What's new

Six years later......

Joined
Aug 20, 2002
Messages
10,153
Reaction score
681
I see....NATO takes over when we deploy to other theaters.........everyone bitched W went in with out other countries help....now NATO is running the show and their lack of success is W's fault?
Dude...get off the hate W bus.... :down:
 
According to W, he no longer thinks about OBL much any more.

In Sept 17, 2001 W said OBL was wanted dead or alive. On March 13, 2002 he said he is no longer concerned about OBL. I am sure the families of the 3,000 dead from Sept 11 are very happy to hear that master mind of the murders is not a concern.

Not to concerned


THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I say, we haven't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him, when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban.


BTW, NATO did not take command of Afghanistan till August of 2003. NATO fact sheet

Dell, it's very simple. Iraq is W's fault. It's all his fault. It's no one else is at fault. He was POTUS when he went in. He was POTUS when NATO took over. He was POTUS when OBL was never caught.
 
I see....NATO takes over when we deploy to other theaters.........everyone bitched W went in with out other countries help....now NATO is running the show and their lack of success is W's fault?
Dude...get off the hate W bus.... :down:


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


DELL.

I (seriously) don't HATE Bush !

Now CHENEY, him I HATE.

As for EL CHIMPO, he's a BUFFOON, a Incompetant NINCOMPOOP, too DUMB a person to hate, but DELL, he allowed himself to get talked into Iraq, by Cheney/Wolfowitz/Rummy, when his(own) original plan was to revenge his ol' man, and kill Hussain.

So you see DELL, it's simply a matter of Bush taking responsibility for this MAJOR cluster FUUK !!!!

It's not rocket sceince DELL.
It IS what it IS !!
 
BTW, NATO did not take command of Afghanistan till August of 2003. NATO fact sheet

Dell, it's very simple. Iraq is W's fault. It's all his fault. It's no one else is at fault. He was POTUS when he went in. He was POTUS when NATO took over. He was POTUS when OBL was never caught.

2003....duh....Mr kittty....4 long years ago......duh....

Eric Rudolph hid out in our own backyard as long or longer than OBL and our finest federal law enforcement officials couldn't find him......last I checked, it is a pretty big planet.

Iraq is your fault.
 
It’s an interesting idea but one that we will never know the answer to. No politician much less a POTUS would ever institute a draft unless we were looking at a world war. It would be political suicide.

The other problem is evidenced by the military history of Clinton, W, Cheney and the like. They are people of means and power. That will insure that they or their off spring will never serve on the front lines of combat. They will get a deferment (or 5) or they will be protecting Indiana from danger.

As for their equipment, it is appalling that we will spend billions to try and build up a nation but won’t spend what it takes to make sure our troops have adequate equipment. But hey, like Rumsfeld said, you fight with what you have, not what you want. Some how I am guessing he was never near an IED that went off, much less saw the carnage that was present after the explosion.

And yet these same SOB’s have the nerve to accuse others of not supporting the troops. If that is not amount to dereliction of duty I don’t know what is. The actions of this administration, more so than any other are criminal.
 
It’s an interesting idea but one that we will never know the answer to. No politician much less a POTUS would ever institute a draft unless we were looking at a world war. It would be political suicide.
Yet we declared a 'global war on terror'. Doesn't "global" mean "world"?

That's why I say that "supporting the troops" means little more than putting a yellow ribbon on the back of your car whilst making that shopping trek (our pres said that's what we needed to do in times of crisis) to the mall. You want to know if your war has support? Start a draft. Back in WWII...the last time America was attacked...we had men who couldn't make it into OUR military cross the border into Canada and try to get into THEIR military.
 
Yet we declared a 'global war on terror'. Doesn't "global" mean "world"?

That's why I say that "supporting the troops" means little more than putting a yellow ribbon on the back of your car whilst making that shopping trek (our pres said that's what we needed to do in times of crisis) to the mall. You want to know if your war has support? Start a draft. Back in WWII...the last time America was attacked...we had men who couldn't make it into OUR military cross the border into Canada and try to get into THEIR military.

KCFlyer,

I agree 100%, but that horse has left the gate.

Take Care,
B) UT
 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070906/wl_nm/nato_afghan_dc

Bin Laden attacked America
Bin Laden is in .............A F G H A N I S T A N !!!

If EL CHIMPO felt that all the troops were not needed in afghanistan, then any "surplus" could be deployed elsewhere, ...BUT OBVIOUSLY (from an afganistan standpoint) THERE WERE "NO" EXTRA TROOPS TO DEPLOY !!!!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070906/ap_on_...bin_laden_video

It IS what it IS.


I wasn't aware not looking for OBL is an impeachable offense....we had good methods for finding him through hi-tech but your left wing media has a habit of blabbing all those neat methods all over the airwaves in some perverted sense of a 'right to know' and now Osama knows too.

Dude we still have boots on the ground over there since day one.And besides....several of your 'left leaners' on here have repeatedly stated how troops were 'robbed' from Afghanistan to support Iraq.....looks like theres adequate boots to do the job.

U.S. troop presence in Afghanistan at 17,900, and expected to hold steady

By Lisa Burgess

ARLINGTON, Va. - U.S. military forces in Afghanistan now number 17,900 and are likely to remain at that level at least through the New Year, according to senior Pentagon leaders.

Lt. Gen. Norton A. Schwartz, the Joint Staff's Director of Operations, gave the size of the current U.S. presence in Afghanistan during testimony Wednesday before the House Armed Services Committee.

His revelation that there are close to 18,000 U.S. troops involved in Operation Enduring Freedom appeared to surprise some members of the committee - including Rep. John Spratt, a Democrat from South Carolina - who had presumed a considerably smaller presence.

"We have a huge ongoing mission" in Afghanistan, Spratt said. "Yet we've only got 12,000 troops there. . Are we slighting and undersizing, under-resourcing the mission in Afghanistan because of the demands on the mission in Iraq?"

"In point of fact, right at the moment we have about 17,900 U.S. troops in Afghanistan," Schwartz replied. "And that number is adequate for the mission."

Schwartz said the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan "has grown over the last few months for several reasons, including anticipation of [Afghan presidential] elections in the early fall."

Schwartz said that the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan would remain steady "for months to come."

"I believe that after the first of the year we'll begin to see some adjustments," Schwartz said.

Troops currently in Iraq represent the fifth major rotation since the United States became involved in that country in late 2001.

According to Schwartz, the bulk of the U.S. force is made up of soldiers from the 25th Infantry Division from Hawaii.

Those troops include the 25th ID Headquarters, Division Artillery Headquarters, its Aviation and Support Brigades, and the 2nd and 3rd Combat Brigade teams.

The training mission for the Afghan National Army, meanwhile, is now the responsibility of the Oklahoma National Guard, Schwartz said.

Augmenting the 25th ID are Marine aviation and ground forces, many of whom are from the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit from Camp LeJeune, N.C., Lt. Gen. Jan C. Huly, deputy commandant of the Marine Corps for Plan, Policies and Operations, said during the hearing.

The 22nd MEU "has been on the ground for three or four months," Huly said.

The Marines are at Forward Operating Base Ripley in south-central Afghanistan, according to the official 22nd MEU Website (www.usmc.mil/22ndmeu).

The amphibious ships assigned to the MEU, meanwhile, have remained in waters "near Afghanistan" and "these ships will bring them out and home," Huly said.

Various news reports have also indicated that other U.S. elements now in Afghanistan include the 1st Battalion of the 3rd Special Forces Group, the 2nd Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment (the unit Arizona Cardials safety Pat Tillman was assigned to when he was killed in Afghanistan in April), and about 250 soldiers from the 2nd Battalion, 27th Infantry Regiment.

The sixth rotation for Operation Enduring Freedom, which will begin later this year, will include a division headquarters element from U.S. Army Europe's Southern European Task Force and the 173rd Infantry Brigade from Vicenza, Italy.

Training of the Afghan National Army will be taken over by the 76th Infantry Brigade of the Indiana National Guard, Schwartz said.

Neither Huly nor Schwartz said which Marine units would be tapped for the coming rotation. However, the 11th MEU, from Camp Pendleton, Calif., and the 24th MEU, from Camp LeJeune, are presently deployed to Iraq, which leaves only the U.S.-based 13th, 15th, 26th MEUs as candidates.

The Corps' remaining MEU, the 31st MEU, is based in Okinawa, Japan.

Keeping tabs on the number of U.S. forces deployed overseas -- information that military analysts and commanders call the "order of battle" -- is challenging.

Top-level military leaders will almost always respond in public hearings to direct questions about such levels when posed by lawmakers. But the Pentagon does not routinely disclose orders of battle, citing "operational security issues."

Meanwhile, some think-tanks and military watchdog organizations use press reports and other sources to attempt to reconstruct U.S. orders of battle, including the website Global Security, (globalsecurity.org).

According to Global Security, as of May 19, the most recent date available, the number of U.S. forces in Afghanistan totaled "nearly 10,000 soldiers" and "roughly 4,200 Marines --" considerably fewer than the 17,900 cited by Schwartz.

Gar.....they're looking

It has been related to NEWSWEEK by dozens of American, Pakistani and Afghan military and intelligence officials, as well as a few Qaeda sympathizers like Omar Farooqi. Capturing bin Laden "continues to be a huge priority," says Frances Fragos Townsend, President George W. Bush's chief counterterror adviser.


Duh....sorry,not credible
 
I wasn't aware not looking for OBL is an impeachable offense....we had good methods for finding him through hi-tech but your left wing media has a habit of blabbing all those neat methods all over the airwaves in some perverted sense of a 'right to know' and now Osama knows too.
I recall reading that the British were a wee tad upset at the US because while they were after the "liquid bombers" responsible for our ziploc bags full of hair gel, the US intelligence swooped in and landed....the peons. The Brits were hoping to hold out just a bit longer to nab the LEADERS of that plot. Oh well. We can blame Soros or somebody.

Dude we still have boots on the ground over there since day one.And besides....several of your 'left leaners' on here have repeatedly stated how troops were 'robbed' from Afghanistan to support Iraq.....looks like theres adequate boots to do the job.
It's comforting to know that our all volunteer military is capable of conducting a "global" war on terror...even though most of them are currently deployed in a country that had far LESS to do with terrorism than the other countries.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top