Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: NATO tells Prez Obama to go screw himself over more troops for Afghanistan

  1. #1
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,359

    Question NATO tells Prez Obama to go screw himself over more troops for Afghanistan

    Barack Obama made an impassioned plea to America’s allies to send more troops to Afghanistan, warning that failure to do so would leave Europe vulnerable to more terrorist atrocities.

    But though he continued to dazzle Europeans on his debut international tour, the Continent’s leaders turned their backs on the US President.

    Gordon Brown was the only one to offer substantial help. He offered to send several hundred extra British soldiers to provide security during the August election, but even that fell short of the thousands of combat troops that the US was hoping to prise from the Prime Minister.

    Just two other allies made firm offers of troops. Belgium offered to send 35 military trainers and Spain offered 12. Mr Obama’s host, Nicolas Sarkozy, refused his request.

    The derisory response threatened to tarnish Mr Obama’s European tour, which yesterday included a spellbinding performance in Strasbourg in which he offered the world a vision of a future free of nuclear weapons.

    Mr Obama – who has pledged 21,000 more troops to combat the growing insurgency and is under pressure from generals to supply up to 10,000 more – used the eve of Nato’s 60th anniversary summit to declare bluntly that it was time for allies to do their share. “Europe should not simply expect the United States to shoulder that burden alone,” he said. “This is a joint problem it requires a joint effort.”

    He said that failing to support the US surge would leave Europe open to a fresh terrorist offensive. “It is probably more likely that al-Qaeda would be able to launch a serious terrorist attack on Europe than on the United States because of proximity,” he said.

    The presidential charm offensive failed to move fellow Nato countries. President Sarkozy told Mr Obama that France would not be sending reinforcements to bolster its existing force northeast of Kabul.

    Germany, Italy, Poland, Canada and Denmark said that they were considering their positions. After a meeting with Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, Mr Obama tried to apply further moral pressure. “I am sure that Germany, as one of the most important leaders in Europe, will be stepping up to the plate and helping us to get the job done.”

    Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, the Nato Secretary-General, warned that new laws proposed by President Karzai in Afghanistan sanctioning child marriage and marital rape had made it harder to raise more soldiers.

    “We are there to defend universal values and when I see, at the moment, a law threatening to come into effect which fundamentally violates women’s rights and human rights, that worries me,” he said.

    “I have a problem to explain to a critical public audience in Europe, be it the UK or elsewhere, why I’m sending the guys to the Hindu Kush.”

    The temporary British deployment falls short of the 2,000 soldiers that the Army had planned to deploy long-term to Afghanistan and appeared to catch defence chiefs by surprise.

    Mr Brown announced the commitment as he flew into Strasbourg for the two-day summit, but hopes that it would spur other allies to follow suit were soon dashed. British officials said that the extra troops, expected to number between 500 and 700 – increasing Britain’s military strength there to about 9,000 – would be dispatched to southern Afghanistan for a four-month period leading up to and beyond the election, due to take place on August 20.

    The plan is to withdraw them once the election is over. Mr Brown said that the extra troops were only supposed to provide a “temporary uplift”.

    Military contingency plans remain on the table to send up to 2,000 more troops long-term, taking the total to 10,000, but that will depend on the political will to approve the deployment.

    Although the Prime Minister discussed Afghanistan with President Obama when they held bilateral talks before the G20 summit in London, it is understood that no formal offer of extra troops was made.

    Barack Obama fails to win Nato troops he wants for Afghanistan - Times Online
    nobody wants to bother what that shithole
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  2. #2
    Elite Member bychance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,297

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    nobody wants to bother what that shithole
    until another attack hits the US?

    the right would go insane.

  3. #3
    Elite Member Mivvi21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,937

    Default

    I see sending more troops anywhere over there to be a huge waste of resources. Stop trying to police the world,America.

  4. #4
    Silver Member gardenofeve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Centre of the Universe Canada
    Posts
    549

    Default

    I think a lot of the other nations are just plain tired of it. They've been really putting a lot into Afghanistan while the US focused heavily on Iraq (comparitively) and now after 8 years, they're ready to pull out.

  5. #5
    Elite Member kingcap72's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    10 miles from Pootie Tang
    Posts
    21,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mivvi21 View Post
    I see sending more troops anywhere over there to be a huge waste of resources. Stop trying to police the world,America.
    I'm all for America not policing the world, but Afghanistan doesn't fall into that category. Afghanistan was a justifiable war, because of the connection to Al-Queda, 9/11 and other terrorist attacks.

    Had Dubya not dropped the ball that situation could've been taken care of. But now with things spilling over into Pakistan, which is close to or already has some nuclear capability and is highly unstable, something has to be done. But we can't be there forever.

  6. #6
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,359

    Default

    Afghanistan is unwinnable. Heed the lessons of history. America will be bled dry there, worse than Iraq.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  7. #7
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    34,679

    Default

    ^^ you know americans don't read history. not even their own



    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  8. #8
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kingcap72 View Post
    I'm all for America not policing the world, but Afghanistan doesn't fall into that category. Afghanistan was a justifiable war, because of the connection to Al-Queda, 9/11 and other terrorist attacks.

    Had Dubya not dropped the ball that situation could've been taken care of. But now with things spilling over into Pakistan, which is close to or already has some nuclear capability and is highly unstable, something has to be done. But we can't be there forever.
    This issue is such a hot button. The world was onboard with the US declaring war on Afghanistan only to have their troops endangered when Bush decided to turn his back on his allies and invade Iraq. Had he "stayed the course" Afghanistan could have been secured years ago.

    It's not Obama's fault but he should understand why other world leaders aren't as eager to continue backing a war the US already turned their back on once. It's nice & convenient now that the US wants the world's help, but when the world needed the US to continue participating in the war they started, they were too busy pursuing Bush's personal vendetta. Again, not Obama's fault but there are feelings of betrayal that can't be buried just because a new leader has taken over. Confidence in US promises has been shaken, it takes time to rebuild.

  9. #9
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,359

    Default

    Um guys, the brits, soviets and alexander the great couldn't "secure" afghanistan over decades of fighting.

    It won't happen.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  10. #10
    Elite Member celeb_2006's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    13,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    Um guys, the brits, soviets and alexander the great couldn't "secure" afghanistan over decades of fighting.

    It won't happen.
    See, that's the thing. The Special Forces guys were able to kick ass with limited soldiers and resources early on in the war, but the way the tribe system works over there, your allies one day could be your enemy the next. And the only way the U.S. could reasonably 'shape' Afghanistan into their vision of a "democratic" western style government is if they destroyed the country and the will of the people (like in WW2) and moulded the country from the ground up. AND maintain a constant presence. No way would that happen, and no way it could happen, America simply can't afford the proper numbers and resources for accomplishing what the war architects truly want. The Afghan peoples are a proud and warrior class, no one has been able to rule them and no one ever will.

    Yes I agree with kingcap, maybe it was justifiable in the sense that those responsible for 9/11 had ties to that country. But enough is enough, we lost whatever momentum we had there, and this strategy is doomed to fail. Osama is deader than dirt, been dead for years, thousands of insurgent fighers and whatnot have been killed, parts of the country ruined. Isn't that enough??? Why can't they accept that Afghanistan never will be like America? Why???

    Afghanistan has become a black hole like Iraq, sucking troops and money that should be spent on our own citizens. The taliban is already regrouping and resurging, and we're sending troops to fight them? Enough is enough. It's their damned country let them run it. Yea it sucks they can't treat their own women as equal citizens, but hell how many other countries treat their citizens like dirt? Should we go policing them too?

  11. #11
    Elite Member kingcap72's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    10 miles from Pootie Tang
    Posts
    21,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    Um guys, the brits, soviets and alexander the great couldn't "secure" afghanistan over decades of fighting.

    It won't happen.
    I don't think the U.S. is trying to 'secure' Afghanistan the way the brits, russia and Alexander were. They all wanted to conquer the country. As much as I hate Dubya I doubt that was his original intent, and I doubt it's Obama's either.

    I think the U.S. is just trying to stablize the country enough so that it's not such a safe haven for the Taliban & Al-Queda, which becomes an issue with Pakistan, another unstable country. Dubya had almost accomplished that goal, until he dropped the ball and invaded Iraq and wanted to spread democracy in both countries.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. John Murtha: We'd need 600,000 troops to pacify Afghanistan
    By witchcurlgirl in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 3rd, 2009, 11:13 PM
  2. US to send 20,000 more troops to Afghanistan
    By witchcurlgirl in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 11th, 2008, 04:14 PM
  3. Officials: 9 US troops killed in Afghanistan
    By celeb_2006 in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 13th, 2008, 04:26 PM
  4. Afghanistan shows challenges for more global NATO
    By JamieElizabeth in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 10th, 2006, 10:31 PM
  5. Condoleeza Rice tells Canada to screw itself
    By Grimmlok in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: October 28th, 2005, 01:57 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •