on October 13th, 2009

The pipeline does not supply USA it goes towards China and India. the whole project was to limit the supply to China as there was an trans continent pipeline on the drawing board that was going to be built wit Chinese money from Iraq through Iran then through Afghanistan to China and India.

I do not think the election was legitimate and there now could be a new election called, that will take months. Meanwhile the UN forces have no other morally based option than to try to keep the country stable at least deny the Taliban ground. The last thing is needed for the Russians to back the Taliban as that would extend the need for UN and USA to stay in Afghanistan.

Clearly on the issue of seeing this war to stop I am completely for that. But for Obama making a statement that the war in Afghanistan was not a US war but a UN one. I started thinking why would a president that stated he wanted to get the troops home as soon as possible. Send more troops into battle? Could it be he is tarred with the same brush as Bush or there are complications involved that mean the troops need to stay be supported strengthened for their protection and supplied with better equipment for the job.

The complications are related to the government in Afghanistan is not to be trusted yet to take over command of its own troops. Pakistan need UN to stay as if they leave the Taliban will use Afghanistan as its terrorist base and Pakistan wants to eradicate the Taliban in Parkistan, what the agreement with UN?

UN want US troops to stay because of its agreement with Pakistan to help eradicate the Taliban in Afghanistan before UN takes its troops home?

There is no need for US or UN troops to stay in Afghanistan as China's exports have been culled and China has made plans to recieve its oil from Africa. (Part of the Global Chess plan moves made by China)?

There could be other complications other questions to be pondered on as yet I have not fully analysised the total situation but there is every possibility that I could be right. Before jumping on Obama I would wait for about 3 or 4 months to see how things are going in Afghanistan.

I am not giving Obama excuses but just the benefit of the doub't at this present time. I really try not to be B.S. just carefull in assessment. I ask just lets see what happens.

djermano

at 16:35 on October 13th, 2009

Ok Bob: but to fill you in; the pipeline goes through Western Pakistan down through to the Arabian Sea.

So what you are saying is that this invasion of Afghanistan is really all about China...in stopping China from succeeding in development right? We know Afghanistan borders China, so the US has invaded Afghanistan..and China just miraculously falls asleep and let's them do it? I find that really crazy...on the part of China........ and why would the US also be borrowing billions from China? So they can fund the Afghanistan War which is really against the Chinese Government?

Quite the plan by US Strategists, but it won't' work....because China has better relations with Pakistan than the US does.

And now while we have discovered the real reason for this War...leaves one to beg the question about the poor people in Afghanistan caught in middle of this.

Obama does not have his head on straight while still believing that Alqaeda and Taliban were responsible for 911. Clearly they were not. It was an internal US government inside job..that hijacked the US Congress and Senate into believing the lie....so they would increase 100 fold spending on the military...to invade....

It is clear...because you know as well as I that when they got the money and support they sent in very few troops to Afghanistan....because really the focus of War was going to go to Iraq. They got no resistance from the Senate or Congress....they were even partially successful in getting the people to believe Saddam had done 911...and connected him to Alqaeda.

So the War was not about Afghanistan. They knew it would take a long time to secure Oil from Afghanistan given the labor to build the pipeline...but in Iraq..they could just take over the existing Oil Wells and have instant Oil access to supply their military machine...Once they secure Iraq for US supply they can proceed to continue the War into Afghanistan...with every intent toward destabilizing China.

They could careless about N. Korea having nuclear Weapons, because getting into Afghanistan gives them the backdoor to China and it's border, instead of thinking an invasion would work on the Korean peninnsula in getting into China.

China's first mistake was allowing the US to borrow money..by buying all those T-bonds. China needs to do something to promote peace and counter the terrorist views America is proclaiming against Afghanistan.

This war is a complete fabrication intent to contain China...and be damned to the Afghanistan people. Bob..I don't think the war will end...It will go on until the US leaves Afghanistan....

This is why they never left Japan. They will use Japan as a pacific base of operations against China...eventually...

I am going to Russia.

Rev. Jermano

Furthermore: I believe people are smart to enough to see that the reason the Economic Crisis hit was in order to stop the money grabbing by the elite who were only intent on using the money to fund the Wars. Now that the recession and World Financial Crisis has taken hold it has killed the Military Assault.

The only way the economy will get better is when they end the war in Afghanistan. We can expect that the economy will remain a bust...until then. I support the recession in that regard.

djermano

at 05:52 on October 13th, 2009

I need to let readers know that I think Obama is not really the one who is doing this escalation. In fact he is being controlled by the Bush people. I think Bush has a gun to his head.

Rev. Jermano

albertacowpoke

at 05:55 on October 13th, 2009

I replied to this comment in another thread. Bottom line too much credit given to Bush and not enough to Obama.

witness to the hidden evil (not verified)

at 11:42 on October 13th, 2009

Incorrect. The "gun" pointed at Obama's head is pointed at it 24/7... a directed energy weapon dozens of miles away. Many of our politicians are under similar (invisible) duress. Directed energy weapons can induce pain, strokes, even heart attacks, and it's completely deniable. And you can't talk about it for fear of being labeled crazy.What's going on in America right now - Obama isn't the only "targeted individual" - would blow your mind if you knew about it.

Hugh Askew

at 16:18 on October 13th, 2009

Well, no one around here will call you crazy, not with that kind of dirt to scoop.

Thanks for sharing.....and, be sure to stop back when you get your medication adjusted. :)

René

at 09:28 on October 13th, 2009

There was no Taliban while the Russians were still in Afghanistan.

Amazing how some people like to twist history around.

Hugh Askew

at 16:15 on October 13th, 2009

Rene, see the post by barbara diehl below...it is a solid explanation. Unfortunately, the CIA provided much of the funding that fueled the dominance of the Taliban.

djermano

at 15:52 on October 13th, 2009

So Rene tell us the difference between an Afghan tribal member who engaged the Russians, and then became a Taliban? Your point is moot.

Also: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091013/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/bc_us_us_afghanistan..

Obama still believes the lie Alqaeda was responsible for 911...

barbara diehl (not verified)

at 16:08 on October 13th, 2009

I believe the Taliban did exist while Russia was in Afghanistan, not as large as what we see now, but certainly they were there. By 1991-92, the US and the USSR finally reached an agreement that neither would continue to supply aid to any faction in Afghanistan. However, the numerous militant factions previously funded and armed by the US have been vying for supremacy. One of the armed Afghan factions funded by the CIA during this war was the Taliban, an apparently Islamic movement. With the departure of Soviet troops in 1989, these factions began vying with one another for supremacy, the Taliban eventually arising as the dominant force in Afghanistan. As a coherent politico-military faction or movement, the Taliban did not exist prior to October 1994, but were members of other factions such as Harakat-e Islami and Mohammad Nabi Mohammadi, or operated independently without a centralised command centre.

James Scopoulis (not verified)

at 21:10 on October 13th, 2009

good. if the terrorists and insurgents are making a come back than we need to kick em while they are down

djermano

at 05:50 on October 25th, 2009

Thing is you are the terrorist.

The Rev

Hermerthot (not verified)

at 07:37 on October 27th, 2009

It's amazing to me anyone still believes that the presidents decide anything about any war. It's all run behind the scenes by a greedy, money-blinded monarchy that is out to dominate parts of the world they don't yet own. You could see it on Bush's face and you can see it on Obama's. They end up with a gun at their head, and are reminded that it's their job to appear responsible. Anyone ever heard of economic hit-men? Do you believe America is a free country, being now trillions in debt? We are free to CONSUME. That is all anyone is "free" to do. If you are not feeding the banks and your fat ass, you will be invaded repeatedly until you do so!