U.S. military says it can meet Obama demands
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
Millions in global aid for Iraq remain unspent
( 1 )
-
U.N. Security Council blames Syrian gov't for Houla killings
( 5 )
-
U.S. drones kill 5 militants in Pakistan
( 9 )
-
NATO has fight on its hands in Afghanistan - Panetta
( 6 )
-
Iran may rethink 20% enrichment: spokesman
( 2 )
-
- 秘書及び業務サポート
- 加治金属工業株式会社, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥4.0M / Year
-
- English Instructor (Osaka, Kyoto, Kobe)
- Berlitz Japan, Inc. (ベルリッツ・ジャパン株式会社), Kansai
- Salary: ¥125,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month
-
- ALT - Mie Prefecture - Yokkaichi City - June start
- NPO法人グローバル教育推進機構（GLAD), Mie
- Salary: ¥230,000 / Month For a full working month. Some months differ.
Order by Time Order by Popularity
25 Comments
Login to comment
0
smithinjapan
Good... get them where they should be, instead of the debacle in Iraq. Shouldn't have been there from the start.
0
Nippon5
Shouldnt have been in Afgahistan either... It should be the UN in there and it should of been the UN in Iraq doing the job the UN was created for... Why should the US always be the protector and police of the world, why cant other countries like Canada use their men and woman... Maybe if they did they wouldnt be so quick to blame the US for everthing....
But most in those other countries (except Britian) hide their heads in holes and pray that the Brits or the Americans will take care of those bad countries...Its sad to have the US and Britan be your police and then complain how they do it... Get your gun and your vest and take your army and your country to fight terrorism, to get rid of leaders who do genocide...
0
SushiSake3
Obama has a deadline for a US withdrawl from Iraq.
The Iraqi government has just negotiated a fixes timeline for withdrawl of US forces from Iraq.
What do all those who decried timelines as 'defeat' and 'waving a surrender flag' saying now???
0
SushiSake3
Nippon5 - "Get your gun and your vest and take your army and your country to fight terrorism, to get rid of leaders who do genocide..."
Heh, the same old circular argument that has been proved baseless so many times now.
It's well beyond time for all those who supported the invasion of Iraq to cook up a far more robust argument than that.
0
powderfinger
"What do all those who decried timelines as 'defeat' and 'waving a surrender flag' saying now???"
And what do all those who said 'quagmire', 'Vietnam 2', 'watch the Yanks cut and run', 'civil war any day now' have to say for themselves?
"Back in Iraq, Jarred by the Calm"
NY Times Sept 30 2008
"When I left Baghdad two years ago, the nation’s social fabric seemed too shredded to ever come together again. The very worst had lost its power to shock. To return now is to be jarred in the oddest way possible: by the normal, by the pleasant, even by hope. The questions are jarring, too. Is it really different now? Is this something like peace or victory? And, if so, for whom: the Americans or the Iraqis?"
0
Nippon5
Sushisake3...
Just sit down in your chair looking at your screen and feel safe you will always be able to complain about the US defending you, being the backbone to the UN since all those other countries dont support the military side of the UN they just go there to complain about the bad men in the world.. The invasion of Iraq was something that should of happened by the UN in the name of removing a genocide leader, but Bush didnt wait... I support Sadamm out of power, I just dont support the US having to be the tool used for his removal..
Once again I say your welcome to rally your countries armies and have them take over fot the states and police the world, we will stand down for you... I wont hold my breath too long though as I know its easier to sit on the side lines and yell then it is to get in and play the game...
And as it is a circular arguement that your position is in too.. To complain about the genocide and the killings of the world but to wait for the US to take action so you can complain about it... again and again and again..
0
Betzee
Huh? Those voicing such sentiments were McCain supporters. In fact Obama's election, as opposed to a McCain victory, was likely the decisive factor in getting the Iraqi government to sign off on the "SOFA agreement," which they had been waffling on for the better part of a year, specifying the length of time and terms under which US troops would remain in their country.
Tehran was lobbying hard against any agreement which it felt threatened its security, and McCain's infamous, or ominous, spontaneous breaking into a rendition of "bomb Iran" on the campaign trial no doubt strengthened their resolve. Maliki, after all, spent some time in Iran where his political party was formed with fellow Iraqi Shia exiles. Ties to their Iranian counterparts remain strong. Bottom line, unless Tehran signed off, it was going to be very difficult for Washington to reach an agreement with Baghdad.
Iran nearly consumed two presidencies. The case of Carter is well known. But Iran contra, now forgotten, was quite damaging to Reagan in its day. Hopefully Obama will fare better; his diplomatic approach is already bearing fruit. GWB's bellicose rhetoric, by contrast, didn't exactly slow Iran's development of a nuclear weapon.
0
USAFdude
Betzee - very well said. In posts like the one you've quoted above, we see the hypocrisy of the NeoCons.
Wasn't it a certain USAF member who's been saying the same thing for a couple of years now? Checking... Yeah, it was! Glad to be of service.
Of course we can! We wouldn't have helped elect him if we didn't believe we could work with him.
0
powderfinger
Obama voted against the surge.
He gets no credit for anything positive to have come out of Iraq.
0
adaydream
We've had 5 years to win the george bush Memorial War in Iraq and between george bush and his buffoons we're a long way from "Victory."
Adm. Mike Mullen and Robert Gates knows what side their bread is buttered on and if they want to continue in their positions for any longer than Jan 20, they'll have all new plans. < :-)
0
SuperLib
So you guys support an increase of troops in Afghanistan?
0
Nippon5
I dont support an increase of American Troops in Afghanistan, but I do support an increase of troops from other UN nations in Afghanistan....
0
Betzee
The chances of that are improved now. GWB was so toxic no leader, democratically elected or dictator, could afford to look like he was acquiesing to a request from the US prez in front of his own people.
As I'm sure everyone remembers, the initial offer of NATO countries to send troops was turned down by Washington on the grounds "they would just slow us down."
Once the fighting proved otherwise and we were in Iraq, GWB declared it was vital that NATO commanders had the wherewithal "to defeat the enemy wherever the enemy may make its stand". And "when [those commanders] said, 'we need additional help', our NATO countries must provide it". Needless to say, such demands would have been politically suicidal to meet.
0
sailwind
Think they are gonna step up the plate now......Got a bridge to nowhere to sell you.
0
Betzee
Obama never voted against the surge, the number of troops is the sole prerogative of the Commander in Chief. However, if you supported Donald Rumsfeld in the face of mounting criticism, you were against the surge since he opposed it, a big part of the reason he was removed.
What Obama wanted was benchmarks and a troop withdrawal schedule, ridiculed by Mitch McConnell in March 2007 as "waving the white flag of surrender." Yet the security pact negotiated by GWB which the Iraqis just agreed to is exactly that.
0
sailwind
His own words do not support your assertion.
http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=SJbsQ7oUQWw
0
sailwind
Obama never voted against the surge,
And this
http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=qBO5s8NUOxw&NR=1
0
Betzee
The Congressional Record is the place to look for how members voted, not youtube.
On the campaign trail this fall Cindy McCain asserted: "The day that Senator [Barack] Obama decided to cast a vote to not fund my son when he was serving sent a cold chill through my body." What she didn't tell you is that John McCain voted against the same appropriation in March, 2007. Congress controls the purse strings, troop levels are set by the Commander in Chief "in consultation with commanders on the ground."
0
Sarge
"get troops quickly out of Iraq and into Afghanistan"
What! I agree with Nippon5 here. Let other nations take some responsibility and pick up the slack in Afghanistan. Of course we'll keep our fair share of troops there, but U.S. troops shouldn't be the backbone of the force there.
"Obama never voted against the surge"
He was against it, he said he didn't think it would work. He was wrong. I'm afraid he's going to be wrong on another major military decision during his presidency.
0
Betzee
But how much has really changed? The Iraq of November 2008 is a far safer place than it was one year ago. Yet as two new books about America's experience in Iraq make clear, five years of violence and civil war have left a legacy of deep sectarian division. Waiting for an Ordinary Day, by former Wall Street Journal Baghdad bureau chief Farnaz Fassihi, follows the lives of several Iraqis she came to know between 2002 and 2005, and examines how US political and military failures contributed to the cataclysmic breakdown of society—failures that continue to have strong effects today. The Strongest Tribe, a detailed account of the Iraq war by Bing West, a US Marine veteran, picks up the tale from the perspective of the US forces in Iraq, and demonstrates how, by trial and error, luck, and skilled leadership, US commanders turned the war around beginning in late 2006. Both books make it clear that the US occupiers, at the cost of tens of thousands of lives, permitted extremism to spread, and failed to encourage the growth of civil institutions. The books also show that the disastrous situation described by Fassihi is sure to have lasting effects, even as the military strategies described by West have dramatically improved security in some of the most violent regions.
Anyone old enough to remember the early 1970s will recall the days when "we won the Vietnam War" after the Paris Peace Accords were signed. (When I used to show films from that era to students born much later I always had to explain that otherwise they would be totally confused. I worry "the surge worked" may require a similar explanation in the future.)
The Iraqis have yet to agree on how oil revenues should be divvied up. While the Maliki government has agreed to take responsibility for making those payments to the Sunni Awakening Council members who have been on Uncle Sam's payroll, reflected in vastly reduced casualties among US troops, it has not moved to make them members of the Iraqi Armed Forces. There remains much work to be done, work that can only be undertaken by the Iraqis.
0
Madverts
I still find it a constant source of amusement that the people who supported the invasion see the surge as some sort of success. I guess blood on your hands don't half stain....
The only option left is to get out of Iraq. Which is what a Presidebt Obama will clearly be doing.
It may get better it may get worse. But's it's time to piss off home.
0
USAFdude
You almost got it right, sarge. It should read: Let other nations take some responsibility and pick up the slack in Iraq.
OK, be afraid. Just know that we real US troops are looking forward to President Obama. I do my best not to get killed defending your right to trash a President who has even taken office yet. Real supportive, "sarge".
You're welcome.
0
HaroldSteptoe
The US Military should be disbanded and turned into a small but effective self defense force. They cause nothing but trouble and death around the world.
Gawd, it makes peace loving blokes like me mad, seeing all them innocent dead.
I hope Obama demands the US disbands, it would be the best thing to happen this century. Do the right thing Obama, oh yes, rid the military. The world would be much safer.
0
Sarge
Harold: "The US Military should be disbanded and turned into a small but effective self defense force. They cause nothing but trouble and death around the world."
You'd have to be smoking pot to say something like that. I betcha all those Indonesians and Thais who received all that aid from the U.S. military after that monster typhoon and all those Pakistanis who received all that aid from the U.S. military after that monster earthquake wouldn't say that.
"I hope Obama demands the US disbands ( the military )"
I wonder what USAFdude would have to say about that.
0
USAFdude
USAFdude says Harold is dreaming. No way will we "disband" and let the terrorists overrun our country. Not on my watch.
Back to top