Thread: 205 US Casualties in Afghanistan in 2012

Originally Posted by jviehe

Why does Commander Obama never talk about it? Isnt the ongoing involment in a war, fighting terrorism a pretty important issue? Shouldnt he at least show that hes actively involved and concerned? Meanwhile there are reports of the Taliban being willing to deal, but with no response from the US, they instead step up attacks.



BBC News - Afghanistan: Peace signals from the Taliban

Why should we negotiate wit terrorist. Why do you want us to surrender?

Originally Posted by jviehe

Why does Commander Obama never talk about it? Isnt the ongoing involment in a war, fighting terrorism a pretty important issue? Shouldnt he at least show that hes actively involved and concerned? Meanwhile there are reports of the Taliban being willing to deal, but with no response from the US, they instead step up attacks.

BBC News - Afghanistan: Peace signals from the Taliban

ahoy Jviehe,

Mr. Obama is doin' Mr. Rumsfeld, Mr. Cheney, Mr. Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith proud.

aye.

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by wooyarn

Why should we negotiate wit terrorist. Why do you want us to surrender?

Negotiate THEIR surrender. But that wasnt the point of my post. Rather that the President isnt engaged at all. Hes off campaigning when he should be actively engaged in fighting a war.

Originally Posted by wooyarn

Why should we negotiate wit terrorist. Why do you want us to surrender?

You cannot win a war against an indigenous native insurgency without resorting to draconian measures and being prepared to take large losses.

It has never happened and never will.

All you can do is coerce the circumstances to change so that the opposition comes to the table to discuss a cease fire.

Now that the Taliban want one, you are dismissing them for doing the only thing that will lead to a peaceful solution in Afghanistan without massive bloodshed.

The conservative CONCERN for peace is astounding. It doesn't "wear" very well.

If obama had of had the opportunity to sit down with the taliban last year, or the year before what would the cons have said about that? The taliban gave A. Q. safe haven, and they flew planes into buildings killing thousands here on our soil and now this president is trying to appease them, to make peace with them?????!!!! Another sign this president is no leader!! He is a socialist not a leader!

Pardon me as I roll on the floor and laugh my ass off! The cons are something else, ain't they? As transparent in intentions as the invisible man standing outside the rest room in a modeling agency.

Originally Posted by RDK

You cannot win a war against an indigenous native insurgency without resorting to draconian measures and being prepared to take large losses.

It has never happened and never will.

All you can do is coerce the circumstances to change so that the opposition comes to the table to discuss a cease fire.

Now that the Taliban want one, you are dismissing them for doing the only thing that will lead to a peaceful solution in Afghanistan without massive bloodshed.

We could win the war any time we wanted if we considered it a war and not just a police action. The only way for any conflict like this to end is for one side or the other to win. We just don't have what it takes to go in and wipe out an entire group of people. Both the fighters and those who support them. In my opinion, we should never enter a conflict we don't intend to win and end quickly by whatever means necessary.

Originally Posted by OldmanDan

We could win the war any time we wanted if we considered it a war and not just a police action. The only way for any conflict like this to end is for one side or the other to win. We just don't have what it takes to go in and wipe out an entire group of people. Both the fighters and those who support them. In my opinion, we should never enter a conflict we don't intend to win and end quickly by whatever means necessary.

These police actions are hurting america in all sorts of ways. And I am with you on this deal. If we are gonna commit our young men and gals, we should go in to WIN IT, in the shortest amount of time as possible. If we cannot do that, then we need to stop this incessant occupying as our young get killed off or their lives destroyed by losing legs and arms.

I believe that congress should vote to declare war, the american people asked to do their part as in ww2. But of course that would really limit us flexing our military might, like the pompous bully on the school yards of america. I am sick of it.

When you look at the stats on paper of the young americans who have lost all that they have, and all that they will ever have, and actually realize these were living breathing human beings with dreams and hopes and families, it makes me pissed off at politicians. And at the peoplel who support these police actions, which historically have been a grand waste of lives and taxpayer money.

Ron Paul has the right idea when it comes to our military, and the way that we have used it starting with Viet Nam. He believes in the rules set forth by the constitution in how we engage in war. We really have become an evil empire, IMO. With too much power being given by congress to the president. It was not SUPPOSED to be that way, and for very obvious reasons.

While I don't see us as an evil empire, I do see us as unwilling to commit to do what is necessary. There are too many bleeding hearts who would come unglued if we wiped out an entire village as we did in WWII. We wouldn't have to win a war that way more than once before the others would get religion.

Originally Posted by OldmanDan

While I don't see us as an evil empire, I do see us as unwilling to commit to do what is necessary. There are too many bleeding hearts who would come unglued if we wiped out an entire village as we did in WWII. We wouldn't have to win a war that way more than once before the others would get religion.

I would be happy to just know that the chain of command is doing the job. We just dont get any information about Afghanistan and the american citizens that are dying there daily. The media doesnt cover it. Obama doesnt talk about it. We know more about a Syrian civil war than we do about the US war in Afghanistan.

Originally Posted by jviehe

I would be happy to just know that the chain of command is doing the job. We just dont get any information about Afghanistan and the american citizens that are dying there daily. The media doesnt cover it. Obama doesnt talk about it. We know more about a Syrian civil war than we do about the US war in Afghanistan.

Same way with iraq after a bit. Nonstop coverage on the invasions, then it slowly loses news time until you hear a blurb here and there. Out of sight, out of mind is my feelings on this. We covered the shit out of the nam war, with body counts each day. And stories of war in every magazine around, every night Cronkite told us about what was going on.

SO, out of sight, out of mind and the only folks that think about the war are the families of the men who are over there risking their lives. Death always draws a crowd of newscasts and news in print, except when its a war that has dragged on for years and years. We need deaths caused by new enemies, or accidents to sell our entertainment based media.

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

Same way with iraq after a bit. Nonstop coverage on the invasions, then it slowly loses news time until you hear a blurb here and there. Out of sight, out of mind is my feelings on this. We covered the shit out of the nam war, with body counts each day. And stories of war in every magazine around, every night Cronkite told us about what was going on.

SO, out of sight, out of mind and the only folks that think about the war are the families of the men who are over there risking their lives. Death always draws a crowd of newscasts and news in print, except when its a war that has dragged on for years and years. We need deaths caused by new enemies, or accidents to sell our entertainment based media.

In Vietnam the weekly body count was higher than 205 for many weeks.
And in Vietnam we had a conscript military nearly everyone(the upper class largely excluded) had a relative or friend in Vietnam or in the military, and the draft was a concern of all but the children of the well connected , the great thing for those who seek to use the military for optional wars is that it's self selected from a relatively small slice of the population, so hardly anyone knows somebody in the service, and it's not an issue that impacts their lives.
That's a big part, but not all. The second part and maybe the most important is that there is no compelling video produced by this conflict.
In Vietnam you had low flying airplanes turning green jungle into huge black edged, orange blossoms of napalm, you had a guy being shot in the head on the 6 O'Clock news, you had dead bodies and body parts, horribly wounded soldiers in the flurry of activity of a field hospital, you had compelling visuals that kept people riveted to the TV. In the Gulf wars you had Shock and Awe, tracers over Baghdad, huge explosions, and that crazy video from smart bombs, and little kids with their arms and legs blown off, dead babies and all kinds of compelling visuals.
Afghanistan produces little in the way of compelling video.
The media doesn't cover it, because when it does cover it, people change the channel.

Originally Posted by goober

In Vietnam the weekly body count was higher than 205 for many weeks.
And in Vietnam we had a conscript military nearly everyone(the upper class largely excluded) had a relative or friend in Vietnam or in the military, and the draft was a concern of all but the children of the well connected , the great thing for those who seek to use the military for optional wars is that it's self selected from a relatively small slice of the population, so hardly anyone knows somebody in the service, and it's not an issue that impacts their lives.
That's a big part, but not all. The second part and maybe the most important is that there is no compelling video produced by this conflict.
In Vietnam you had low flying airplanes turning green jungle into huge black edged, orange blossoms of napalm, you had a guy being shot in the head on the 6 O'Clock news, you had dead bodies and body parts, horribly wounded soldiers in the flurry of activity of a field hospital, you had compelling visuals that kept people riveted to the TV. In the Gulf wars you had Shock and Awe, tracers over Baghdad, huge explosions, and that crazy video from smart bombs, and little kids with their arms and legs blown off, dead babies and all kinds of compelling visuals.
Afghanistan produces little in the way of compelling video.
The media doesn't cover it, because when it does cover it, people change the channel.

Besides, every one of them is just a "pampered loser", according to you.

Where is the daily drumbeat from the New York Times and the other MSM about the death toll in the Mid East? While Bush was President, we heard the numbers every day.