world

U.S. troop deaths double in Afghanistan

7 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

7 Comments
Login to comment

I hope President Obama's surge will have as much success as President Bush's did.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Define success Wolfpack. Neither of these surges and neither of these wars were worth American lives. Obama was elected partly on the idea that he was anti-war. Instead he opted for a surge that increased casualties in a hopeless region that does not deserve to be called a country. Obama seriously let me down on that one. Bush never let me down because I never expected anything but disappointment from him. And he delivered!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Doesn't it stand to reason mathematically, that the more shooting and more encounters you have, the higher the amount of casualties??? There is a direct relationship between the two...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sharky1, why are there more shootings and encounters though? I think you are avoiding admitting something here.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Honorable Obama is doing what he should: Listening to his Generals and supporting them. This is a misleading headline, as well. Waiting for the election results and close out of Iraq, forces in Afghanistan did little to root out the taliban strongholds, instead focusing on engaging the population and civil development. So, when the article claims that deaths have doubled for this portion of the year versus last year, it omits that this time last year there were no offensives of great scale conducted. Pretty simple to understand, really. When you decide to go to the enemy's strong hold and root him out or destroy him, you take more casulties than talking to village elders or building micro hydro electric plants. You have to give it to the numbers though, you can make them say all kinds of things. For instance, 1 Soldier who lost an arm last March in a rocket attack compared to 4 Soldiers who got sprained ankles equals a 300% increase in Casulties! (example) (and I'm not making light of the sacrafice of our men and women in harms way) Salutes Gotta love the objectivity of the Associated Press.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

HeyLars says:

Define success Wolfpack. Neither of these surges and neither of these wars were worth American lives

I define success as acheiving political and military goals. The surge in Iraq clearly achieved that. There is a stable democracy there now despite the efforts of Al Qaeda and Iran to undermine the country. The only positive thing that President Obama has done since becoming president has been the surge. The remainder of his foreign and domestic policy has been a disaster.

Whether or not the wars are worth American lives was already considered when the US Congress voted for war against Iraq and Afghanistan on a bipartisan basis. Another reason why voting for war is such a serious matter is because once voting for it, you can't take it back. I can still remember Hillary Clinton arguing on the Senate floor that she supported the war against Iraq not based upon information from the Bush administration, but on what she knew about Iraq based on information she received while her husband was president and from Democrat party advisors.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

HeyLars...The reason there is more shooting and more encounters is because of the push against the oppressive taliban. If you had been following the news, you could have figured that out...as most other readers can...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites