How it Works1 min ago
More troops for Afghanistan?
9 Answers
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/oct/14/gordon-brown-davidcameron
The prime minister said that he had agreed in principle to increase the size of the British force, from 9,000 to 9,500, provided the Afghans supplied more troops, the right equipment was available and other countries made a contribution.
What is the betting that even if these three conditions are not met he will still send out these extra troops. Hasn't he already promised Mrs Clinton?
He also said British troops remained in Afghanistan to "protect the streets of Britain" from the rise of al-Qaida.
Obama on the other hand says that he would make an announcement in "the coming weeks", regarding considering a proposal by the commander of international forces in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, for up to 40,000 more international troops.
I thought it was only Britain that had a dithering leader, it would seems that the US also has one.
The prime minister said that he had agreed in principle to increase the size of the British force, from 9,000 to 9,500, provided the Afghans supplied more troops, the right equipment was available and other countries made a contribution.
What is the betting that even if these three conditions are not met he will still send out these extra troops. Hasn't he already promised Mrs Clinton?
He also said British troops remained in Afghanistan to "protect the streets of Britain" from the rise of al-Qaida.
Obama on the other hand says that he would make an announcement in "the coming weeks", regarding considering a proposal by the commander of international forces in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, for up to 40,000 more international troops.
I thought it was only Britain that had a dithering leader, it would seems that the US also has one.
Answers
1 to 9 of 9
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Given that any proper build-up of forces in such a difficult situation needs to be accompanied by real consideration of future strategy and the supporting logistics, and given that the troops in Afghanistan are a multi-national NATO force and Obama is committed to international dialogue and diplomacy...
I say kudos to Barack for not leaping in mob-handed (or out!).
Dithering: "To be uncertain or unable to make a decision about doing something"
Doesn't mean you can't take your time about making a firm decision!
I say kudos to Barack for not leaping in mob-handed (or out!).
Dithering: "To be uncertain or unable to make a decision about doing something"
Doesn't mean you can't take your time about making a firm decision!
-- answer removed --
It was admitted on the news tonight that the US has had dramatic success in using drones to kill the leaders of Al Qaeda and Taliban.. So much so that many have been eliminated and the ones that remain are getting paranoid about who is reporting them before being attacked. So far they have elimniated about 15 Al Qaeda leaders. So obviously this is the strategy in Obamas mind, why have soldiers on the ground killed where a flying robot can do the job better.
If we had any sense we would make more use of these drones and the collateral damage of civilians would just be an act of war. Hearts and minds are for loving couples on valentines day.
If we had any sense we would make more use of these drones and the collateral damage of civilians would just be an act of war. Hearts and minds are for loving couples on valentines day.
rov1200 Couldn't agree more.
Take the number of troops killed or injured while on "Foot Patrol" yet they still carry them out.
There seems to be no precise strategy attached to this war in Afghanistan.
If we had used these same tactics in WW2 we would still have been fighting the Germans.
Blimey! we have 21st century trained soldiers who can call on 21st century weapons, yet we can't wipe out a band of tribesmen who still live in the Middle ages.
Take the number of troops killed or injured while on "Foot Patrol" yet they still carry them out.
There seems to be no precise strategy attached to this war in Afghanistan.
If we had used these same tactics in WW2 we would still have been fighting the Germans.
Blimey! we have 21st century trained soldiers who can call on 21st century weapons, yet we can't wipe out a band of tribesmen who still live in the Middle ages.
1 to 9 of 9