Replies

you say “Impeach Obama - yes we can!!!”

****************************
this past week:
“’We're pinned down:’ 4 U.S. Marines die in Afghan ambush..”

They called for air cover; The answer, according to obama’s new ROE? tough - don't want to kill the tallies.

For the CIC to aid and abet the enemy, directly causing and allowing the death of our troops = who now are not allowed air cover - even when ambushed and pinned down, receiving fire and asking for help - are DINIED help - and get killed - in this case - the most marines killed in one battle since the beginning of the war - Is this not treason.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/75036.html

our traitor in chief is aiding and abetting our enemy in killing our troops = ducks in a shooting gallery and not allowed to defend themselves - no cover.

August was the deadliest month of the whole war for our troops = Sept is setting up to be even worse...because of the new ROE - Rules of Engagement...
which are NOT to provide air cover for our troops, even when ambushed, pinned down and being killed. (the rationale for these new ROE’s admits that it will cause more deaths for our troops now but that it will be worth it in the long run. Worth it for WHO? How “”LONG” is that run?)

That is treason. Pure and simple. That is aiding and abetting the enemy, who now knows THEY have the cover, not our troops - and they are ramping it up.

We need to slam Rush, Beck and all with emails demanding that our traitor in chief DEFEND OUR TROOPS,NOT THE TALIBAN.

send them the above link about the battle - the same battles our troops are now subjected to daily.

I am sick - frightened and sick...and our troops feel they are being sent to be fodder for the enemy - who are the real friends of our CIC?

We need to get the Tea Party folk to make signs saying: DEFEND OUR TROOPS,NOT THE TALIBAN...
and make our own signs and stand on the main intersections every day - at least weekends...get folks together - go to your local VFW and such halls and recruit -

Do this in your towns NOW - google for your local Tea Parties in your state...

MAKE YOUR SIGNS and gather friends and get downtown - have flags and music - Greenwoods “Glad to Be an American” is a good one. Alert your local newspapers and let them know you expect coverage. Hand out print outs of this battle, include the URL.

Write letters to the editor and just put the headline:

“’We're pinned down:’ 4 U.S. Marines die in Afghan ambush..”

Make those signs: DENIED AIR COVER as they were being killed...under the “DEFEND OUR TROOPS, NOT THE TALIBAN” - “Honk for our TRoops”

and include the web link -

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/75036.html

and the facts about the new ROE and how deadly it has already been -

(Where's the presses outrage now?)

Let's Roll -

REPOST of a REPOST
EVERYONE NEEDS TO SEE THIS!!!

Wednesday, September 09, 2009 10:40:05 AM · 139 of 187
MestaMachine to RabidBartender; 444Flyer
REPOST:

Thursday, September 03, 2009 6:36:09 AM · 8 of 15
MestaMachine to ImpBill
THIS is why Peters, and many guys with boots on the ground, are angry at the changes in ROE and McChrystal’s throwing caution to the wind where it comes to protecting our troops.
He thinks our TROOPS have acted too defensively in their own best interest and caused the “poor, helpless civilians” humiliation.

NOTE THE DATE.
General wants more troops for Afghan war
By: The Associated Press - The Sentinel-Record - Published: 08/02/2009

MORE TROOPS: Lt. Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the U.S. general in charge of turning around the war in Afghanistan, may recommend significant changes to U.S. and NATO operations in a report due in August.WASHINGTON - The U.S. general put in charge of turning around the war in Afghanistan is likely to recommend significant changes in the campaign and may include a request for more U.S. forces that the White House is expected to resist.

Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s long-awaited reassessment of the war against Taliban insurgents aims for a transformation of the shaky relationship between U.S. forces and Afghan civilians as troops press a counterinsurgency strategy of clearing and holding populated areas, said officials apprised of the report’s contents.

The biggest change urged in McChrystal’s report is a “cultural shift” in how U.S. and foreign troops operate - ranging from how they live and travel among the Afghan population to where and how they fight, a senior military official in Kabul said Friday.

The latest draft of the assessment also urges speeding up the training of Afghan soldiers and police and nearly doubling their numbers to roughly 400,000, said a senior defense official in Washington, one of several uniformed and civilian officials who spoke on condition anonymity because the report has not been made public.

As McChrystal readies the assessment of the war, due in two weeks, numerous U.S. officials and outsiders aware of his thinking suggest that he will request in a companion report that more American troops, probably including marines, be added next year.

Several people familiar with the work being done cautioned that McChrystal could opt not to ask for an increase at all - a recognition that President Barack Obama and other White House advisers would not look favorably on adding new numbers to U.S. forces after already agreeing to boost their ranks by 21,000 troops earlier this year.

The main recommendations for change stem from the military’s new counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan, which is now designed to focus less on going after Taliban strongholds and more on protecting the local population.

The new U.S. strategy is also aimed at helping develop an Afghan government that civilians will embrace rather than siding with the insurgents, two senior military officials said. To achieve that, one official said, the latest draft of McChrystal’s assessment includes the following recommendations:

- Using intelligence less to hunt insurgents and more to understand local, tribal and social power structures in the areas where they operate. McChrystal is considering concentrating troops around populated areas rather than going after sparsely populated mountain areas where Taliban hide.

- Getting troops more active in fighting corruption. U.S. forces will need to take care in their dealings with local Afghan leaders to ensure that they are not perceived by the Afghan population to be empowering corrupt officials.

*PLEASE NOTE THIS PARAGRAPH IN PARTICULAR.
In preparing his assessment of the Afghan command, McChrystal found an American military culture that showed a great concern for troops’ protection – sometimes at the expense of their relations with Afghan civilians.

To change those relations, McChrystal wants American forces to think twice about basic conduct - for instance no longer pointing their guns at people when they pass in convoy or blocking narrow roads with their convoys, while relegating Afghans to the ditches.

To deal with the most contentious aspect of those shaky relations, McChrystal has already committed to try to reduce civilian casualties by issuing new orders that restrict when troops should call in bombing strikes.