it’s slow process, but it doesn’t make it wrong. the afghan police/army needs to learn somewhere, right?

No I agree with you. It’s just fucked up.

didn’t see that, but doesn’t surprise me. his problem was size and speed, never assignment or lack of fundamentals. dude brings the hammer and always wraps up. one of my favorite buckeyes ever…glad you’re enjoying him.

Yeah, have to assume that sort of thing doesn’t go unnoticed by the coaching staff. And even if what he lacks makes him less than ideal as a starter, I bet he has a roster spot pretty well locked up now. And an ideal special teamer.

Stuff like we are depending on the Afghan trained military to enforce laws, protect outliers, etc. and they are doing a pathetic job of it because they are idiot Afghans, while on the other hand the swift, stern, organized former remnants of the Taliban are still capable of winning hearts and minds because they simply aren’t as incompetent.

you get control by buying warlords and the warlords mandate that they need involvement for their incompetent men.

in kill bin laden, about operation anaconda, they get into this BIG TIME. delta guys, the best in the world, were prohibited from FIRING SHOTS because the afghans were promised the job.

when the afghans left the real estate they conqured every night it got taken back and the delta guys were left up there alone.

there are so many intertwined political webs in that region that it’s almost impossible to toe the line while not getting the entire region of 30mm people in an organized insurgency against you.

it’s slow process, but it doesn’t make it wrong. the afghan police/army needs to learn somewhere, right?

Did you see that Kurt Coleman missed 0 tackles in 2010, leading all NFL secondary players (per PFP)?

didn’t see that, but doesn’t surprise me. his problem was size and speed, never assignment or lack of fundamentals. dude brings the hammer and always wraps up. one of my favorite buckeyes ever…glad you’re enjoying him.

I think the manner in which we are trying to rebuild the place is also part of the problem. A buddy of mine just got back with some real practical intel. Stuff like we are depending on the Afghan trained military to enforce laws, protect outliers, etc. and they are doing a pathetic job of it because they are idiot Afghans, while on the other hand the swift, stern, organized former remnants of the Taliban are still capable of winning hearts and minds because they simply aren’t as incompetent.

Fucking A. It seems like we’re never going to achieve anything over there.

we should at least try and rebuild the place, no? leaving wouldn’t exactly endear anyone to american hearts.

I think the manner in which we are trying to rebuild the place is also part of the problem. A buddy of mine just got back with some real practical intel. Stuff like we are depending on the Afghan trained military to enforce laws, protect outliers, etc. and they are doing a pathetic job of it because they are idiot Afghans, while on the other hand the swift, stern, organized former remnants of the Taliban are still capable of winning hearts and minds because they simply aren’t as incompetent.

so what’s your plan? i mean, if it’s so crystal clear, by all means, lets have it.

but im all for letting al qaeda have free reign in the FATA. it’s not like pakistan has a corrupt, easily bought government with nuclear capabilities or anything…

Spence, the short answer is your right, there is no plan that is without risk or without costs. I didn’t mean to make it seem that way.

The long answer is, well, really fucking long. Don’t mean to cop out, but maybe another time.

Did you see that Kurt Coleman missed 0 tackles in 2010, leading all NFL secondary players (per PFP)?

Well, unfortunately, that’s not all he said.

However, he said, his policy on the border issue “means that the parties themselves — Israelis and Palestinians — will negotiate a border that is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967,” the eve of the war. Those negotiations will involve “mutually agreed-upon” land swaps to deal with changing conditions of recent decades, he said.
“That’s what mutually agreed-upon swaps means. It is a well-known formula to all who have worked on this issue for a generation,” Obama said to applause. “It allows the parties themselves to account for the changes that have taken place over the last 44 years,” including the new demographic realities on the ground and the needs of both sides.

His proposal contained “nothing particularly original,” he said, adding that “this basic framework for negotiations has long been the basis for discussions among the parties, including previous U.S. administrations.”
“If there is a controversy, then, it’s not based in substance,” Obama said.

It’s a lose-lose situation, but al qaeda isn’t the scary threat you’re making it out to be. It’s not like we are going to ever leave Afghanistan fully. We will still use special ops in the region. Having an entire army there is doing us very little good, and it’s helping to crush our fiscal situation.

i have an idea to help alleviate that bad fiscal situation…but that’s neither here nor there.

but there’s a lot of value having a mobilized military right on pakistan’s doorstep. and regardless of your thoughts on al qaeda’s capability, the FATA is a breeding ground for insurgents. leaving the area in the state it is (largely due to our involvement) would be just horrible to the people living there.

we should at least try and rebuild the place, no? leaving wouldn’t exactly endear anyone to american hearts.

It’s a lose-lose situation, but al qaeda isn’t the scary threat you’re making it out to be.

Sounds like 1998 in here.

Doesn’t this go against what Husker said? Isn’t what Obama saying re: Israel actually much different than what previous Presidents have said about the 1967 lines? The settlements? The Israeli forces in Palestinian areas?

Obama is not the first President to hint that Israeli settlement activity in Palestinian lands is hurting the peace process (and it is the number one issue). If he takes action he’ll be the first since GHWB to do so.

And everyone has learned an important domestic politics lesson from Bush the first’s 1992 fate.

Obama said the 2-state solution (which would mean the borders go back) is the US policy. Every other president has said the same things privately and the policy towards Israel/Palestine has been such on an unofficial level, but Obama was the first Pres to say it in a speech.

Well, unfortunately, that’s not all he said.

but im all for letting al qaeda have free reign in the FATA. it’s not like pakistan has a corrupt, easily bought government with nuclear capabilities or anything…

It’s a lose-lose situation, but al qaeda isn’t the scary threat you’re making it out to be. It’s not like we are going to ever leave Afghanistan fully. We will still use special ops in the region. Having an entire army there is doing us very little good, and it’s helping to crush our fiscal situation.

Doesn’t this go against what Husker said? Isn’t what Obama saying re: Israel actually much different than what previous Presidents have said about the 1967 lines? The settlements? The Israeli forces in Palestinian areas?

Obama said the 2-state solution (which would mean the borders go back) is the US policy. Every other president has said the same things privately and the policy towards Israel/Palestine has been such on an unofficial level, but Obama was the first Pres to say it in a speech.

Read up on it. The difference is, settlements and such were rarely discussed with W as the war on terror was his main thing. The two-state solution has always been the unofficial stance. Obama simply made it the official one.

Obama has taken things much further concerning settlements, the ’67 lines, and troops in Palestinian territories. I’m confident this is not in line with previous administrations.

“Keep over 100,000 Americans there and spend $50 billion a year there until magical ponies appear that turn Afghanistan into a modern democracy” is not a reasonable policy. There’s no clear path. There are no clear goals that can be articulated by anyone in either administration. It’s just “wait and hope and die and spend”.

so what’s your plan? i mean, if it’s so crystal clear, by all means, lets have it.

but im all for letting al qaeda have free reign in the FATA. it’s not like pakistan has a corrupt, easily bought government with nuclear capabilities or anything…

wonder how rudy G even gets to the point where he’s considering running again…

Never underestimate a politicians ego and ambition.

It would be a lot better for everyone if he followed up his talk with real actions re: settlements, but that’s likely something that isn’t happening until his second term (if he actually intends on it).

Doesn’t this go against what Husker said? Isn’t what Obama saying re: Israel actually much different than what previous Presidents have said about the 1967 lines? The settlements? The Israeli forces in Palestinian areas?