“Outnumbered, but not outgunned” what Obama needs more of in Afghanistan if he is to win.

[jody]

Outnumbered, but not outgunned

Patrolling the town of Shewan in Farah province, the troops from 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines, were attacked by a small group of insurgents that eventually swelled to more than 250 fighters. They had enough rocket-propelled grenades and machine gun ammunition to wage an eight-hour battle against a well-trained, well-equipped Marine force.

And in the end, the results were devastating — for the insurgents.

More than 50 enemy fighters were killed in the battle, and several more wounded, Marine officials said. A single Marine corporal, serving as the unit’s designated marksman, killed 20 insurgents by himself, using only 20 shots to do it.

The estimated 30 Marines involved, on the other hand, rolled away relatively unscathed. No Marines were killed and only one was wounded in the battle, the platoon commander said.

These are the type troops Commander in Chief Obama and his supporters must rely on if Obama’s surge of 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan is to succeed.

[dkofos]

1. There is nothing to WIN in Afghanistan.

We need to get the fuck out.


NOW!!

[jody]

3. Agree, that's what I hope Obama would do. n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. More cannon fodder for a lost war. Support the bodybag industry!

[jody]

5. Agree, Obama should bring our troops home. n/t

[izquierdista]

4. Stupid thinking

That killing people solves the problem. It solves the immediate problem of having them shoot rocket-propelled grenades at you, but not the long term problem of why they keep shooting grenades at you and where they keep getting them from.

[jody]

7. Agree, Obama has authority to bring our troops home but many will die unless he issues the order. nt

[Bragi]

6. Wow, who'd a guessed!

Who could have imagined that the best equipped troops in the history of warfare could kill ill-equipped insurgents in the world's poorest nation. Impressive for sure.

Too bad these insurgents keep refusing open combat and instead adopt guerrilla tactics, forcing the US to bomb their villages.

And too bad there is no chance of "winning" anything in this backward country.

[jody]

8. IMO the only way we could win is by bringing our troops home. n/t

[The_Casual_Observer]

9. They could have battles like this for the next 100 years & gain nothing

It's a stalemate, the same stalemate the russians were in, except that it will move even slower since the insurgents aren't don't have a new supply of US made anti-aircraft rockets. But they aren't going away, not in a million years.

[jody]

10. Agree and we need to make Obama know his supporters want our troops home. n/t

[The_Casual_Observer]

11. The argument, of course, is that leaving that place to the insurgents

is a sure fire way to create a safe haven for terrorists. This is the problem that Obama is grappling with right now for sure.

[jody]

12. There are "safe haven for terrorists" in many countries other than Afghanistan. Bush used your

argument for eight years re Iraq and Afghanistan and how much success has he had?

[Bragi]

13. Really?

That argument could be used to justify occupying dozens of nations. Why not send troops to occupy the entire Gulf, most of Africa (note: the continent, not the country), Indonesia, etc., etc. ?

[Bragi]

14. If Obama escalates the war in Afghanistan...

...it will be a cancer on his Presidency. Now is the time for Obama supporters to make it clear that escalating this useless conflict is not in the national s interest, or in his own political interest.

[The_Casual_Observer]

15. Yes really, whether you like it or not, it's the OFFICIAL argument used to

justify the occupation of the place. It's linear thinking, since that's where 9/11 was cooked up, that's where the next one would come from. No matter if the thinking is right or wrong, it's policy & so far Obama has indicated that he is going to follow the policy.

[jody]

16. Sadly I agree, "so far Obama has indicated that he is going to follow the policy." n/t

[rocktots]

17. So who still wants us in Afganistan?

Get to the ROOT of the issue, otherwise your just blowing gas.

We will be in there to keep a large force in the middle east, for a threat factor on Iran.

What is the ROOT of this?

[jody]

18. "threat factor on Iran" "What is the ROOT of this?" What group makes threats against Iran and holds

a dominate position in presidential politics?

You raised Iran as a key factor so you answer your question.

[Greyhound]

22. Another of the anti-midas' colossal fuck-ups, and ironically IIRC we were

liberators in the beginning.

[Mari333]

19. Obama's Vietnam. bring them home. nt

[jody]

21. Agree and we need to press that issue with Obama now before he takes office so it's #1 priority. n/t

[Radical Activist]

20. We never lost a battle in Vietnam.

Always racked up high body counts too.

[jody]

23. Agree, our military is the world's best at killing the enemy, that's their job but history in

Afghanistan suggests one would have to kill all Afghans to declare victory.

The Afghanistan people in particular the Pashtun peoples who make up about 40% of the Afghan population and most of the Taliban are perfectly capable of solving their own problems.