Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Go Back   Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops > InsideHoops Main Basketball Forums > Off the Court Lounge

Off the Court Lounge Basketball fans talk about everything EXCEPT basketball here

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-16-2012, 07:49 PM   #1
longhornfan1234
Local High School Star
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,838
longhornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this boardlonghornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this boardlonghornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this boardlonghornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this boardlonghornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this boardlonghornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this boardlonghornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this boardlonghornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this boardlonghornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this board
Default Negotiations to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2014

Despite statements by Vice President Joe Biden, the State Department is about to begin formal negotiations over the extension of U.S. troops past 2014, a top State Department official said Tuesday.

Last week, U.S. and Afghan negotiators met in Kabul to talk about the Bilateral Security Agreement that will govern the extension of U.S. troops past 2014, when President Barack Obama said the combat mission in Afghanistan will end and the U.S. will complete the transition of the entire country to Afghan government control.

Also last week, Biden told Americans during his Oct. 11 debate with Republican vice-presidential nominee Paul Ryan that U.S. troops were leaving Afghanistan by 2014.

"We are leaving in 2014, period, and in the process, we're going to be saving over the next 10 years another $800 billion," Biden said. "We've been in this war for over a decade. The primary objective is almost completed. Now all we're doing is putting the Kabul government in a position to be able to maintain their own security. It's their responsibility, not America's."

Marc Grossman, the State Department's special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, explained today that's not the whole story.

Grossman said Tuesday that the point of the upcoming negotiations is to agree on an extension of the U.S. troop presence well past 2014, for the purposes of conducting counterterrorism operations and training and advising the Afghan security forces.

In May, Obama and Afghan President Hamid Karzai signed a Strategic Partnership Agreement that promised an ongoing U.S. commitment to Afghanistan through 2024. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced Oct. 3 that Grossman's deputy, James Warlick, will be the lead U.S. negotiator for the Bilateral Security Agreement that will follow. Karzai's Ambassador to Washington Eklil Hakimi will lead the negotiations for the Afghan side.

Grossman said that while meetings on "how we will manage our forces going forward in Afghanistan," have already taken place, formal negotiations have not yet begun. Once the negotiations formally start, the Bilateral Security Agreement must be completed within one year, according to the Strategic Partnership agreement, Grossman explained.

Some U.S. military officials have said the plan is to keep 25,000 American troops in Afghanistan past 2014, but Grossman insisted that there is no number yet and the 25,000 figure quoted in reports is speculative. NATO announced Monday that it will also keep international troops in Afghanistan past 2014 alongside U.S. troops, not for combat but strictly for the mission of training and advising the Afghans.

Grossman was speaking on a panel at the annual summit of the International Stability Operations Association in Washington. Also on the panel was Under Secretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy, who said that the State Department would need U.S. military troops in Afghanistan to protect them and help them well past 2014.

"Rather than developing our own capabilities, we will be depending on DOD support for functions such as a quick reaction force, personnel recovery, fuel support, explosive ordinance disposal, and medical assistance, by 2015," Kennedy said.

The Cable also asked Kennedy why he testified in a hearing last week that he was "inclined" to support the requests for more security in Libya before the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi that killed Amb. Chris Stevens and three other Americans. Kennedy declined to comment.


http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/po..._afghanistan_s
longhornfan1234 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 08:11 PM   #2
knickballer
Very good NBA starter
 
knickballer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 2010 offseason
Posts: 8,542
knickballer is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterknickballer is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterknickballer is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterknickballer is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterknickballer is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterknickballer is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterknickballer is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterknickballer is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterknickballer is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: Negotiations to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2014

TL;DR

knickballer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 08:22 PM   #3
longhornfan1234
Local High School Star
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,838
longhornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this boardlonghornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this boardlonghornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this boardlonghornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this boardlonghornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this boardlonghornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this boardlonghornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this boardlonghornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this boardlonghornfan1234 has one of the lowest reputations on this board
Default Re: Negotiations to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by knickballer
TL;DR




Where's the libs?


But...but.. Obama said we're leaving in 2014.
longhornfan1234 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 08:28 PM   #4
Balla_Status
______________________
 
Balla_Status's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,784
Balla_Status is a pretty well-respected posterBalla_Status is a pretty well-respected posterBalla_Status is a pretty well-respected posterBalla_Status is a pretty well-respected poster
Default Re: Negotiations to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by knickballer
TL;DR


Receives nobel peace prize

Sends more troops
Balla_Status is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 08:32 PM   #5
johndeeregreen
Oh yeah, Mitch Kramer?
 
johndeeregreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 11,616
johndeeregreen is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterjohndeeregreen is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterjohndeeregreen is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterjohndeeregreen is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterjohndeeregreen is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterjohndeeregreen is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterjohndeeregreen is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterjohndeeregreen is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterjohndeeregreen is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterjohndeeregreen is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterjohndeeregreen is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: Negotiations to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2014

Look, I get the argument, guy says one thing, does another. But are Republicans really going to sit here and bash him for doing this when it's obviously what they wanted all along?
johndeeregreen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 08:37 PM   #6
IcanzIIravor
NBA lottery pick
 
IcanzIIravor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: I walk the earth Kung Fu style
Posts: 5,732
IcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: Negotiations to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2014

We tried the same thing in Iraq, but Iraq wouldn't extend the SOFA agreement so we could keep a small force to train and do counter-terrorism operations. Considering Al Zawahiri remains somewhere between Pakistan and Afghanistan I am not surprised we are trying to keep a small force around for counter-terrorism operations against high value targets and further training of Afghan troops.
IcanzIIravor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 08:43 PM   #7
Godzuki
Banned
 
Godzuki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 9,936
Godzuki is starting to rub some people the wrong way
Default Re: Negotiations to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by longhornfan1234
Despite statements by Vice President Joe Biden, the State Department is about to begin formal negotiations over the extension of U.S. troops past 2014, a top State Department official said Tuesday.

Last week, U.S. and Afghan negotiators met in Kabul to talk about the Bilateral Security Agreement that will govern the extension of U.S. troops past 2014, when President Barack Obama said the combat mission in Afghanistan will end and the U.S. will complete the transition of the entire country to Afghan government control.

Also last week, Biden told Americans during his Oct. 11 debate with Republican vice-presidential nominee Paul Ryan that U.S. troops were leaving Afghanistan by 2014.

"We are leaving in 2014, period, and in the process, we're going to be saving over the next 10 years another $800 billion," Biden said. "We've been in this war for over a decade. The primary objective is almost completed. Now all we're doing is putting the Kabul government in a position to be able to maintain their own security. It's their responsibility, not America's."

Marc Grossman, the State Department's special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, explained today that's not the whole story.

Grossman said Tuesday that the point of the upcoming negotiations is to agree on an extension of the U.S. troop presence well past 2014, for the purposes of conducting counterterrorism operations and training and advising the Afghan security forces.

In May, Obama and Afghan President Hamid Karzai signed a Strategic Partnership Agreement that promised an ongoing U.S. commitment to Afghanistan through 2024. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced Oct. 3 that Grossman's deputy, James Warlick, will be the lead U.S. negotiator for the Bilateral Security Agreement that will follow. Karzai's Ambassador to Washington Eklil Hakimi will lead the negotiations for the Afghan side.

Grossman said that while meetings on "how we will manage our forces going forward in Afghanistan," have already taken place, formal negotiations have not yet begun. Once the negotiations formally start, the Bilateral Security Agreement must be completed within one year, according to the Strategic Partnership agreement, Grossman explained.

Some U.S. military officials have said the plan is to keep 25,000 American troops in Afghanistan past 2014, but Grossman insisted that there is no number yet and the 25,000 figure quoted in reports is speculative. NATO announced Monday that it will also keep international troops in Afghanistan past 2014 alongside U.S. troops, not for combat but strictly for the mission of training and advising the Afghans.

Grossman was speaking on a panel at the annual summit of the International Stability Operations Association in Washington. Also on the panel was Under Secretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy, who said that the State Department would need U.S. military troops in Afghanistan to protect them and help them well past 2014.

"Rather than developing our own capabilities, we will be depending on DOD support for functions such as a quick reaction force, personnel recovery, fuel support, explosive ordinance disposal, and medical assistance, by 2015," Kennedy said.

The Cable also asked Kennedy why he testified in a hearing last week that he was "inclined" to support the requests for more security in Libya before the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi that killed Amb. Chris Stevens and three other Americans. Kennedy declined to comment.


http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/po..._afghanistan_s

i'd assume they're probably going to bring most of the troops home, and keep a small presence or even special ops there which seems to be what the article is saying, instead of a 0 presence. i can't imagine Obama and Biden renigging on that promise on the eve of an election race, more than this being a right wing distortion of a few troops or military being "keeping our troops there" which is how they tend to distort misleading everyone to believe its all or even most of our troops.
Godzuki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 08:51 PM   #8
JtotheIzzo
The Future is Now
 
JtotheIzzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Wolviapolis
Posts: 13,991
JtotheIzzo is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableJtotheIzzo is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableJtotheIzzo is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableJtotheIzzo is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableJtotheIzzo is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableJtotheIzzo is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableJtotheIzzo is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableJtotheIzzo is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableJtotheIzzo is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableJtotheIzzo is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableJtotheIzzo is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable
Default Re: Negotiations to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2014

The US still has almost 80,000 troops in Korea and Japan, they aren't going anywhere any time soon.

'Combat' troops will be taken out in 2014 but there will be 'peace-keeping' permanent forces there for the next 50 years minimum, same with Iraq. These wars are too great an investment to just pack up camp and leave, military personnel need to be there so when US companies start helping with the rebuilding, the army can make sure the US can wield the necessary influence and provide the correct protection to make sure American interests get the plum contracts. That is where the wars start paying off, its not about freedom and flag waving bullshit.

Last edited by JtotheIzzo : 10-16-2012 at 08:54 PM.
JtotheIzzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 10:08 PM   #9
nathanjizzle
OG
 
nathanjizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,700
nathanjizzle has an EXTREMELY bad reputation around these partsnathanjizzle has an EXTREMELY bad reputation around these partsnathanjizzle has an EXTREMELY bad reputation around these partsnathanjizzle has an EXTREMELY bad reputation around these partsnathanjizzle has an EXTREMELY bad reputation around these parts
Default Re: Negotiations to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2014

yes, lets pull out our troops so terrorist groups can regroup and murder american civilians again.
nathanjizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2012, 12:38 AM   #10
Joshumitsu
Local High School Star
 
Joshumitsu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,789
Joshumitsu has an incredible reputation hereJoshumitsu has an incredible reputation hereJoshumitsu has an incredible reputation hereJoshumitsu has an incredible reputation hereJoshumitsu has an incredible reputation hereJoshumitsu has an incredible reputation hereJoshumitsu has an incredible reputation here
Default Re: Negotiations to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2014

It's not a bad thing.

But we need Special Forces to advise the Afghans, not some 19 year old with a rifle.
Joshumitsu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2012, 12:40 AM   #11
Velocirap31
Decent college freshman
 
Velocirap31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jurassic Park
Posts: 2,718
Velocirap31 has a near all-star reputation hereVelocirap31 has a near all-star reputation hereVelocirap31 has a near all-star reputation hereVelocirap31 has a near all-star reputation hereVelocirap31 has a near all-star reputation hereVelocirap31 has a near all-star reputation here
Default Re: Negotiations to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by johndeeregreen
Look, I get the argument, guy says one thing, does another. But are Republicans really going to sit here and bash him for doing this when it's obviously what they wanted all along?

This. A republican president would have done exactly the same thing and then some.
Velocirap31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2012, 01:28 AM   #12
lakerspng
National High School Star
 
lakerspng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,012
lakerspng is considered somewhat coollakerspng is considered somewhat cool
Default Re: Negotiations to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2014

I don't think that's the problem with the hypocrisy.

It's necessary to keep forces in such an unstable region. that's obvious.

The issue is not whether it's the correct choice, the issue is Biden so heavily politicizing a stance simply to strengthen his position in a on-camera debate when he knows for a fact you that he cannot follow through, just to try and look better.

It would be foolish to pull our military support from Afghanistan. Back that truth. Say despite what we might want to do, we have to do what is in the best interest of our country and of the country of afghanistan and we will work with their government to find the best solution. Even if it's the harder choice, we will do our best to make the right choice.

but no, instead because the vast majority of liberals are against the conflict, they flat out mislead and lie about it. both parties do the same sh!t and it's why I don't support either. They're both just so full of sh1t
lakerspng is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2012, 01:58 AM   #13
IcanzIIravor
NBA lottery pick
 
IcanzIIravor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: I walk the earth Kung Fu style
Posts: 5,732
IcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: Negotiations to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by lakerspng
I don't think that's the problem with the hypocrisy.

It's necessary to keep forces in such an unstable region. that's obvious.

The issue is not whether it's the correct choice, the issue is Biden so heavily politicizing a stance simply to strengthen his position in a on-camera debate when he knows for a fact you that he cannot follow through, just to try and look better.

It would be foolish to pull our military support from Afghanistan. Back that truth. Say despite what we might want to do, we have to do what is in the best interest of our country and of the country of afghanistan and we will work with their government to find the best solution. Even if it's the harder choice, we will do our best to make the right choice.

but no, instead because the vast majority of liberals are against the conflict, they flat out mislead and lie about it. both parties do the same sh!t and it's why I don't support either. They're both just so full of sh1t

Are you confusing Iraq with Afghanistan? Currently the majority of American's are not in favor of staying in Afghanistan. Liberals always thought the correct war was Afghanistan. The break down came when we fought a useless war in Iraq. President Obama stated before and after becoming President that Afghanistan was a priority.
IcanzIIravor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2012, 02:13 AM   #14
lakerspng
National High School Star
 
lakerspng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,012
lakerspng is considered somewhat coollakerspng is considered somewhat cool
Default Re: Negotiations to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by IcanzIIravor
Are you confusing Iraq with Afghanistan? Currently the majority of American's are not in favor of staying in Afghanistan. Liberals always thought the correct war was Afghanistan. The break down came when we fought a useless war in Iraq. President Obama stated before and after becoming President that Afghanistan was a priority.

not confusing it at all. Biden promised we would be out of Afghanistan in 2014. he knows we can't. Instead of stating that and stating why, he vehemently backs the statement in the debate so as to not lose his party's favor and support. It's just dumb.
lakerspng is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2012, 02:33 AM   #15
IcanzIIravor
NBA lottery pick
 
IcanzIIravor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: I walk the earth Kung Fu style
Posts: 5,732
IcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterIcanzIIravor is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: Negotiations to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by lakerspng
not confusing it at all. Biden promised we would be out of Afghanistan in 2014. he knows we can't. Instead of stating that and stating why, he vehemently backs the statement in the debate so as to not lose his party's favor and support. It's just dumb.

I don't think it is that. The majority of American's are in favor of pulling out of their so I don't think it was about losing party support. Now I agree he is hedging, since if it is anything like Iraq, it will come down to if we get a new SOFA agreement or not. If we get a SOFA agreement there will be at least a small sizable presence their military wise. If not I expect it will go the same way Iraq has gone. Built up embassy and State Department backed by a large contingent of private contractors.
IcanzIIravor is offline   Reply With Quote
This NBA Basketball News Website Sponsored by:
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:41 PM.




NBA Basketball Forum Key Links:
InsideHoops Home
NBA Rumors
Basketball Blog
NBA Daily Recaps
NBA Videos
Fantasy Basketball
NBA Mock Draft
NBA Free Agents
All-Star Weekend
---
High School Basketball
Streetball
---
InsideHoops Twitter
Search Our Site













Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy