|
rulemylife -> RE: Obama releases secret Bush anti-terror memos (3/4/2009 1:28:26 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
Yes, and he always clearly said throughout the campaign a security force would be left in place.
I didn't expect quite as high a number either, but apparently that was influenced by what the military felt was necessary.
It's still an improvement over 120,000 - 160,000 as we have had. '
Okay, so until 2010 minimum we're at 120,000 in Iraq (using the low number); currently we also have 38,000 in Afghanistan, with a recently made commitment for 17,000 more bringing that total of 55,000 by year ending 2009.
So if everything works out perfectly the 'best case' scenario projected by this Administration is that after 2010 'ONLY' 90,000 US Troops will be occupying foreign soil - BEST case. Care to speculate on the odds of 'Best Case' occuring?
Until the first one is returned will have, at minimum, 175,000 troops deployed; 120,000 (your number) in Iraq, and the escalation to 55,000 in Afghanistan.
Your okay with this because it's now President Obama? The rhetoric of Candidate Obama should be considered invalid now on this matter since he obtained the goal he wanted from it?
Don't worry - you are NOT alone. Not one peep from the Berkley, Columbia, or any 'anti-war' crowds. They are still drunk on their social engineering agenda coming to power and choose to ignore, what amounts to, the largest total US troop deployment since the Vietnam era.
This isn't directed to you personally, but for the left - Hypocrisy be damned if a bigger agenda is being served - huh?
quote:
The president last week decided the U.S. will send 17,000 additional U.S. combat and support troops to Afghanistan. In a statement he said the deployment was “necessary to stabilize a deteriorating situation in Afghanistan, which has not received the strategic attention, direction and resources it urgently requires.”
The U.S. has about 38,000 personnel in Afghanistan, and about 32,000 troops from other NATO members also are in the country. US TROOPS IN AFGHANISTAN
I'm ok with it because I've always believed one of the few things Bush did right was going into Afghanistan.
The problem was he never committed enough troops to get us in and out quickly, instead diverting to Iraq.
Afghanistan was where our problem was, and is growing again.
Meanwhile we created another situation in Iraq that has to be dealt with.
Hussein was largely marginalized by the sanctions and his was a secular government that viewed the Islamist radicals as a threat to his own rule. There was little likelihood that he would have supported them.
But now we've created the power vacuum in that country Bush Sr. worried about, and ended the Gulf War because of before taking out Hussein.
|
|
|
|
