US to send 12-15,000 troops to Afghanistan

[politicsisrotten]

The Pentagon will be sending 12,000 to 15,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan, possibly as soon as the end of this year, with planning underway for a further force buildup in 2009.

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/...ghanistan.html

I'm guessing Shannon is gonna be a lot busier..

[Van Damme]

12-15000 more redneck inbred trailor trash let loose on the Afghan people, aren't they lucky

[seabhcan]

The Pentagon will be sending 12,000 to 15,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan, possibly as soon as the end of this year, with planning underway for a further force buildup in 2009.

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/...ghanistan.html

I'm guessing Shannon is gonna be a lot busier..

A sign of desperation. Nato has been there for 7 years now. By this stage in the 1980's the Soviets had long realised the game was up.

[martel]

12-15000 more redneck inbred trailor trash let loose on the Afghan people, aren't they lucky

Thats just a little bit racist isn't it? Incidentally there are large numbers of blacks, latinos and Asians in the US army as well.

[Van Damme]

12-15000 more redneck inbred trailor trash let loose on the Afghan people, aren't they lucky

Thats just a little bit racist isn't it? Incidentally there are large numbers of blacks, latinos and Asians in the US army as well.

Are rednecks a race?

Yes the rank and file of the US army is indeed made up of the poor, uneducated and exploited of every ethnic background.

[Conor the Bold]

SeahBcan, before you start talking yet MORE rubbish...

can you compare the casualty rates between Afghanistan in the 1980's and now?

Oh I'm sorry you can#'t and you won't. Just like yoru conduct on the other thread when you claimed 200k causalities to invade Iran...

[cHeal]

I wonder if this move could be tied to an attack on Iran? It's a small number of troops, but much more than I would have taught necessary in Afganistan at this point.

[Clanrickard]

The Pentagon will be sending 12,000 to 15,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan, possibly as soon as the end of this year, with planning underway for a further force buildup in 2009.

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/...ghanistan.html

I'm guessing Shannon is gonna be a lot busier..

A sign of desperation. Nato has been there for 7 years now. By this stage in the 1980's the Soviets had long realised the game was up.

So they should just let the Taliban take over?

[seabhcan]

The Pentagon will be sending 12,000 to 15,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan, possibly as soon as the end of this year, with planning underway for a further force buildup in 2009.

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/...ghanistan.html

I'm guessing Shannon is gonna be a lot busier..

A sign of desperation. Nato has been there for 7 years now. By this stage in the 1980's the Soviets had long realised the game was up.

So they should just let the Taliban take over?

Yes. Whatever their faults, they are Afhgans. Nato will give up and withdraw in 5 - 10 years anyway.

[Clanrickard]

The Pentagon will be sending 12,000 to 15,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan, possibly as soon as the end of this year, with planning underway for a further force buildup in 2009.

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/...ghanistan.html

I'm guessing Shannon is gonna be a lot busier..

A sign of desperation. Nato has been there for 7 years now. By this stage in the 1980's the Soviets had long realised the game was up.

So they should just let the Taliban take over?

Yes. Whatever their faults, they are Afhgans. Nato will give up and withdraw in 5 - 10 years anyway.

Whatever their faults. Typical rubbish from the spoilt rich in the West. The Taliban would be a nightmare for Afghans especially women. But I suppose hatred of the US is more important.