Comments on: Report Discredits Obama Afghan Mission

By: casualobserver

casualobserver — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 00:00:04 +0000

The current goal of the Afghan Ministry of Defense is to expand the Afghan National Army to about 134,000 troops. However, American President Barack Obama has called for an expansion of almost 260,000 Afghan troops in the next five years at a cost of $20 billion. All costs of expansion of the army, including pay and new modern equipment, would be paid for by the American government

The deployment does not change the maximum number of service members expected to soon be in Afghanistan: 68,000, more than double the number there when Bush left office.

So, let's assume the increase from 134,000 to 260,000..........68,000 US troops.........student to teacher ratio of less than 2 to 1............$159,000 per new student warrior.

Something tells me the NEA had a hand in designing this training program.

By: dduck12

dduck12 — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 23:51:57 +0000

Sounds like we are jumping the gun here, just like the liberals used to do with Bush, This is one “secret report”. Who knows if it biased, accurate or what. I think O deserves more credit- at least for a while.
Pakistan is not a White Whale, but like Iran a major problem; there is no jumping ship.

By: jkremmers

jkremmers — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:54:19 +0000

According to the report, the whole mission's number one priority is training the Afghan army and police. Makes sense since less than 100 al qaida are in Afghanistan. The rest is nation building. You can spin this sucker any which way and it still comes out a loser. — Jer

By: sortaRepublican

sortaRepublican — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:48:18 +0000

In short, it will take centuries to Westernise these 7th century peasants who hate us.

By: casualobserver

casualobserver — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:04:41 +0000

By the way, dmf, your Afghan war policy has just claimed 8 American lives today…….yeah, I know…it's not important

By: casualobserver

casualobserver — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:32:52 +0000

“so the whole mission is discredited? just because the date was overly ambitious?”

Well, Keith Olberman thought it was important…..he made a nightly living off of measuring how far off “the date” was.

However, Obama should be so lucky to only miss the date………..I've got ten grand that says he doesn't achieve the objective either……..no matter how many years we stay there.

By: dmf

dmf — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 20:17:38 +0000

so the whole mission is discredited? just because the date was overly ambitious?

boy that's sound reasoning. sounds to me like your mind was made up before you found this.

overly ambitious dates are par for the course. it's like when you tell your lady that you're supposed to be there by 7 even though it's 8. because you know she'll be late and maybe you'll be on time.

bfd. find something important.

By: AustinRoth

AustinRoth — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 20:00:15 +0000

It is all Bush's fault of course. Everything is.