Obama to withdraw 30,000 troops against Pentagon advice

[Oldman1]

bye bye murderers.

The Taliban will disagree, they are there to stay. More Afghans will be murdered many years ahead before the Taliban is defeated by the Afghan military or with Pakistani military.

 

[Oldman1]

lol poor US together with 40 nato countries with israel and india together cant fight a small band of taliban not more then 100000 rebels and they are thinking of bullying chinese and dreaming about interference in south china sea?i think US wants to commit suicide

Can you list many conflicts in post-Vietnam? I think its shocking that the U.S. hasn't learned its lesson. And if China tries to bully Vietnam AGAIN it will lose again.

 

[muse]

Our lives and safety are worth it , god bless America for keeping us safe . The shutters are not down- America will prevail, we will enjoy great lives and majority of the people would still love our green cards. America will still be hugely prosperous...can you say the same of ?

That's very touching but is the substance of patriotism limited to support of idiot wars? America will prevail, great lives, prosperous - well certainly, but are you safer now? If words could kill huh?

For a third of what has been spent on military, the US could have won over both Pakistan and Iran and Afghanistan, but of course they have their lobbies and internal politics

 

[HROBOS]

Your numbers are made up and phoney. Stalin killed more folks inside the old USSR than even Hitler.

If something you do not know, better not say anything.
Tell us about McCarthy and the hunt for 'witches'. Tell us as American citizens of Japanese descent were in concentration camps.
The black population, when it became full citizens? When no longer hunt the Indians? Buying scalps (British invention).
Now let's talk about Russia. At school he studied? Do you know what civil war?
1. Cromwell, the Jacobins have killed more of its population than Stalin.
2. Stalin, Beria, Trotsky are not Russian. Explain specifically for those who believe that the Spanish speaking "Mexican language" and Africa is a country (voters must be worthy of their president). Soviet Union was similar to the European Union. Composed of countries with their national identity, language, territory and government. These countries were united - economic space, common currency and army. When everyone who came out of the Soviet Union called the Russian is a measure of your ignorance. In modern Russia there is
a) The "Россияне" - derived from the name of the country (these are all citizens of the country).
b) The "Русский" - is ethnically Russian (80%).
c) "Русскоязычные" - the general name of a group of people practicing the Russian culture. Members of this group may not be ethnically Russian, but Russian cultural identity. The strong band seen outside Russia (usually in the former Soviet Union and oriented to Russia).
3. All repression was the result of years of civil war and continuing political struggle (remember the fate of the Jacobins and Cromwell). No one knows the exact numbers of victims of repression in Russia. However, they are quite comparable with the victims of U.S. promotion of its "democratic norms" (from 45g).. American democracy reminds me of a pagan idol, which requires all new bloody victims.
4. The key word here, "its citizens." In Russia, it was an internal struggle.
NATO kills foreign nationals. For them it's an excuse.

 

[HROBOS]

pakistan must not provide 'escape route' to these americans, at any cost, they can go through iran

I totally agree.
You can offer to dig an underground passage or escape unnoticed, pretending to be tourists.

 

[Asian.Century]

America has snatched Defeat at the realm of Victory.

 

[Cheetah786]

French President Nicolas Sarkozy has announced the phased withdrawal of its 4,000 soldiers serving in Afghanistan.

A statement said the French would follow the timetable of US withdrawals announced by President Barack Obama.

Mr Obama said 10,000 US troops would pull out this year, with another 23,000 leaving by the end of September 2012.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai welcomed the move, but the Taliban dismissed it as "symbolic" and vowed to continue fighting until all foreign forces left.

At least 68,000 US troops will remain in the country after the 33,000 have been withdrawn, but they are scheduled to leave by 2013, provided that Afghan forces are ready to take over security.

However the US reductions just announced are larger and faster than military commanders had advised.

They told the president that the recent security gains were fragile and reversible, and had urged him to keep troop numbers high until 2013.

Correspondents say the enormous cost of the deployment - currently more than $2bn (£1.25bn) a week - has attracted criticism from Congressional leaders, while the public are weary of a war that seems to have no end and has left at least 1,500 personnel dead and 12,000 wounded.

There have also been changes on the ground, notably the killing in May of al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden by US forces in Pakistan.
Mission change

Mr Sarkozy's announcement came shortly after that of Mr Obama's, and followed a telephone discussion between the two leaders on Wednesday, said the Elysee Palace - the presidential office - in a statement.
The withdrawal of the approximately 4,000 serving French troops would be progressive and would take place "in a proportional manner and in a timeframe similar to the pullback of the American reinforcements", it said, beginning in the coming months.

The French president "stressed that France shared the American analysis and objectives and that it was happy with President Obama's decision".

Mr Obama's announcement, after a month-long strategy review, outlined the exit of the forces he sent to the country at the end of 2009 as part of a "surge".

In his speech, he said he had set clear objectives for the surge in December 2009 - to refocus on al-Qaeda, to reverse the Taliban's momentum, and train Afghan security forces to defend their own country.

His administration also stated the commitment would not be open-ended and that the withdrawal would begin in July 2011, he added.

"After this initial reduction our troops will continue coming home at a steady pace as Afghan security forces move into the lead. Our mission will change from combat to support."
The BBC's Paul Adams in Washington says the speech was all about reassuring the American public that the "tide of war" was receding.

Six thousand Americans have died in Iraq and Afghanistan and $1 trillion has been spent.

The initial withdrawal is expected to happen in two phases, with 5,000 troops coming home in coming months and another 5,000 by the end of the year.

The remainder of the surge reinforcements - 20,000 combat troops and an 3,000 deployed to support the operation - will be out by the end of September 2012, in time for the US presidential election.

Our correspondent says this is a quicker pace than most analysts predicted, and suggests the president does not feel he needs to leave the bulk of the surge force in place for another fighting season.

The second largest contributor to the international force in Afghanistan is the UK, which has more than 10,000 soldiers including special forces.

It has pledged to pull back forces by 2015 - and earlier if conditions allow.

US administration officials told the New York Times that the US military commander in Afghanistan, Gen David Petraeus, had not endorsed Mr Obama's decision. He recommended limiting initial withdrawals and leaving in place as many combat forces for as long as possible, they said.

Outgoing Defence Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reluctantly accepted the reductions, the officials added.

Serious doubts remain about whether Afghan forces will be up to the task.

But President Karzai welcomed Mr Obama's announcement as "a good step for their benefit and the people of Afghanistan".

"I want the people of Afghanistan to be safe in their country with their own capable means," Mr Karzai said.Security fears

There was a more ambivalent response from senior Afghan security officials who spoke to the BBC.

They stressed that neither the army nor police were yet capable of handling security alone, citing problems of enemy infiltration, drug addiction, and high desertion rates.

An Afghan official with the country's National Security Council said he hoped the withdrawal would take place progressively, and not in one fell swoop.

"We look for a long-term commitment from the United States and the international community, one that will not allow Afghanistan to fall back to the pre-civil war and Taliban days," the official, who did not want to be named, told the BBC.

"We want to remind everyone, history shows that if you turn your [back] on Afghanistan, it will have negative consequences for you."

But a farmer in a volatile district in the north-eastern province of Kundoz told the BBC: "As far as I am concerned, the American forces didn't make a difference to me and my village. So if they leave it won't affect me.

"They supported militias, commanders who kill, rape and loot here. They are hated for that at my village.''

BBC News - Afghanistan: France follows US in troop withdrawal

 

[Respect4Respect01]

The Taliban will disagree, they are there to stay. More Afghans will be murdered many years ahead before the Taliban is defeated by the Afghan military or with Pakistani military.

dude, why arent they defeated by the world's best equipped army in ten years.

 

[Respect4Respect01]

Yup...That is exactly what we will say to the Taliban savages.

nato killed more ppl than taliban if u think little hard.

 

[SpArK]

Hillary and Co would grill Obama for that.

 

[Respect4Respect01]

Hillary and Co would grill Obama for that.

i don't think that Hillary Clinton is a good politician. But i think Bill Clinton was very good president, because he was always for peace, no wars.

 

[SMC]

BTW, this signals a change in status quo vis-a-vis Pakistan and bharat. Bharat wanted US to stay in Afghanistan till apocalypse since that would ensure instability in Pakistan till apolcalypse. But as US begins to withdraw and by the time it has a significant troop reduction, the instability will go, the economic growth will pick up quite fast, terrorist attacks will go down significantly, etc, thus ending the status quo that bharat has been enjoying for last 3-4 years. Obviously bharatis have deluded themselves into believing whats causing the economic slown down or the terrorist attacks, but we all know it's due to US presence in Afghanistan mainly. So once that is gone or at least starts to go away, things will change rapidly.

Obviously they're not going away overnight, so don't expect anything to happen overnight.

 

[JayAtl]

That's very touching but is the substance of patriotism limited to support of idiot wars? America will prevail, great lives, prosperous - well certainly, but are you safer now? If words could kill huh?

For a third of what has been spent on military, the US could have won over both Pakistan and Iran and Afghanistan, but of course they have their lobbies and internal politics

Okay- I'll attempt to explain and hopefully I don't come across as condescending, that's not my intention. if my words are not reflective of my intention. then do please pardon me.

To answer: You have to be an American, embedded in the culuture to understand us. This is not about winning hearts and minds of Pakistanis ( we spend billions on your country in aid, non military and short of hating India- nothing will get Pakistanis hearts and minds over to the US) - its about protecting American citizens, period. It does not matter how much we spend- Americans covet their lives and freedoms more.

Let's put this way- your country plays good taliban, bad taliban, good LET, haqquni , bad HUT and is being attacked every week, while your army has sympathizers, won't go into SWAT and really the govt, law enforcement and military have done a lack luster job of protecting its citizens lives. We Americans are not okay with expecting our govt to perform in such a manner. We think its un-American and yes we are high on patriotism ( vs. something per a poll posted here by you guys showed you citizens identify with religion first and then your country)

You think about saving money vs lives, you think about Indian borders vs norther borders- we think about American lives before money or some other boogeyman for political reasons. So when we I say we will been resilient, will will prosper, we will still be enjoying great lives - I say it, because of that core fundamental trait of Americans- we cherish freedom and our lives above all costs. Afghanistan was thrust upon us, we did not throw darts at a world map and decide to go to that god forsaken country.

This is the reason we have not had single attack on our soil since 911 in almost 10 years. When 911 happened we had thousands and thousands of 18,19,20yr olds, and older citizens join up the military to fight against WOT. Here on these forums I have never read a single Pakistani wanting to join its army to fight to protect citizens against Terror- the few I see who have inquired is to join to protect it against INDIA! - India? really...thats where we Americans differ.

 

[American Eagle]

Defeat is epitomized by a person saying if my family will be spared being assassinated or murdered by the Taliban/al Qaida then I want peace at any price.

That is the defintion of giving up and letting a handful of terrorists run rough shod over you and your families. Shame is thus defined.

Best to get out of the area for good and live in the free world.

 

[muse]

To answer: You have to be an American, embedded in the culuture to understand us. This is not about winning hearts and minds of Pakistanis ( we spend billions on your country in aid, non military and short of hating India- nothing will get Pakistanis hearts and minds over to the US) - its about protecting American citizens, period. It does not matter how much we spend- Americans covet their lives and freedoms more.

Let's put this way- your country plays good taliban, bad taliban, good LET, haqquni , bad HUT and is being attacked every week, while your army has sympathizers, won't go into SWAT and really the govt, law enforcement and military have done a lack luster job of protecting its citizens lives. We Americans are not okay with expecting our govt to perform in such a manner. We think its un-American and yes we are high on patriotism ( vs. something per a poll posted here by you guys showed you citizens identify with religion first and then your country)

You think about saving money vs lives, you think about Indian borders vs norther borders- we think about American lives before money or some other boogeyman for political reasons. So when we I say we will been resilient, will will prosper, we will still be enjoying great lives - I say it, because of that core fundamental trait of Americans- we cherish freedom and our lives above all costs. Afghanistan was thrust upon us, we did not throw darts at a world map and decide to go to that god forsaken country.

This is the reason we have not had single attack on our soil since 911 in almost 10 years. When 911 happened we had thousands and thousands of 18,19,20yr olds, and older citizens join up the military to fight against WOT. Here on these forums I have never read a single Pakistani wanting to join its army to fight to protect citizens against Terror- the few I see who have inquired is to join to protect it against INDIA! - India? really...thats where we Americans differ.

Thank you for your post - May I suggest that you consider your responses without reference to such things as "your country" -- after all, you don't have a clue to my nationality and it should not matter after all, your position does not change because of the nationality of persons, right?

Ok, so if going into Afghanistan was about protecting Americans and the war is not won, is leaving about protecting Americans as well??

AQ was the target in Afghanistan and it has been destroyed in Afghanistan - - Has the threat to the US diminished??

US think of lives before money?? Is that why the US president has said it's time for nation building in the US??

Defeat is epitomized by a person saying if my family will be spared being assassinated or murdered by the Taliban/al Qaida then I want peace at any price.

That is the defintion of giving up and letting a handful of terrorists run rough shod over you and your families. Shame is thus defined.

Best to get out of the area for good and live in the free world.

An end to all intimidation? We must be real - we must ask what are the objectives of the effort and access if the objectives were met -- Is Afghanistan safer and are US citizens safer?? Is it true that sorting out Afghanistan and Iraq and Libya and Syria and .. will make US citizens safer in the US??

If you are convinced by the argument that these peoples and countries must be sorted out to make the US safe, then of course the war is not won and there must be war for a long long time to come -- On the other hand if you are willing to think that security is a mutual, that US cannot be safe without others being safe, then you might consider whether or not US citizens can best be made safe by formulating policies whose focus is not "sorting out" peoples and nations.