<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Afghan Catastrophe Under Obama</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=afghan-tragedy-under-obama</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2014 10:23:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4163292</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 00:18:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4163292</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;1) We came up empty? Isn&#039;t UBL sleeping with the fishes?&quot; 
 
Not from the mass deployments, no. 
 
&quot;2) This, much to the chagrin of the hawks who&#039;ve never seen battle, is exactly the administration&#039;s strategy.&quot; 
 
There&#039;s a huge difference between avoiding escalation in war, and going in to win one but then handing victory to the belligerent. You don&#039;t have a clue what 0&#039;Bama&#039;s strategy is because even 0&#039;Bama doesn&#039;t know. He doesn&#039;t actually have a war strategy, he has a political strategy for the war. That strategy changes with the politics, like the weather. He&#039;s a proud follower. Remember? ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&quot;1) We came up empty? Isn&#039;t UBL sleeping with the fishes?&quot; </p>
<p>Not from the mass deployments, no. </p>
<p>&quot;2) This, much to the chagrin of the hawks who&#039;ve never seen battle, is exactly the administration&#039;s strategy.&quot; </p>
<p>There&#039;s a huge difference between avoiding escalation in war, and going in to win one but then handing victory to the belligerent. You don&#039;t have a clue what 0&#039;Bama&#039;s strategy is because even 0&#039;Bama doesn&#039;t know. He doesn&#039;t actually have a war strategy, he has a political strategy for the war. That strategy changes with the politics, like the weather. He&#039;s a proud follower. Remember? </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4163273</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 00:11:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4163273</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;It does not matter if a commander actions resulted in 4%, 20% or 1% casualties, when there was the option to achieve the same result with fewer casualties, he is not to be commended. He is to be reviled. After a while you get to know what effort (troop strengths), tactics &amp; equipment get what results. This is not an arcane art. Many soldiers &amp; former soldiers &amp; others know this. The Commander in Chief has advisors.While he may have eschewed studying military science earlier in life there is no excuse for engaging in losing strategies. &quot; 
 
 
Exactly, if you&#039;re out to achieve your objectives...unless your objective is to transform the host nation and continue your treason. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&quot;It does not matter if a commander actions resulted in 4%, 20% or 1% casualties, when there was the option to achieve the same result with fewer casualties, he is not to be commended. He is to be reviled. After a while you get to know what effort (troop strengths), tactics &amp; equipment get what results. This is not an arcane art. Many soldiers &amp; former soldiers &amp; others know this. The Commander in Chief has advisors.While he may have eschewed studying military science earlier in life there is no excuse for engaging in losing strategies. &quot; </p>
<p>Exactly, if you&#039;re out to achieve your objectives&#8230;unless your objective is to transform the host nation and continue your treason. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4163185</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2013 23:41:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4163185</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;The context? You&#039;re talking to me about context while letting Tapson slide? He states that 72 percent of Afghan war casualties have been under the Obama administration. If Tapson had your reverence for context, he would also point out that there was a surge and a much bigger focus on Afghanistan under Obama than there was under Bush. To your point, more troops + more operations + an enemy that has been allowed to regroup over 6 years of &quot;priority Iraq&quot; = more casualties.&quot; 
 
The casualties didn&#039;t come from the surge. They came from the changes to tactics and rules of engagement. And other idiotic policy changes, like training our enemy. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&quot;The context? You&#039;re talking to me about context while letting Tapson slide? He states that 72 percent of Afghan war casualties have been under the Obama administration. If Tapson had your reverence for context, he would also point out that there was a surge and a much bigger focus on Afghanistan under Obama than there was under Bush. To your point, more troops + more operations + an enemy that has been allowed to regroup over 6 years of &quot;priority Iraq&quot; = more casualties.&quot; </p>
<p>The casualties didn&#039;t come from the surge. They came from the changes to tactics and rules of engagement. And other idiotic policy changes, like training our enemy. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: trickyblain</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4162399</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[trickyblain]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:45:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4162399</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The context? You&#039;re talking to me about context while letting Tapson slide? He states that 72 percent of Afghan war casualties have been under the Obama administration. If Tapson had your reverence for context, he would also point out that there was a surge and a much bigger focus on Afghanistan under Obama than there was under Bush. To your point, more troops + more operations + an enemy that has been allowed to regroup over 6 years of &quot;priority Iraq&quot; = more casualties. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The context? You&#039;re talking to me about context while letting Tapson slide? He states that 72 percent of Afghan war casualties have been under the Obama administration. If Tapson had your reverence for context, he would also point out that there was a surge and a much bigger focus on Afghanistan under Obama than there was under Bush. To your point, more troops + more operations + an enemy that has been allowed to regroup over 6 years of &quot;priority Iraq&quot; = more casualties. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wsk</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4161750</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[wsk]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2013 16:18:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4161750</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[MarySue, I respectfully disagree. The low-eared man-child messiah is anything but incompetent. In fact, he may be one of the most successful presidents in American history in terms of accomplishing his goals.  He enabled the govt&#039; to take over 1/7 th of the US economy (Obamacare), he turned over the largest industrial company (GM) to his socialist brothers (the UAW). Green Energy, unaccountable czars and soon he will use presidential edict to take awy our 2 nd Amendment rights,. Traitorous? Oh. yes. Incompetent, most assuredly, no. 
Welcome to the new Amerika. Welcome to the new normal. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MarySue, I respectfully disagree. The low-eared man-child messiah is anything but incompetent. In fact, he may be one of the most successful presidents in American history in terms of accomplishing his goals.  He enabled the govt&#039; to take over 1/7 th of the US economy (Obamacare), he turned over the largest industrial company (GM) to his socialist brothers (the UAW). Green Energy, unaccountable czars and soon he will use presidential edict to take awy our 2 nd Amendment rights,. Traitorous? Oh. yes. Incompetent, most assuredly, no.<br />
Welcome to the new Amerika. Welcome to the new normal. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wsk</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4161732</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[wsk]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2013 16:13:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4161732</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why the silence about 72% of U.S. casualties in Afghanistan occurring during this administration? 
Duh. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why the silence about 72% of U.S. casualties in Afghanistan occurring during this administration?<br />
Duh. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4160378</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2013 08:47:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4160378</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Despite Tapson&#039;s misleading numbers, many, many more troops (and civilians) died under Bush&#039;s first term alone. The current administration -- amidst the howling and sniveling of the right -- ended this in Iraq, and is doing the same in Afghanistan.&quot; 
 
Oversimplifying is the only game you have? Context is your enemy. By your measure, Bush would be successful if he acted like Clinton and limited his offensive military tactics to cruise missile launches and occasional AF sorties to protect Muslims. The rest can be achieved through appeasement, right? 
 ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&quot;Despite Tapson&#039;s misleading numbers, many, many more troops (and civilians) died under Bush&#039;s first term alone. The current administration &#8212; amidst the howling and sniveling of the right &#8212; ended this in Iraq, and is doing the same in Afghanistan.&quot; </p>
<p>Oversimplifying is the only game you have? Context is your enemy. By your measure, Bush would be successful if he acted like Clinton and limited his offensive military tactics to cruise missile launches and occasional AF sorties to protect Muslims. The rest can be achieved through appeasement, right? </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Len_Powder</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4160114</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Len_Powder]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:25:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4160114</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;So naturally our senior military officials have placed the blame for the green-on-blue murders on everything from the strain of Ramadan fasting, to summer heat, and most recently, to our troops&#8217; own &#8220;ignorance of, or lack of empathy for Muslim and/or Afghan cultural norms.&#8221; 
 
It seems our soldiers are not sufficiently politically correct, accepting of diversity or cultural equivalence, or sensitive to the feelings of those who hold us in contempt and whose primary aim is to end our existence. Of what possible use could we be to Afghanistan given our troops&#039; moral decrepitude? In fact, would it not make a great deal of sense to not only withdraw our soldiers from all Muslim countries but to disband our military altogether? After all, they seem incapable of conforming to their new mission as defined by the Obama Team, which is to be diplomats and social workers in occupied countries.  ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&quot;So naturally our senior military officials have placed the blame for the green-on-blue murders on everything from the strain of Ramadan fasting, to summer heat, and most recently, to our troops&rsquo; own &ldquo;ignorance of, or lack of empathy for Muslim and/or Afghan cultural norms.&rdquo; </p>
<p>It seems our soldiers are not sufficiently politically correct, accepting of diversity or cultural equivalence, or sensitive to the feelings of those who hold us in contempt and whose primary aim is to end our existence. Of what possible use could we be to Afghanistan given our troops&#039; moral decrepitude? In fact, would it not make a great deal of sense to not only withdraw our soldiers from all Muslim countries but to disband our military altogether? After all, they seem incapable of conforming to their new mission as defined by the Obama Team, which is to be diplomats and social workers in occupied countries.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: trickyblain</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4159371</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[trickyblain]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2013 03:27:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4159371</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Despite Tapson&#039;s misleading numbers, many, many more troops (and civilians) died under Bush&#039;s first term alone. The current administration -- amidst the howling and sniveling of the right -- ended this in Iraq, and is doing the same in Afghanistan. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Despite Tapson&#039;s misleading numbers, many, many more troops (and civilians) died under Bush&#039;s first term alone. The current administration &#8212; amidst the howling and sniveling of the right &#8212; ended this in Iraq, and is doing the same in Afghanistan. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: trickyblain</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4159358</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[trickyblain]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2013 03:23:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4159358</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Our mission there should only ever have been to find bin Laden and eradicate the Taliban to the last man; we turned up empty on the former, and if we&#8217;re not going to follow through with the latter, then the least we can do is quit setting up our own soldiers and advisers for eradication at the hands of the Taliban and friends.&quot; 
 
1) We came up empty? Isn&#039;t UBL sleeping with the fishes? 
2) This, much to the chagrin of the  hawks who&#039;ve never seen battle, is exactly the administration&#039;s strategy. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&quot;Our mission there should only ever have been to find bin Laden and eradicate the Taliban to the last man; we turned up empty on the former, and if we&rsquo;re not going to follow through with the latter, then the least we can do is quit setting up our own soldiers and advisers for eradication at the hands of the Taliban and friends.&quot; </p>
<p>1) We came up empty? Isn&#039;t UBL sleeping with the fishes?<br />
2) This, much to the chagrin of the  hawks who&#039;ve never seen battle, is exactly the administration&#039;s strategy. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ghostwriter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4158410</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ghostwriter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 22:10:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4158410</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Taliban aren&#039;t the most peaceful people out there. 
 ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Taliban aren&#039;t the most peaceful people out there. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bob e</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4158301</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[bob e]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 21:34:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4158301</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[i do not know how this country is gonna make 4 more years of this black muslim phoney. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i do not know how this country is gonna make 4 more years of this black muslim phoney. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Walter Sieruk</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4157876</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Walter Sieruk]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 19:20:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4157876</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One of the many nonsensical polices of Obama in his administration concerning Afghanistan is that he feels ,in spite of all the facts, that some kind of workable &quot; peace alliance&quot; might be workedout between the Karzai goverment and the Taliban. This is worse then folly. One of the reasons is that the Taliban have worked very hard to prove by their own actions,time and time again, that they are a group a cruel, ruthless thugs with honor . Thus they would keep their word in any &quot;negotiations&quot; that they may have with the people of the Karzai goverment only as long as it would suite them and no longer. Instead of listening to the foolishness of Obama nad his polices in Afghanistan it would be a good idea for the the people in the Karzai goverment to heed the wisdom of Sun Tzu in THE ART OF WAR. Which teaches &quot;We cannot enter into an alliance with neighboring princes until we are acquainted with their designs.&quot; To put this in a more current and updated way, it may be said &quot;We cannot enter into an alliance with the Taliban until we are acquainted with their designs.&quot;   With the Taliban we all may be sure that their intentions are evil. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the many nonsensical polices of Obama in his administration concerning Afghanistan is that he feels ,in spite of all the facts, that some kind of workable &quot; peace alliance&quot; might be workedout between the Karzai goverment and the Taliban. This is worse then folly. One of the reasons is that the Taliban have worked very hard to prove by their own actions,time and time again, that they are a group a cruel, ruthless thugs with honor . Thus they would keep their word in any &quot;negotiations&quot; that they may have with the people of the Karzai goverment only as long as it would suite them and no longer. Instead of listening to the foolishness of Obama nad his polices in Afghanistan it would be a good idea for the the people in the Karzai goverment to heed the wisdom of Sun Tzu in THE ART OF WAR. Which teaches &quot;We cannot enter into an alliance with neighboring princes until we are acquainted with their designs.&quot; To put this in a more current and updated way, it may be said &quot;We cannot enter into an alliance with the Taliban until we are acquainted with their designs.&quot;   With the Taliban we all may be sure that their intentions are evil. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sun Tzu</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4157319</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sun Tzu]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:35:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4157319</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[People take risks for jobs they believe in &amp; that they are trained for, but at the same time they want compensation &amp; do not want their lives wasted. Examples would be pilot, stuntman firefighter, policeman, soldier, astronaut &amp; so many others. 
 
There is a difference from being exposed to an increased risk of danger &amp; having threat of danger being carelessly increased more because of a naive, blase attitude &amp; policies of a dilettante president. 
 
&quot;If you have to use our live, use them don&#039;t misuse them.&quot; 
 
You commit troops to a conflict. You know a percentage are going to die.  That is just the way it is.  But there are acceptable percentage &amp; unacceptable percentages. I think at one time if an invading force suffered more than 15% casualties in a battle  (circa WW2) that was considered unacceptable &amp; poor generalship.   It is in relationship to how good the enemy is compared to yourself. 
 
Since the Commander in Chief is the head general so to speak. He falls under the same system. Talking about caring, flying out to the Area of operations  (AOR) for Thanksgiving &amp; Christmas photo ops does not cut it.   
 
It does not matter if a commander actions resulted  in 4%, 20% or 1% casualties, when there was the option to achieve the same result with fewer casualties, he is not to be commended.  He is to be reviled.  After a while you get to know what effort (troop strengths), tactics &amp; equipment get what results.  This is not an arcane art.  Many soldiers &amp; former soldiers &amp; others know this. The Commander in Chief has advisors.While he may have eschewed studying military science earlier in life there is no excuse for engaging in losing strategies. 
 
And it is more than troops &amp; equipment. It is rhetoric &amp; willpower.  Having people say &quot;the war is lost&quot; or threatening to cut off funding to troops in the field is better than the enemy having new formations forming as if by magic or secret agents inside the enemies military establishment feeding information about enemy troop movement &amp; dispositions. 
 
P.S. Don&#039;t bring up Vietnam. You only display your ignorance for all to see. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People take risks for jobs they believe in &amp; that they are trained for, but at the same time they want compensation &amp; do not want their lives wasted. Examples would be pilot, stuntman firefighter, policeman, soldier, astronaut &amp; so many others. </p>
<p>There is a difference from being exposed to an increased risk of danger &amp; having threat of danger being carelessly increased more because of a naive, blase attitude &amp; policies of a dilettante president. </p>
<p>&quot;If you have to use our live, use them don&#039;t misuse them.&quot; </p>
<p>You commit troops to a conflict. You know a percentage are going to die.  That is just the way it is.  But there are acceptable percentage &amp; unacceptable percentages. I think at one time if an invading force suffered more than 15% casualties in a battle  (circa WW2) that was considered unacceptable &amp; poor generalship.   It is in relationship to how good the enemy is compared to yourself. </p>
<p>Since the Commander in Chief is the head general so to speak. He falls under the same system. Talking about caring, flying out to the Area of operations  (AOR) for Thanksgiving &amp; Christmas photo ops does not cut it.   </p>
<p>It does not matter if a commander actions resulted  in 4%, 20% or 1% casualties, when there was the option to achieve the same result with fewer casualties, he is not to be commended.  He is to be reviled.  After a while you get to know what effort (troop strengths), tactics &amp; equipment get what results.  This is not an arcane art.  Many soldiers &amp; former soldiers &amp; others know this. The Commander in Chief has advisors.While he may have eschewed studying military science earlier in life there is no excuse for engaging in losing strategies. </p>
<p>And it is more than troops &amp; equipment. It is rhetoric &amp; willpower.  Having people say &quot;the war is lost&quot; or threatening to cut off funding to troops in the field is better than the enemy having new formations forming as if by magic or secret agents inside the enemies military establishment feeding information about enemy troop movement &amp; dispositions. </p>
<p>P.S. Don&#039;t bring up Vietnam. You only display your ignorance for all to see. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BLJ</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4157107</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[BLJ]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:24:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4157107</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am reading &quot;The Wrong War&quot; by Bing West. It is about the debacle in Afghanistan and is an outstanding read. 
 
Our troops hands are tied by idiotic &quot;rules of engagement&quot; and political correctness. Toss in a Muslim C-in-C and there you have it. We have the best military in the world and their hands are tied. 
 
The MSM&#039;s lack of reporting what is going on there is also a crime. These clowns were jumping all over news from Afghanistan and Irag when Bush was in office. Now that the Chosen One is there not a peep.  
 
 ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am reading &quot;The Wrong War&quot; by Bing West. It is about the debacle in Afghanistan and is an outstanding read. </p>
<p>Our troops hands are tied by idiotic &quot;rules of engagement&quot; and political correctness. Toss in a Muslim C-in-C and there you have it. We have the best military in the world and their hands are tied. </p>
<p>The MSM&#039;s lack of reporting what is going on there is also a crime. These clowns were jumping all over news from Afghanistan and Irag when Bush was in office. Now that the Chosen One is there not a peep.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joan Rogers</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4156775</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joan Rogers]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 13:31:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4156775</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am glad ,finally we get out of the Middle east,saving billions,and protect our own land....Go where we are needed,they don&#039;t want our help..their only agenda is to kill kill kill.Leave them to their way of life,it will never change EVER.....from the line of Ishmael..Gen.16:11,12...will never change ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am glad ,finally we get out of the Middle east,saving billions,and protect our own land&#8230;.Go where we are needed,they don&#039;t want our help..their only agenda is to kill kill kill.Leave them to their way of life,it will never change EVER&#8230;..from the line of Ishmael..Gen.16:11,12&#8230;will never change </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joan Rogers</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4156744</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joan Rogers]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 13:21:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4156744</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[very well said ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>very well said </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pierce</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4156644</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[pierce]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:50:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4156644</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[He, Barack Obama, found ways to criticize George W, but he has flummoxed around on just about everything he has had contact with. I honestly think that he, and his czars have not a clue as to what they are doing.  
In Hamid Karzai, Obama has come face to face with someone of his own ilk. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>He, Barack Obama, found ways to criticize George W, but he has flummoxed around on just about everything he has had contact with. I honestly think that he, and his czars have not a clue as to what they are doing.<br />
In Hamid Karzai, Obama has come face to face with someone of his own ilk. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4156641</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:50:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4156641</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;If you want the dollars you take the risk.&quot; 
 
The risk of an enemy 5th columnist winning the US presidency? ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&quot;If you want the dollars you take the risk.&quot; </p>
<p>The risk of an enemy 5th columnist winning the US presidency? </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/afghan-tragedy-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4156636</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:48:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=173481#comment-4156636</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Mary, I&#039;m afraid incompetence is not the right word. He is very competently aiding and abeting the enemy&quot; 
 
 
There are huge portions of both to go around. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&quot;Mary, I&#039;m afraid incompetence is not the right word. He is very competently aiding and abeting the enemy&quot; </p>
<p>There are huge portions of both to go around. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 703/724 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-30 05:28:53 by W3 Total Cache -->