If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   March was the first month without a U.S. combat death in more than a decade. Thanks Obama   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 156
    More: Spiffy, United States, combat deaths, Enduring Freedom, Hamid Karzai  
•       •       •

748 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Apr 2014 at 2:19 AM (38 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



156 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-02 06:48:02 AM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: It would have been nice to celebrate this good news without the political snark and partisanship.


I was at the gym last night and a few of the TVs were on Fox News as usual. There was no mention of this milestone. The whole hour was about trumpeting some poll that said Iraq/Afgan vets preferred W to Obama as CiC. Funny timing, that.
 
2014-04-02 06:49:00 AM  
This is just more proof that Obama is making us appear weak to our enemies.
 
2014-04-02 06:54:16 AM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: It would have been nice to celebrate this good news without the political snark and partisanship.

But since when are we about nice?


I ran out of nice when I realized that our country is now a nation in perpetual war, and nobody even gives a shiat.

A month without combat deaths? the last DECADE should have had no combat deaths.

/It's easy to celebrate when your standards are so goddamn low.
 
2014-04-02 06:57:39 AM  
Good. It's nice to have a month without a plane full of flag draped coffins to ignore.

Here's to many more months like it.
 
2014-04-02 06:58:30 AM  

Daedalus27: Afghanistan was necessary to fight.


No it wasn't. For what we have spent fighting Afghanistan we could have BOUGHT IT outright. fark fighting, we could have just paid every single terrorists and political official off, and we STILL would have saved billions of dollars over fighting a war for over a decade.
 
2014-04-02 06:59:33 AM  

stoli n coke: Good. It's nice to have a month without a plane full of flag draped coffins to ignore.

Here's to many more months like it.


The planes with flag draped coffins are still there.

They just now have a different countries flag on the coffins, and the planes are going somewhere else to be ignored.
 
2014-04-02 06:59:44 AM  

cretinbob: Meanwhile, in Albequerque

[www.washingtonpost.com image 606x337]


Hey, you wanted illegals out of the country, Obama's getting rid of them and you're mad?
 
2014-04-02 07:02:44 AM  

GardenWeasel: I was at the gym last night and a few of the TVs were on Fox News as usual. There was no mention of this milestone. The whole hour was about trumpeting some poll that said Iraq/Afgan vets preferred W to Obama as CiC. Funny timing, that.


Wonder if they told/asked any of those vets if they knew that Obama has done more for veteran spending then any president ever and that the Republican party has fought him every step of the way on it.
 
2014-04-02 07:04:45 AM  

fluffy2097: Daedalus27: Afghanistan was necessary to fight.

No it wasn't. For what we have spent fighting Afghanistan we could have BOUGHT IT outright. fark fighting, we could have just paid every single terrorists and political official off, and we STILL would have saved billions of dollars over fighting a war for over a decade.


We also could have turned the place into a glass desert and not have had to worry about future black mail from a culture that perpetually seeks to leech off of anyone it can. Both would have been cheaper in the short run, but only one would have been cheaper in the long run.
 
2014-04-02 07:06:18 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: GardenWeasel: I was at the gym last night and a few of the TVs were on Fox News as usual. There was no mention of this milestone. The whole hour was about trumpeting some poll that said Iraq/Afgan vets preferred W to Obama as CiC. Funny timing, that.

Wonder if they told/asked any of those vets if they knew that Obama has done more for veteran spending then any president ever and that the Republican party has fought him every step of the way on it.


As a vet ... source please? Not being a trolling douche, I mean really I would like to see a source on it.
 
2014-04-02 07:08:03 AM  

Lcpl_Dunno: We also could have turned the place into a glass desert and not have had to worry about future black mail from a culture that perpetually seeks to leech off of anyone it can. Both would have been cheaper in the short run, but only one would have been cheaper in the long run.


The only cheap way to deal with the middle east is to build a wall around the entire area, and just ignore the whole goddamn place until the shooting stops for a decade or two.
 
2014-04-02 07:08:05 AM  
And the administration just announced that the VA backlog is down 44% and will be eliminated by 2015.

But of course this had nothing to do with Obama, and both sides are still the same.
 
2014-04-02 07:09:47 AM  
Afghanistan probably wouldn't have turned in to such a cluster fark if part way in to it we didn't have a whole 'nother war against a non-aggressor nation that we diverted all our attention and resources to while putting Afghanistan on the back burner.  Granted, it's Afghanistan, so that's still up for debate.
 
2014-04-02 07:12:44 AM  

DamnYankees: bdub77: This just tells you how fickle and shortsighted the American public is about war.

Or that the general public is not really in a position to know what's best, and that the elected leaders have a profound responsibility to not get caught up in the moment.


but being a knee jerk reactionary is just so...Murican.
 
2014-04-02 07:12:55 AM  

Summoner101: Afghanistan probably wouldn't have turned in to such a cluster fark if part way in to it we didn't have a whole 'nother war against a non-aggressor nation that we diverted all our attention and resources to while putting Afghanistan on the back burner.  Granted, it's Afghanistan, so that's still up for debate.


If the Russians couldn't conquer Afghanistan, what hope do Americans have, honestly?
 
2014-04-02 07:13:09 AM  

fluffy2097: Lcpl_Dunno: We also could have turned the place into a glass desert and not have had to worry about future black mail from a culture that perpetually seeks to leech off of anyone it can. Both would have been cheaper in the short run, but only one would have been cheaper in the long run.

The only cheap way to deal with the middle east is to build a wall around the entire area, and just ignore the whole goddamn place until the shooting stops for a decade or two.


Im not against this. Also cheaper than the war and fact is using the military as guards for this would have produced less casualties. As a general side note though, those guys are pretty damned shady and good with getting past walls or posts or ... really anything. So again I'm down for the glass desert mentality. Full disclosure, I have lost more than a couple friends to those people.

Summoner101: Afghanistan probably wouldn't have turned in to such a cluster fark if part way in to it we didn't have a whole 'nother war against a non-aggressor nation that we diverted all our attention and resources to while putting Afghanistan on the back burner.  Granted, it's Afghanistan, so that's still up for debate.


Yes and no.

Yes, if we were more focused we would have been where we are now years earlier.

No, we aren't done based on the current strategy and basically never will be.
 
2014-04-02 07:15:11 AM  

fluffy2097: Daedalus27: Afghanistan was necessary to fight.

No it wasn't. For what we have spent fighting Afghanistan we could have BOUGHT IT outright. fark fighting, we could have just paid every single terrorists and political official off, and we STILL would have saved billions of dollars over fighting a war for over a decade.


Here's the other problem with Afghanistan.  That country will NEVER, EVER have a stable government that isn't monumentally corrupt or dictatorial.  Want proof?  Look at the entire history of the country.  The idea that America was going to come in, sweep all the bad guys out, and insert a democratic, pro-Western style government elected by the people, was complete fantasy from the get-go.

Military solutions work when you are prepared to flatten the enemy into the stone age and start over.  See Germany circa 1945.
 
2014-04-02 07:16:18 AM  

GardenWeasel: The Stealth Hippopotamus: It would have been nice to celebrate this good news without the political snark and partisanship.

I was at the gym last night and a few of the TVs were on Fox News as usual. There was no mention of this milestone. The whole hour was about trumpeting some poll that said Iraq/Afgan vets preferred W to Obama as CiC. Funny timing, that.


A cursory search for "march combat deaths" on the Google this morning finds much of the same, Usually, any noteworthy news item will have a Fox News link in the 1st 4-shiats... this item, nothing. I went several pages forward and still nothing. Switched to news.google.com, still nothing. Funny that.
 
2014-04-02 07:18:51 AM  

Lcpl_Dunno: Full disclosure, I have lost more than a couple friends to those people.


My condolences.

Personally, my view on war is you are all in, or all out. This doctrine the US military has of being 'peacekeepers' to protect our political interest just leads to protracted bloodshed over generations.

Either we shouldn't start a war at all, or we should be wiping entire sections of the map off the face of the planet, then salting the earth behind us so nothing will ever grow there again.

/Not surprisingly, I rarely believe that war is the go to option for solving a problem.
//I'm more of an isolationist.
 
2014-04-02 07:19:38 AM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: neongoats: Hell, the Coast Guard protects our freedom more than most of the military.

The Coast Guard is part of the military, though in peacetime it answers to the Vaterlandssicherheitsdepartment instead of the Pentagon.


Is this some form of filter pwnage?
 
2014-04-02 07:31:05 AM  
Well, at any rate, I'll bet the guy that didn't get killed last month is happy about it.
 
2014-04-02 07:32:49 AM  

bdub77: Good.

A February Gallup survey found that 49 percent thought it was a mistake and 48 percent did not. That was a radical shift from November 2001, when 9 percent thought it was a mistake while 89 percent did not.

This just tells you how fickle and shortsighted the American public is about war.

I have chickenhawk friends telling me they think Taft is weak for not starting WW III w/Pootie Tang for Crimea.

/notthisshiatagain.jpg


This is true. That's why when the next president wants to blockade Crimea or something, the American public will be 60% in favor....if that president is Republican. If they're a Democrat it'll be a grievous abuse of power - unless it's successful and the economy is good, in which case the American people will say, "Fire at will!"
 
2014-04-02 07:33:16 AM  

fluffy2097: Lcpl_Dunno: Full disclosure, I have lost more than a couple friends to those people.

My condolences.

Personally, my view on war is you are all in, or all out. This doctrine the US military has of being 'peacekeepers' to protect our political interest just leads to protracted bloodshed over generations.

Either we shouldn't start a war at all, or we should be wiping entire sections of the map off the face of the planet, then salting the earth behind us so nothing will ever grow there again.

/Not surprisingly, I rarely believe that war is the go to option for solving a problem.
//I'm more of an isolationist.


I could not agree with you more. Literally. If we used "war" as the threat to end all discussions and we meant it (demolish the place salt the earth and ignore it for a dozen generations) then other wouldn't be inclined to do things to promote us going to war with them. That said (as you said) it should  notbe the first, second, or even third resort on the regular. Hell preferably war is effectively the answer when all other reasonable options have failed.

That said, blackmailing the US is not a reasonable option IMO and should immediately be answered with "Look we can come to a real solution or I can grind your civilization to dust. Your choice."

Lastly, I was an AD Marine. We aren't cops and using the USMC as cops only invites problems. I have a friend that killed a guy (because really, that's what Marines do) under  reallywrong circumstances. He didn't know and he has been really  reallymessed up over it ever since. Wanna bet that the locals are equally as unhappy or more? Can't train people to "locate, close with, and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver" and then ask them to be local PD.
 
2014-04-02 07:34:51 AM  

Alphax: A month without BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!


Cthulu is going to be pissed.
 
2014-04-02 07:39:56 AM  
fluffy2097:

My condolences.


Also because I am an asshat (and forgot the first time around), thank you for your condolences.
 
2014-04-02 07:44:55 AM  
What we need to do is put a job creator into the White House, who will soon detect the most wickedly diabolical plot ever, truly, against America, truly, since the beginning of time, and then it will be our destiny to Remember the Heroes and Support the Troops and Keep America Safe and Go to War with the Army We Have and most importantly Cut Job Killing Tax Job Killers on the Job Creators, and remember folks, keep on shopping.

/truly
 
2014-04-02 07:59:50 AM  

Lcpl_Dunno: fluffy2097: Lcpl_Dunno: Full disclosure, I have lost more than a couple friends to those people.

My condolences.

Personally, my view on war is you are all in, or all out. This doctrine the US military has of being 'peacekeepers' to protect our political interest just leads to protracted bloodshed over generations.

Either we shouldn't start a war at all, or we should be wiping entire sections of the map off the face of the planet, then salting the earth behind us so nothing will ever grow there again.

/Not surprisingly, I rarely believe that war is the go to option for solving a problem.
//I'm more of an isolationist.

I could not agree with you more. Literally. If we used "war" as the threat to end all discussions and we meant it (demolish the place salt the earth and ignore it for a dozen generations) then other wouldn't be inclined to do things to promote us going to war with them. That said (as you said) it should  notbe the first, second, or even third resort on the regular. Hell preferably war is effectively the answer when all other reasonable options have failed.

That said, blackmailing the US is not a reasonable option IMO and should immediately be answered with "Look we can come to a real solution or I can grind your civilization to dust. Your choice."

Lastly, I was an AD Marine. We aren't cops and using the USMC as cops only invites problems. I have a friend that killed a guy (because really, that's what Marines do) under  reallywrong circumstances. He didn't know and he has been really  reallymessed up over it ever since. Wanna bet that the locals are equally as unhappy or more? Can't train people to "locate, close with, and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver" and then ask them to be local PD.


I agree. Every branch of the US military was created with a specific job in mind.  Marines are shock troops.  They are a sledgehammer, their role is kill people and break stuff, they are very good at killing people and breaking stuff.  If this is the 'new face of combat' then maybe it's time for another branch that is trained and equipped to stabilize a country after the marines finish killing and breaking stuff.

This is not a slam against the marines, killing people and breaking stuff is necessary in any conflict.
 
2014-04-02 08:24:42 AM  

fluffy2097: Summoner101: Afghanistan probably wouldn't have turned in to such a cluster fark if part way in to it we didn't have a whole 'nother war against a non-aggressor nation that we diverted all our attention and resources to while putting Afghanistan on the back burner.  Granted, it's Afghanistan, so that's still up for debate.

If the Russians couldn't conquer Afghanistan, what hope do Americans have, honestly?


Well, it's the usual problem everyone since Ghenghis Khan faced: you can conquer the nation easily, but you can't get the tribes to do anything differently from what they have been doing, so they fight back. After a while, it gets tiring and the original intent has less support, so the guest army goes away.
 
2014-04-02 08:26:52 AM  
i2.cdn.turner.com
Oh, so NOW it's ok for a President to stay out of wars? Fark you! Build your own damn houses from now on!
 
2014-04-02 08:39:28 AM  

Lcpl_Dunno: As a vet ... source please? Not being a trolling douche, I mean really I would like to see a source on it.


First off - best ever is a bit hyperbolic, should have said best in my life time.

A list from Google:
Politifact list on his campaign promises on veterans
White House's list
Veterans of Foreign Wars list
Some Guy on Tumblr's list

He's pushed for (and gotten) huge increases in money for veteran medical care, despite fights with Congress.  We've had a number of threads over the years on this.
 
2014-04-02 08:41:41 AM  
Well, we're still engaged in warfare, we've just learned to eliminate the risk to our soldiers.  When you're fighting dudes who have barely managed to put together an arsenal with automatic weapons with missile-wielding death-bots controlled from the middle of a body of water 400 miles away, that's not exactly putting you at imminent risk of retaliation.
 
2014-04-02 08:42:31 AM  
Imagine President McCain and how many wars we would be in right now.
//That is all.
 
2014-04-02 08:44:03 AM  
Well this is good news, and I should be happy. But then I think about the generation of kids that's has grown up never knowing what peace looks like, and I get all angry again. Oh, and the thousands of war veterans that are already crippled for life. So yeah. I'm not celebrating.
 
2014-04-02 08:49:14 AM  

Egoy3k: I agree. Every branch of the US military was created with a specific job in mind.  Marines are shock troops.  They are a sledgehammer, their role is kill people and break stuff, they are very good at killing people and breaking stuff.  If this is the 'new face of combat' then maybe it's time for another branch that is trained and equipped to stabilize a country after the marines finish killing and breaking stuff.

This is not a slam against the marines, killing people and breaking stuff is necessary in any conflict.


http://www.ted.com/talks/thomas_barnett_draws_a_new_map_for_peace
 
2014-04-02 08:51:32 AM  
Ah, but not being in a war means we are cowards, and cowards die a thousand deaths, so the death toll is actually eleventy billion.
 
2014-04-02 08:55:09 AM  

UNC_Samurai: Lee Jackson Beauregard: neongoats: Hell, the Coast Guard protects our freedom more than most of the military.

The Coast Guard is part of the military, though in peacetime it answers to the Vaterlandssicherheitsdepartment instead of the Pentagon.

Is this some form of filter pwnage?



Department of Fatherland Security, nicht warh?
 
2014-04-02 09:00:57 AM  
Thanks Taft
 
2014-04-02 09:03:14 AM  

UNC_Samurai: Lee Jackson Beauregard: neongoats: Hell, the Coast Guard protects our freedom more than most of the military.

The Coast Guard is part of the military, though in peacetime it answers to the Vaterlandssicherheitsdepartment instead of the Pentagon.

Is this some form of filter pwnage?

Seems like someone is virally hawking something. Pretty clever I guess? Might work?
http://www.zazzle.de/department+von+vaterland+sicherheit+geschenke
 
2014-04-02 09:08:02 AM  

Befuddled: In other news; we've been at war for over a decade now and nobody seems to think that's abnormal.


We've been at "war" since WWII, at least. Hell, technically we're still at war with N. Korea, since no peace treaty was signed.
 
2014-04-02 09:12:18 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: Befuddled: In other news; we've been at war for over a decade now and nobody seems to think that's abnormal.

We've been at "war" since WWII, at least. Hell, technically we're still at war with N. Korea, since no peace treaty was signed.



The military industrial complex is full steam ahead!

Thanks Taft
 
2014-04-02 09:13:27 AM  
That should give them plenty of time to answer questions about Benghazi.
 
2014-04-02 09:17:10 AM  
What was that old episode of original Star Trek?  A world has a non-destructive method of war.. so citizens are just expected to report to the disintegration rooms when told to, but there's no infrastructure destroyed.  It's neat and clean, so they never have a reason to end the war.

We're not too far from that now.. just a tiny percentage of the population doing all the fighting, and all the destruction is overseas in other nations.

It might have been 'A Taste of Armageddon'.
 
2014-04-02 09:20:12 AM  
Obama
study it out
idiot
wtf
filters
lol

/*sigh*
 
2014-04-02 09:24:12 AM  

Alphax: What was that old episode of original Star Trek?  A world has a non-destructive method of war.. so citizens are just expected to report to the disintegration rooms when told to, but there's no infrastructure destroyed.  It's neat and clean, so they never have a reason to end the war.

We're not too far from that now.. just a tiny percentage of the population doing all the fighting, and all the destruction is overseas in other nations.

It might have been 'A Taste of Armageddon'.


... if these wars should be fought anywhere, they should be on US soil, and we'd see how many more wars the US would be iffy to get into.

/not born in the US
//live here
///afraid one day south america is targeted.
 
2014-04-02 09:24:55 AM  

theknuckler_33: Obama
study it out
idiot
wtf
filters
lol

/*sigh*


Yes, that was fun yesterday.
 
2014-04-02 09:26:48 AM  
And at the end of Obama's tenure as Commander in Chief, both Iraq and Afganistan will be back in the hands of the terrorists we were trying to remove, turning this into a complete waste of time, treasure and lives. Oh, and Iran will most likly have a nuke. So yeah, Thanks Obama.
 
2014-04-02 09:28:27 AM  

Alphax: We're not too far from that now.. just a tiny percentage of the population doing all the fighting, and all the destruction is overseas in other nations.


The war-fighting population - young adult males - is a small percentage of any population, so it's always been a small percentage of the population that does all the fighting. Also, keeping the enemy as far away from your own infrastructure as possible is one of the basic tenets of war. These don't really signify anything new.
 
2014-04-02 09:29:20 AM  

Brick-House: And at the end of Obama's tenure as Commander in Chief, both Iraq and Afganistan will be back in the hands of the terrorists we were trying to remove, turning this into a complete waste of time, treasure and lives. Oh, and Iran will most likly have a nuke. So yeah, Thanks Obama.


You have a sweet ass
 
2014-04-02 09:31:18 AM  

qorkfiend: Alphax: We're not too far from that now.. just a tiny percentage of the population doing all the fighting, and all the destruction is overseas in other nations.

The war-fighting population - young adult males - is a small percentage of any population, so it's always been a small percentage of the population that does all the fighting. Also, keeping the enemy as far away from your own infrastructure as possible is one of the basic tenets of war. These don't really signify anything new.


No, we're using smaller numbers of soldiers, with larger numbers of tours of duty, than in the past.  And the topic hardly comes up in our media, or in our Congressional debates.  It's something that just happens, and most people don't notice.
 
2014-04-02 09:34:04 AM  
3.bp.blogspot.com

coloradoright.files.wordpress.com
 
Displayed 50 of 156 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report