• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Obama's Nobel Peace Award is a SAD IRONY

tun_dr_m

Alfrescian
Loyal
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091201...Ec2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDb2JhbWF0b2RldGFp


Obama to detail Afghanistan war expansion

AP


Lawmakers pressure Obama ahead of Afghanistan speech Reuters – U.S. President Barack Obama at the White House in Washington October 7, 2009. Obama faces pressure from …
By JENNIFER LOVEN, AP White House Correspondent Jennifer Loven, Ap White House Correspondent – 1 hr 5 mins ago

WASHINGTON – After months of debate, President Barack Obama will spell out a costly Afghanistan war expansion to a skeptical public Tuesday night, coupling an infusion of as many as 35,000 more troops with a vow that there will be no endless U.S. commitment. His first orders have already been made: at least one group of Marines who will be in place by Christmas.

Obama has said that he prefers "not to hand off anything to the next president" and that his strategy will "put us on a path toward ending the war." But he doesn't plan to give any more exact timetable than that Tuesday night.

The president will end his 92-day review of the war with a nationally broadcast address in which he will lay out his revamped strategy from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y. He spent part of Monday briefing foreign allies in a series of private meetings and phone calls.

Before Obama's call to Britain's Gordon Brown, the prime minister announced that 500 more U.K. troops would arrive in southern Afghanistan next month — making a British total of about 10,000 in the country. And French President Nicolas Sarkozy, whose nation has more than 3,000 in Afghanistan, said French troops would stay "as long as necessary" to stabilize the country.

Obama's war escalation includes sending 30,000 to 35,000 more American forces into Afghanistan in a graduated deployment over the next year, on top of the 71,000 already there. There also will be a fresh focus on training Afghan forces to take over the fight and allow the Americans to leave.

He also will deliver a deeper explanation of why he believes the U.S. must continue to fight more than eight years after the war was started following the Sept. 11 attacks by al-Qaida terrorists based in Afghanistan. He will emphasize that Afghan security forces need more time, more schooling and more U.S. combat backup to be up to the job on their own, and he will make tougher demands on the governments of Pakistan as well as Afghanistan.

"This is not an open-ended commitment," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said. "We are there to partner with the Afghans, to train the Afghan national security forces, the army and the police so that they can provide security for their country and wage a battle against an unpopular insurgency."

On a few of the bigger questions most on the minds of increasingly restive members of Congress and the public, such as how much the additional $30 billion to $35 billion cost will balloon the already skyrocketed federal deficit, how long the U.S. commitment will continue and how it will wind down, Obama was expected to make references without offering specifics.

Gibbs said detailed discussions on costs would be held later with lawmakers.

Even before explaining his decision, Obama told the military to begin executing the force increases. The commander in chief gave the deployment orders Sunday night, during an Oval Office meeting in which he told key military and White House advisers of his final decision.

At least one group of Marines is expected to deploy within two or three weeks of Obama's announcement and will be in Afghanistan by Christmas, military officials said. Larger deployments will begin early next year.

The initial infusion is a recognition by the administration that something tangible needs to happen quickly, officials said. The immediate addition of Marines will provide badly needed reinforcements for those fighting against Taliban gains in the southern Helmand province, and also could lend reassurance to both Afghans and a war-weary U.S. public.

Obama's overall review was launched Aug. 31, when Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, then the newly minted top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, delivered to Pentagon brass his assessment of the situation on the ground and what was needed to turn it around. McChrystal produced a separate resource request, first seen by Obama on Oct. 1. The president's review was anchored by 10 extensive war council meetings, starting on Sept. 13, that featured a debate between a counterinsurgency strategy focused on protecting the local population and building up the Afghanistan government or a more limited counterterrorism strategy.

The final product is neither, though it leans more toward counterinsurgency.

The length of the process drew sharp barbs. Less than two months in, Vice President Dick Cheney accused Obama of "dithering," beginning a drumbeat of criticism from Republicans. The White House shot back that the administration Cheney helped lead had given inordinate attention to Iraq while turning its back on Afghanistan.

But with U.S. casualties in Afghanistan sharply increasing and little sign of progress, the war Obama once liked to call one "of necessity," not choice, has grown less popular with the public and within his own Democratic Party. In recent days, leading Democrats have talked of setting tough conditions on deeper U.S. involvement, or even staging outright opposition.

The displeasure on both sides of the aisle is likely to be on display when congressional hearings on Obama's strategy get under way later in the week on Capitol Hill.

Obama spent much of Monday and Tuesday on the phone, outlining his plan — minus many specifics — for the leaders of France, Britain, Germany, Russia, China, India, Denmark, Poland and others. He also met in person at the White House with Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.

A briefing for dozens of lawmakers was planned for Tuesday afternoon, just before Obama left for New York to give his speech against a military backdrop.

He also was to call Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari — two leaders on whom the success of the plan will depend heavily.

In Afghanistan, rampant government corruption and inefficiency have made U.S. success much harder. Obama was expected to place tough conditions on Karzai's government, along with endorsing a stepped-up training program for the Afghan armed forces in line with recommendations this fall by U.S. trainers.

That schedule would expand the Afghan army to 134,000 troops by next fall, three years earlier than once envisioned.

The president faces a tricker task in talking tough on Pakistan.

Though extremist fighters and al-Qaida leaders are believed to be based in its western region near the border with Afghanistan, public scoldings from Washington can hurt as well as help Pakistani efforts because of pervasive anti-American sentiment. The U.S. cannot send troops into Pakistan, and rarely discusses the anti-terrorist missile strikes conducted inside Pakistan from U.S. drones.

Military officials said the speech is expected to include several references to Iraq, where the United States still has more than 100,000 troops. The strain of maintaining that overseas war machine has stretched the Army and Marine Corps and limited Obama's options.

He is expected to at least implicitly pledge not to return to the worst days of the Iraq war, when the Army was resorted to 15-month tours with little time at home between deployments and when National Guard and reserve troops were subjected to lengthy tours.

___

Associated Press writers Anne Gearan, Pamela Hess and Robert Burns contributed to this report.
 

obama.bin.laden

Alfrescian
Loyal
The Nobel Peace Prize winner did not do ANYTHING about peace in Afghanistan but expanded the wars instead.

Obama is suppose to be a Democrat but he never promote democracy in Afghanistan at all. He never held an election in Afghan. Nothing but wars.

Obama's wars is worst than Bush in Afghanistan.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091202...Ec2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDY29uZ3Jlc3NzY3J1

Congress scrutinizes Obama's Afghanistan plan

By ANNE FLAHERTY and ANNE GEARAN, Associated Press Writers Anne Flaherty And Anne Gearan, Associated Press Writers – 16 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Vice President Joe Biden said Wednesday the Obama administration's new surge-and-exit troop strategy in Afghanistan is aimed more at wringing reforms from President Hamid Karzai than mollifying a war-weary American public.

Appearing on network news shows a day after President Barack Obama announced his plan to send in 30,000 more U.S. forces, Biden said the principal aim of the new policy is to protect the United States from further terrorist attack while also keeping the Taliban from overrunning the country.

Democrats complained about Obama's escalation of the 8-year-old war, however. And Republicans are unhappy with his promise to withdraw troops in 18 months. But Congress appears nevertheless willing to approve the buildup's $30 billion price tag.

Sen. John McCain, who lost to Obama in last year's presidential election, reiterated Wednesday that while he supports the president's build up, he believes it's a mistake to signal in advance when a troop withdrawal might begin. Obama said in his prime-time West Point speech Tuesday that it could commence as early as July 2011.

The Arizona Republican said: "We don't want to sound an uncertain trumpet to our friends in the region."

On Capitol Hill, Congress is ready to use two days of high-profile hearings on the war, beginning later Wednesday, to express its misgivings. Obama's escalation strategy won quick backing from NATO allies. Afghan leaders praised the speech, but had questions about the 18-month timetable for withdrawal.

And a Taliban spokesman said Wednesday that Obama's plan was "no solution" to Afghanistan's troubles.

Of Karzai, Biden said the plan was an unmistakable warning.

"The purpose is to make it clear to Karzai and his government, which have up to now been unwilling to step up to the ball, to make it clear that you now have to step up to the ball," the vice president said.

Obama pledged Tuesday night to an audience of Army cadets at the U.S. Military Academy that the shift from surge to exit strategy would depend on the military situation in Afghanistan.

"We will execute this transition responsibly, taking into account conditions on the ground," Obama said, declaring that the nation's security was at stake and that the additional troops were needed to "bring this war to a successful conclusion."

Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, which planned to grill top administration officials Wednesday on Obama's decision, said that he expected the administration to submit a new war spending request and that Democrats would back it.

The planned infusion of 30,000 U.S. troops would raise the total American military presence in Afghanistan to about 100,000.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates was expected to tell Levin's panel that the president's strategy "will make real and measurable progress over the next 18-24 months," said spokesman Geoff Morrell.

Biden was asked about doubts he was said to have had about escalating the war.

"I've never publicly said what my position is because I reserve that for the president," he replied. "But I was skeptical of taking our eye off the ball. The ball is al-Qaida. That's the reason we're there. They are in Pakistan, the Taliban leadership is in Pakistan. And I wanted to make sure the focus stayed on those two elements of our concern and didn't sort of morph into a nation-building exercise that would tie us down for 10 years and in fact not be of any assistance in meeting what is the real threat to the U.S. — that is al-Qaida and the most extreme forces that are in Pakistan and wanting to topple Pakistan."

Many Democrats said they weren't convinced that sending more troops would hasten an end to the war. They also question whether the money used for troop deployments will drain resources from other domestic priorities, like health care and job creation.

Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., called the plan "an expensive gamble to undertake armed nation-building on behalf of a corrupt government of questionable legitimacy."

After meeting Wednesday with Karzai, U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal called Karzai's reaction to the new U.S. strategy "really positive. The president was very upbeat, very resolute this morning."

McChrystal, Obama's field commander in Afghanistan, said U.S. and NATO forces would hand over responsibility for the fight against the Taliban to Afghan security forces "as rapidly as conditions allow."

Afghan Interior Minister Hanif Atmar, who also met with McChrystal, sought more details about how the Afghan security forces would be trained and expanded in the next 18 months — a time frame that he said was too short for a complete handoff from international forces.

"That kind of time frame will give us momentum," Atmar said. "We are hoping that there will be clarity in terms of long-term growth needs of the Afghan national security forces and what can be achieved in 18 months."

NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said he expected the allies to bolster the American buildup with more than 5,000 additional troops. He said the best way to overcome widespread public opposition in Europe is by demonstrating progress, starting by transferring control of parts of the country to the Afghan government.

At a meeting of foreign ministers in Athens, Greece, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg said: "Some countries are ready now to make commitments to provide additional troops or additional funds, some are now just examining it. We understand that they need a little bit of time to digest exactly what the president's proposed."

French President Nicolas Sarkozy hailed Obama's speech as "courageous, determined and lucid" but stopped short of pledging additional French troops.

Biden and McCain appeared on ABC's "Good Morning America," CBS's "The Early Show," and NBC's "Today" program.

___

Associated Press writers Slobodan Lekic in Brussels and Heidi Vogt in Kabul contributed to this report.
 
Top