1000 brave American soldiers now dead in Afganistan

[MonsterMark]

The Left decried how Bush was killing soldiers.
Took Bush 7 years to get to 500.
Took Obama less than 2 to get to the same number.
Change the rules of engagement and get more Americans needlessly killed. Great plan.
Where is the outrage from the Left on this illegal war and where is Cindy? :shifty:
Shouldn't she be camping out in front of the White House?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/19/us/19dead.html?partner=MYWAY&ei=5065

Come on libbies. Toot your horn.

 

[Calabrio]

Cindy lost some of her focus once the media stopped showing up to film it.
I wonder after that, and they way she was treated during her brief congressional run, have cause her to realize how she was used by the Democrats and the media.

The rules of engagement changes are an outrage, and causing needless American death. There's no excusing it.

 

[MonsterMark]

The rules of engagement changes are an outrage, and causing needless American death. There's no excusing it.

But not a peep from the Left when their guy is in charge. Notice the hypocrisy?

 

[lincolnx2]

What people fail to realize is the troops are going into AO's that were left alone before, Gen McChrystal and Gen Petreaus had completely different leadership tactics, one is a SF soldier, the other is a convential soldier, Gen McChrystal is about going into areas and creating mayhem, Gen Petreaus waited until the fight came to him. Both are effective, but Gen McChrystal will end this war a whole lot quicker, thats the way SF do.

 

[Calabrio]

What people fail to realize is the troops are going into AO's that were left alone before, Gen McChrystal and Gen Petreaus had completely different leadership tactics, one is a SF soldier, the other is a convential soldier, Gen McChrystal is about going into areas and creating mayhem, Gen Petreaus waited until the fight came to him. Both are effective, but Gen McChrystal will end this war a whole lot quicker, thats the way SF do.

So to be clear, what you're saying is, McChrystal has launched a much more offensive war at the same time the White House has dramatically changed the rules of engagement restricting the ability of the military to defend itself?

 

[PetesSweets86]

woohooo quad digits! go team!

 

[lincolnx2]

So to be clear, what you're saying is, McChrystal has launched a much more offensive war at the same time the White House has dramatically changed the rules of engagement restricting the ability of the military to defend itself?

ROE have nothing to do with IED's or EFP's, you can't engage what you can't see. Gen McChrystal is going to do a whole lot more than Gen Petreaus did. People forget that when Bush did a troop increase in Iraq, the death toll rised drastically.

 

[lincolnx2]

The only way for us to win this war, is to kill every military aged man, just as Col Steele said.

 

[Calabrio]

But when Bush did a troop increase, he did simultaneously change the ROE, announce a time table for withdrawal, and cut funding.

Considering that you're discussing fairly complicated stuff, could you post more than one sentence? Because, often times, without your elaborating, some of what you say seems to contradict itself.

Are you saying that the changes to ROE aren't causing increased casualties?
Not that they are the ONLY thing, but a significant factor?

And since you're quoting Steele as the strategy to win, do you support the current administration half-hearted escalation of the war? Because I think Steele is 180 degrees different than Obama.