Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Report: U.S. plans 'substantial increase' in Afghanistan troops

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
laststeamtrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 05:38 PM
Original message
Report: U.S. plans 'substantial increase' in Afghanistan troops
Source: USA Today

Report: U.S. plans 'substantial increase' in Afghanistan troops

The BBC is reporting that the Obama administration has told British officials that it will announce a "substantial increase" in U.S. forces for Afghanistan.

The report, attributed to British sources, follows today's announcement that 500 additional British troops would be sent to Afghanistan if certain conditions are met.

According to the BBC's Newsnight program, "the US could next week announce plans to send up to 45,000 extra servicemen and women."

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs dismissed the report, saying President Obama has made no final decision on troop numbers.

Read more: http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2009/10/report-us-plans-substantial-increase-in-afghanistan-troops.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
orpupilofnature57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
1. Besides McMclean ,who wants more troops?Not Afghanis ,not the budget,
Who the fu*k besides the 1% want 40 thousand more? Nairobi?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. The hawks won - Gates, Clinton, Holbrooke, Emmanuel won out over Biden, Kerry.
Edited on Wed Oct-14-09 05:50 PM by blm
Sad. And a bad decision by Obama that he may soon regret.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Vietnam REDUX
Vietnam War Picture: General William Westmoreland and President Lyndon B. Johnson



Picture courtesy of the National Archives and Records Administration.)

General William Westmoreland and President Lyndon B. Johnson at Cam Ranh Bay. (December 23, 1967)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. One Term Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenny blankenship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #7
16. But he'll be a SHOE-IN for the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize !
Edited on Wed Oct-14-09 06:29 PM by kenny blankenship
Two -TWO- Nobel Prizes for peace. Won't that look fine?

(My money has been on a troop increase of 20,000 - high 25k, low 15k. But 45,000 - now that would exceed expectations!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orpupilofnature57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. What were they talking about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-15-09 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #2
20. Correction....Emanuel reportedly shifted to Biden's position against increase in troops.
I'm no fan of Emanuel but, fair is fair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. We need our troops to protect the corrupt narco-trafficker Karzai in power
Edited on Wed Oct-14-09 05:50 PM by IndianaGreen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orpupilofnature57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. Thats why JFK ,up front no hidden Agenda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DURHAM D Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
17. India. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orpupilofnature57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Thats true
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
5. Why, how wonderfully "changey!"
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
6. I saw it coming, but this is horrible.
I think this decision could limit Obama to one term. He is on the side of the repukes and neo-cons.

When I heard the updated 'leak' of McCrystal requesting up to 80,000, I knew Obama was going to go with the high end of 40,000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-15-09 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #6
22. I actually thought Biden, Kerry and Reed would influence him more than Clinton, Holbrooke, Gates
and McChrystal.

If Obama decided to increase military presence in Afghanistan then I was wrong in my thinking that hawks would take a backseat in this WH.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
timeforpeace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
9. Isn't it interesting how Obama's "decisions" are never announced, just leaked? Is Helen Thomas right
Edited on Wed Oct-14-09 06:08 PM by timeforpeace
about the courage thing? When has he announced a real decision on a big subject, as opposed to announcing an idea or an intention or a hope?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-16-09 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #9
23. Something odd is going on...and I think some of it is meant to undermine Obama, not help him.
Edited on Fri Oct-16-09 11:16 AM by blm
The hawks have been at these manipulative games for decades, and they have corpmedia at their beck and call.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nuclear Unicorn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 06:06 PM
Response to Original message
11. No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No!
How many more need to be destroyed?

Even the ones who are never hurt never come home the same. It's not right!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orpupilofnature57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. Absolutely ,There aren't enough bodies to fill the subtle ,but constant
Edited on Wed Oct-14-09 06:18 PM by orpupilofnature57
and ambiguous reasons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MetaTrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 06:13 PM
Response to Original message
12. It's unfortunate that Obama is a totally powerless and impotent leader
who could never stop this, or even say anything against it, no matter how much he desperately wants to.

Even Nixon was able to end a war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orpupilofnature57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. The 1% would revolt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-15-09 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #12
21. What An Absolutely Retarded Set Of Statements.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Knight Hawk Donating Member (336 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 06:14 PM
Response to Original message
13. What?
Say it ain't so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laststeamtrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-14-09 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
19. BBC report: link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 08:02 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC