What do you think of Obama sending 30,000 troops to Afganistan?

Obama is planning on sending 30,000 troops to Afganistan until July of 2011. Then he said he's going to start a transitio. What do you think of this?What do you think of Obama sending 30,000 troops to Afganistan?McChrystal wanted 60,000 troops with 40,000 as bare minimum needed to get the job done. Obama split the dfference with 30,000 in attempting to make the right happy and announcing a July 2011 withdrawal to make his leftist base happy. Obama needs to give McChrystal what he asked for so we can finish the job and get the heck out of Dodge.What do you think of Obama sending 30,000 troops to Afganistan?
I'll admit I'm no fan of this war, never have been, never will be. If everything ends perfectly over there, I still will believe this was a huge mistake. Nonetheless, I think Obama is stuck on this issue between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, he can leave, and in doing so he'd probably cause far more problems than he'd solve. The Afghanis would believe we're abandoning them again (like after they pushed the USSR out of their country) and our already bad standing with other nations would fall further. His only other option is to stay, and if he's going to stay, he's got to do it right. I can't say for certain that 30,000 is necessary, but then again, I'm not a military strategist. I'm hopeful that he's getting these troops for good reason, but I can't be sure. What I can be sure of is that by staying, we have a possibility to actually do something meaningful in Afghanistan after all the harm we've caused. It's not very likely, but at least there's a chance there.What do you think of Obama sending 30,000 troops to Afganistan?I supported the war until Obama's administration changed the rules of engagement. Now he is making sitting ducks out of our troops. His rules are just insane for a hot war. He is unfit to lead a pack of Cub Scouts much less Marines The change in the rules of engagement by the Obama administration has been responsible for the deaths of four Marines, eight Afghan soldiers and two interpreters. The rules of engagement do not allow our troops to have artillery or air cover if there are any civilians endangered. They requested artillery and air cover when engaged in a fire fight with the Taliban and were denied. The civilians were running ammunition to the Taliban. Now it has come out from our troops in Afghanistan that the rules of engagement do not allow them to fire unless fired upon, no searches unless the village to be searched is warned in advance. They may shoot someone if they are planting an I.E.D. but if they are walking away after planting it they may not shoot. No raids or searches at night. It is a designed defeat by this administration. Gen McChrystal has handed down these rules. Where do you think they came from.It had to be a deal with Karzai and Obama.



http://www.google.com/search?hl=en%26amp;q=Fou鈥?/a>



http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009鈥?/a>
I would have been happier if he had taken the military's request and given them all of the troops they requested, but this is better than nothing.What do you think of Obama sending 30,000 troops to Afganistan?Not for it at all. We need to leave. But fine, send the troops. Then in a 2 years when Karzai still hasn't done anything, then we can say this test failed and bring our men and women home.What do you think of Obama sending 30,000 troops to Afganistan?
I think he should have done it three months ago instead of hemming, hawing, working on bringing the Olympics into Chicago and going after Fox News.
Hmmm...Bush sends in a surge and gets crucified by the Dems. The Dems do the EXACT same thing and Obama is a savior. Can we say double standard???What do you think of Obama sending 30,000 troops to Afganistan?
He's finally facing up to reality and, at least in this case, doing the right thing (even if half-heartedly).
A cold slap in the face of Democrap and anti-war activists.
Obama needs to ---- or get off the pot. Either send 120,000 troops or take them out altogether.
Well we were suppose to be in afghan in the first place that's what the war on terror was about?
he wants to end the war before re-election. so 18 months, and he hopes the surge works.
I think he is an idiot.
He is making the same mistake Bush made with Iraq. There is no reason we should be in Afghanistan.
sure and im rich and famous too
repubs still arent happy.. they are now saying... uh.. shoulda been 60,000 now we are at risk for another terrorist attack
that hope and change is really working out great!!!