US military deaths in Afghanistan skyrocket under Obama

As a former combat commander, I can tell you that fear is difficult to avoid on the battlefield. But on today’s battlefields, a new fear haunts our troops: the fear of persecution by their own government. That fear leads to internal hesitation. And that leads to death.

Billy and Karen Vaughn, parents who know the pain of having their warrior son betrayed write on Breitbart.com:

“U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan are now forced to fight a two-fronted war. Before each deployment, these soldiers understand fully that day after day they will do battle against relentless terrorists with shifting loyalties and unspeakable hatred. But what none of them could have foreseen was the killing field that would open from their rear: the Continental United States.

“Our government’s incessant tightening of already restrictive ROE (Rules of Engagement), compounded by the failed COIN (Counterinsurgency) strategy—also known as “winning hearts and minds”—has made an otherwise primitive enemy formidable.”

The chart below shows the awful truth about US military deaths in Afghanistan. Click on it to enlarge.
chart-us-fatalities-afghanistan

In the first seven-plus years of war in Afghanistan (October 2001 – December 2008) we lost 630 U.S. soldiers. In early 2009, the Obama administration authorized the implementation of the COIN (Counter-Insurgent) strategy, more focused on “winning hearts and minds” than winning a war, and over the next five years, the U.S. death toll nearly tripled.

Seventy-three percent of all U.S. deaths in Afghanistan have taken place since 2009. In the first seven plus years of war in Afghanistan, 2,638 U.S. soldiers were wounded in action. In the next forty-five months (2009 – 2012) an additional 15,036 suffered the same fate.

Recently, Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai decided to release Islamic terrorists with blood on their hands, that of our American troops as well as Afghan civilians. Imagine being a young warrior in Afghanistan at this time and having to ask “why am I here?” Many Americans are now aware of the story behind Lone Survivor and realize that when faced with life or death decisions it seems our warriors fear lawyers and the media more than the enemy. They face a non-state, non-uniformed enemy that blends in with the civilian population and knows our ROE (Rules of Engagement).

Our battle-tested men and women we send into harm’s way are confronted by the enemy and must make instantaneous combat decisions. Some, like Army 1LT Clint Lorance, find themselves afterwards sitting in a prison cell in Ft. Leavenworth.

Yet, while much evidence demonstrated links to Islamic totalitarianism and terrorism with former Army officer Nidal Hasan, and some were told to keep silent because of “political correctness.” That silence led to 13 dead and some 30 wounded in Ft. Hood Texas — shot by a man in American uniform shouting “Allahu Akhbar.” And what did our leaders say to our warriors gunned down by a jihadist on a military installation in America? It was “workplace violence.”

In the last presidential election, for the first time in nearly 77 years, the sitting president, vice president and candidates for office had no military service. I’m not suggesting that the president of the United States must have served in the military — but the most important duty of the president is Commander-in-Chief. Our country needs a leader who can understand the sacrifices and commitment of those brave men and women who stand on freedom’s rampart, because he or she has been there.

As the Vaughn’s write, “Our best and brightest come home in body bags as politicians and lawyers dine over white linen tablecloths; writing, modifying, and re-modifying these lethal rules. Rules that favor the enemy rather than the American soldier. Rules so absurd they’re difficult to believe until you hear the same stories over and again from those returning from battle.”

When the parents begin to feel this way, will America stop being the Land of the Free because parents will no longer sacrifice the brave?

We must make a stand for those who make the stand for us.

189 COMMENTS

  1. Easiest way to solve the problems that come with ROE is put a politician on point with those same rules and then see how they like it. My guess is the majority would be pushing someone in front of them to save their worthless hide. Till that happens they would rather supply flags for funerals then make the other side upset.

    • No such thing. barry has no rep[ect for the american soldier and the ROE’s prove that. Making a Marine Hold an umbrella in the rain proves that

      • Yeah, I saw that. Despicable! Making a Marine hold an umbrella, and says in outright in front of them: that’s all they’re good for? Such dishonor! Obama has NO love for American soldiers, or even the American people for that matter.

  2. every Pentagon pansie that allowed the stupid ROE that we currently have need to be transferred immediately to the front and left there. They make me sick when the don’t refuse to stand up and say NO to this BS coming from the WH.

  3. Could it be that casualties increased in Afghanistan because we had not directed the bulk of our forces to that particular theater of operations until Obama became President? I quick look at our recent history shows that to be the case.

    Since Afghanistan wasn’t a primary focus of our military activity during the GWB administration, it’s not surprising that the bulk of our casualties occurred in Iraq.

    This could easily be retitled: Military Casualties Plunge in Iraq since Obama took office.

  4. The purpose of a Military is to destroy and defeat its enemies. When it comes to life and death there should be no rules, can anyone imagine WWII fighting in the Pacific against fanatical Japanese with “RULES OF ENGAGEMENT”? OR THE NAZIS? The first implementation of this crap was introduced during the Vietnam Conflict and you see the results of that mess. I saw it first hand and the men and women now serving our country in such Shitholes as Afghanistan, Korea, Africa the Middle East should have their hands UNTIED and be allowed to do what they were trained for, and if you are a civilian on the battlefield you are at your own risk for being a big enough dumbass for being there.

      • The problem is that we have rules of engagement and our enemies have none. The only rule they have is KILL Americans.

      • We do not have to become barbarians in order to destroy our enemy on the battlefield. But we can’t destroy them hopping on one foot, unarmed when they come onto our base while having both hands tied behind our back and our pants down around our knees! Do not kill civilians is a far cry from “do not fire back unless you can do so without killing anyone other than your direct target, do not fire without being fired up and if you ARE fired upon, do not fire back if the guy who just shot the guy on your left to death, if he puts his weapon on the ground and walks away from the scene! So guess what!? Our enemies hide behind boulders and empty their magazine upon our military, then put down their weapon and walk safely away…Insanity!

      • well when you firebomb Dresden and kill 1/2 million civilians and do the same to Tokyo drop an few Atom Bombs on civilian populations I guess I’d have to say NOPE! The soldiers on the gound used common sense when necessary but ey you get in the way of a bullet sorry bout that.

      • Firebombing Dresden was a shameful act on our part.
        The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not… and your comparing them to Dresden is absurd.

        Still, if you think US soldiers in WW2 were not restricted from deliberately killing noncombatants, you know very little of our military history.

      • Why don’t YOU tell us what the differences are between WWII ROEs and Obama’s ROEs.
        ARE WE CATCHING ON YET??

      • More Japanese were killed in the fire bombings of Tokyo than in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined. And, sorry, Bud, that is what happens in war. And, we were not the ones conducting heinous medical experiments on captured civilians like the Germans and Japanese did.

  5. мʏ ƈʟαѕѕмαт­­­­­­℮­­­­­­’ѕ αυɴт мαĸ­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ѕ $78 αɴ нօυʀ օɴ тн­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ ƈօмքυт­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ʀ. ѕн­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ нαѕ в­­­­­­℮­­­­­­­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ɴ օυт օғ α ʝօв ғօʀ ѕιх мօɴтнѕ вυт ʟαѕт мօɴтн н­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ʀ քαʏм­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ɴт աαѕ $1з4з2 ʝυѕт աօʀĸιɴɢ օɴ тн­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ ƈօмքυт­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ʀ ғօʀ α ғ­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ա нօυʀѕ. ƈн­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ƈĸ օυт тнιѕ ѕιт­­­­­­℮­­­­­­ SaveJury&#46com

  6. Barack Hussein Obama put in special rules of engagement so that the United States and NATO forces can sustain the most casualties possible!! Plain and simple everybody knows that

  7. Why have US deaths gone up in Afghanistan under Obama?
    because under Obama, we refocused our attention on fighting Al Qaeda, whereas Bush ignored Afghanistan to focus resources in Iraq… even though Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

    If you want to play the numbers game… be honest and include Iraq.
    More US military personnel were killed under Bush than Obama.

    Also, more terrorists were killed under Obama, than Bush.

    • Wrong. Our deaths in Afghanistan have gone up because our men and women are operating under insane rules of engagement! My son was there for a year recently, assigned to a base up in the north western mountains. In the middle of the base was a road. His barracks were on one side of that road and his office on the other! The first time he went to his office, he discovered that the most recent paper (I will not explain everything his team does, but part of it is producing ‘paper’ or counter intelligence) had been produce in 2008! Three years before he arrived! Which means that we had sent three teams there and they had done ZERO in three years! Well, he soon found out why…first he had to get a three truck convoy with at least four people per truck, just to cross the street to get to his office! This was for ‘safety’ and there were no exceptions. His team sat there for THREE MONTHS before he was able to set up a regular convoy to get him across the road to his office! Going out into the field to talk to locals took even more work and he only managed to do it THREE TIMES in 12 months! Previously, under Bush, when he needed to be out in the field, his team grabbed their translator, packed their MRAP and went out for months at a time (yes, they lived in their truck, out in the field, for months at a time). Under Obama, he needed a six truck convoy staffed with volunteers and a translator for each, even though no one but him would be speaking directly to the Afghani’s, and it was nearly impossible to get enough volunteers to go out when THEY did not feel a need to go. And who could blame them when they could just stay safely on the base!? He spent a year there and achieved nothing except making his superiors angry the few times he managed to be able to actually do his job! He was actually told by his superior officer that he should just sit back and ‘enjoy’ the deployment…all he needed to do was continue to write up reports that said nothing and make them long and boring enough that no brass back at headquarters would bother to read them! He refused…after all, what were they going to do with him…send him back to the states! LOL Wasn’t going to happen. It is insane over there, we are wasting our time, wasting our money and even worse, wasting the lives of our men and women in uniform all because Obama is too cowardly to fight! And our media began pretending that we are not at war the day Obama took office and they are continuing to pretend we are not at war, because to admit the truth and give the stats would mean Obama appearing even more incompetent as a military leader by the whole world! Well guess what!? After Benghazi, the secret is out and the world is laughing at Obama’s failures and plotting our overthrow when we have finally collapsed.

      • God Bless your son for his valour and we thank him for his service. TY for providing one view that helps to explain the morass obama has created for the troops there.

    • Why did Bush have to “ignore” Afghanistan to win in Iraq?

      12/2006 Bill Clinton and the Decline of the Military
      “After Bush was elected and the country had suffered the 9/11 attacks, former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger said Clinton had cut back the military so much that we might not be able to fight a war on terrorism on several fronts. He listed the problems brought on during the Clinton years: lost air and sea lift capacity, two or three years during which nothing was procured for the military, and cuts in R&.D”.
      http://www.humanevents.com/2006/12/21/bill-clinton-and-the-decline-of-the-military/

      Why We Went to War (In Iraq) http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/236jmcbd.asp
      AND Obama used the weapons and military that Bush built to kill terrorists!

      Next time you feel a need to prove how shameless you are, do it somewhere no one else can see it.

  8. You know what? I just spent the last ½ hour crying over this article. I might be wrong, but I don’t give a damn how many died under what President. What I do care about is the number of the men and women that have died because of the crap this administration is passing and they don’t give a damn about our Military. Now throw in the Generals, Officers and Enlisted that has been booted out because of this administration, which was our knowledge and who cared about our men and women. Then to top it off, Afghanistan just released 64 terrorist back into the population. Give me the answers to Fort Hood, Benghazi, our Seals and everything else that has been covered up. Tell me why in the hell our Military has not arrested this administration and why in the hell are we still in the desert?

    Forgive me for being so emotional.

    .

    • I am with you. I can’t understand why Obama and this administration is getting away with all the lies and deception. to say nothing of abuse of presidential powers. misuse of Executive orders. Ignoring the constitution and the will of the people. He should be impeached and arrested.and imprisoned. Biden too!

      • Unfortunately Impeachment would go nowhere. That’s the problem with everything, Harry Reid, sits on it, or they vote it down. I wonder why, when he started writing EO and started changing the Obama Care, why they never took it to the Supreme Court. His administration has broken the laws so many times and still is. It is maddening! Everyone keeps saying wait till the Election, but you know what, we might not have an Election the way things are going. Why don’t the American People have the option of recalling the Elected Officials that are not following what they sworn in to do?

    • Emotion has no place in politics or war and it is the reason why it took women so long to get the vote AND once they got it they abused this power to force big government on us. If you want to know why Obama is in office, look to women.
      Women’s Suffrage Over Time http://t.co/i77RCGb

      THIS is why more of our brothers were killed in action. Obama forced them to be targets: “Our government’s incessant tightening of already restrictive ROE (Rules of Engagement), compounded by the failed COIN (Counterinsurgency) strategy—also known as “winning hearts and minds”—has made an otherwise primitive enemy formidable.”

      • Winghunter, your chose
        this discussion to express your dislike of women? You’re an ass!! Emotions?
        Well, I happened to be at home, sitting at my desk when I read this
        article. Yes, there is a time and place for
        Emotions. If you had no emotions while
        you read this article about all the lives we have lost and had no emotions Winghunter, you’re an empty shell of a man.
        Men, women and every Ethic group in the country voted for Obama. Personally, I don’t give a damn who voted for
        Obama, I didn’t and it’s a done deal.
        Can’t undo it Winghunter, all we can do, is go forward. Do I believe men have died trying to protect
        a woman, yes and women have also died trying to protect a man? Do I think women
        can do everything a man can do, some can. A woman stands beside you and gives a
        million percent of herself in battle just like a man does, for our country. I’m
        5’3” and weigh 108 pounds and no, I don’t think I could do what a man can in a
        battlefield, but that is just me.How dare you disregard woman in the military. If you want to bash women, go to another
        website; this isn’t the place to do it.
        In case you don’t understand that, we are talking about both men and women who fight for our country, not your dislikes of women. No Emotions here,
        Winghunter!

      • Beg to differ, Sir. I am a Conservative woman and refuse to accept the drivel of the Left. Please do not generalize and put all women in the category you have created for us. I am not one of them.

      • Had you read the article, idiot, you would know that women have proven those “fools” absolutely correct!

  9. FYI…. your stats are BS! November 2004 we lost 54 US service members in under 2 weeks during the second battle of Fallujah! There’s no reason to believe a damn thing from this idiot! this article is a disservice to those who sacrificed everything you anti-Obama turf! I don’t care for either Bush or Obama’s decisions but let’s stop what’s really going on!

      • all I meant by this table is Bush didn’t jump into Afghanistan…. WHERE BIN LADEN WAS HIDING! he chose to go into Iraq for his lies of WMD and cost the lives of 4486 service members…FOR NO REASON RELATED TO 9/11. At least Obama concentrated the war in the correct country we should have been in in the first place and killed the one responsible for 9/11. If Bush did his job more US troops would have been killed in Afghanistan hunting Bin Laden instead of going after Saddam. THIS ARTICLE HAS NO POINT!

      • Maybe you missed it, but Bin Laden was killed by our SEALS and he was in Pakistan at the time, not Afghanistan, so your whole premise that we should only be operating in Afghanistan is incorrect. Iraq was a very winnable war…or was until the Democrats cranked up their political machine and started telling our allies in Iraq that they had no intention of allowing the war in Iraq to ever be won, meaning that no Iraqi that stepped up to help us would ever be safe from the revenge of the Taliban and Al Quaeda…and in Iraq we are seeing what happens when you can’t be bother to win a war AND leave your allies undefended and defenseless against their enemies. We could easily have had an ally in Iraq and a stable, non terror led country in the middle east. There was even a company planning to put a Disney style resort there before Obama became president and let everyone know that he was going to ensure that our losses in Iraq were meaningless. Handled correctly we could have negotiated a return of our investment once the Iraqi’s oil fields were operating at normal levels, but no…Obama had to throw it all away in the name of politics!
        Afghanistan is a junk war…there is no way to kill everyone who support the terrorists there, nor is there ever going to be a way to win a war in Afghanistan. Both Bush and Obama are wrong on Afghanistan. We should have gone in from the air only, guns blazing and destroyed everything possible and then sent them a message telling them that if they allowed terrorists to sit and plot against the US they would get more of the same.

      • No. We owed the cavemen a chance at freedom and we gave it to them. Now, anymore of the same BS from them and we turn the sandpits into glass bowls.

      • The Obama supporters are just boring at this point in time where there “man” has been shown to be a total fraud but, the cultist cling.

      • Why did Bush have to make a choice between Iraq and Afghanistan?

        12/2006 Bill Clinton and the Decline of the Military http://www.humanevents.com/2006/12/21/bill-clinton-and-the-decline-of-the-military/
        “After Bush was elected and the country had suffered the 9/11 attacks, former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger said Clinton had cut back the military so much that we might not be able to fight a war on terrorism on several fronts. He listed the
        problems brought on during the Clinton years: lost air and sea lift capacity, two or three years during which nothing was procured for the military, and cuts in R&D.”

        Did Clinton and the Democrats know about Iraq’s WMDs before Bush was in office – YES!

        Democrats Letters and Statements On Going To War With Iraq While Clinton Was Still In Office
        http://bit.ly/gZFlwJ

        No Lies About Iraq by SFCMAC
        “Saddam Hussein had WMDs, a WMD program, and
        terrorist connections. I’m a former Soldier and Intelligence Analyst. I still cannot discuss classified information, but there’s plenty of open source material to substantiate Hussein’s violations and intent:…” http://sfcmac.wordpress.com/2008/06/17/no-lies-about-iraq/

        Is there anymore of YOUR homework that I can do for you!?

      • Sadly this is going to have a Jonestown kind of ending for the “cult of Obama”. They are down to hysterical name calling because that’s all they have left. Their leader has left them out to dry with his trail of well documented lies, ON EVERYTHING. Total freakish creation of the left and the eunuchs in the media.

      • And to what end, your fantasy of “killing Bin Laden” and all would be great? Yep, when John Gotti went prison and died, all organized crime went away with him. Cling to your stupidity.

      • John are you really this dim and uninformed? what the hell do you think the battle for Tora Bora was all about? or have you even heard of it? go read up and then come back and apologize and admit your mistake

  10. These numbers are deceiving. They don’t account for the deaths of nearly 4,000 civilian soldiers (contractors) since 2001. These contractors are subsidized by the US Department of Defense, and are currently about 111,000 strong. By using these contract soldiers, our elected officials can post a lower US military presence, as well as a lowered casualty rate, as they only count active military casualties. You’ll find it is very difficult to locate civilian contractor casualty information online. http://dbacomp.com/defensebaseactcomp/2012/12/31/civilian-contractor-casualty-count/
    http://americancontractorsiniraq.org/overseasciviliancontractors/category/contractor-casualties-2/

  11. You do not send a fighter into the ring with his hands tied behind his back. This president with his ROE is doing just that to our troops. If one breaks the rules to SAVE LIVES ,HE faces imprisonment from a government that should be giving him a medal.
    Do not let your children enlist in this man’s military! Death, maiming, the denial of voting rights and the right to bear arms as civilians are their rewards from this Administration. Send them, instead to facilities that train them how to fight to win, by all means. As do our enemies!

  12. I’m loyal too! This president inherited the war from the past president. This president is pulling us out of the war but I GUESS NO ONE CARES. Good old George sits back and let President Obama take the fall for his screw up. What’s wrong with you people? Take the black out of the man and change his political party and anything he did would be fine. America is still screwed up.

    • Obama will never take responsibility for anything that goes bad. He is the “I didn’t know” child in chief.

      Why is everything racial to a liberal progressive?

    • Wow! I mean, WOW! Many Presidents in the past have inherited wars from their predecessors. The difference between them and the current President is that they actually realized that they needed to do something about it instead of just saying, “B-b-b-b-but the last guy…”

      It’s been five years! It’s time for Obama to start accepting responsibility.

      By the way, Shekesmom, you were the first person to bring up Obama’s color. Maybe you’re the one with the race problem.

      • mu·lat·to [muh-lat-oh, -lah-toh, myoo-]
        noun, plural mu·lat·toes, mu·lat·tos.
        1.
        Anthropology . (not in technical use) the offspring of one white parent and one black parent.
        2.
        Older Use: Often Offensive. a person who has both black and white ancestors.

    • George Bush would not have let the conditions lend itself to our troops being “led to the slaughter.” I just read of a classmates son’s friend being killed very recently by someone who was in uniform and it wasn’t an American! Wakeup! How can people be so blind to reality and so enamored by another human being who is not majestic but puts his pants on one leg at a time just like everyone else. Another thing, most are not racist as you proclaim, it is what you want to believe; it is what the liberals want you to believe and exploit it trying to create a stir. Progressive means to move forward not backward, turning this country into a third world country is not progress but regression. Wakeup! Enough is enough! Do you know who said “if you tell a big enough lie often enough and long enough people will believe it?”

  13. Then they go to the funeral, lie to the parents and listen to a speech from the local imam condemning their child’s souls to hell. Minigod and his quislings need to be shot on sight, and I pray daily for an assassin. Keep your children well, and out of the current military.

  14. Well after all, this was the “good war” according to Obama as he abandons both, Iraq, and Afghanistan and denigrates the efforts of our brave soldiers, our military.

  15. What
    I am about to say, will ANGER many, but it HAS to be said. IF we walk
    out of Afghanistan, pull each and every American Troop out of that
    quagmire… there WILL be a price to pay, for each and every Afghan
    citizen who HELPED and SUPPORTED our efforts there. The EXACT same
    thing happened to not only the Vietnamese we abandoned, but Cambodia and
    Laos as well. I KNOW these things, because I married a WONDERFUL man
    who lost EVERYTHING when he was a child, sat in a refuge camp in
    Thailand for YEARS, until he was finally allowed to come to the USA as a
    Refugee! There are OTHER PEOPLE who will be brutalized if we just walk
    away… and it IS our responsibility, whether WE like it or not.

    • I don’t agree with you the way you said it, but it does not anger me. That is not a reason for us to stay. Saying that, I would much rather give amnesty to those that help us and that are trustworthy, then the ones the administration is bringing in under the radar and all the ones that are in our country that are trying to hurt us.

      • @Reba, I understand how you feel… I loathe this war, not the reason we invaded Afghanistan. When we first sent our troops over there, we knew why… 9-11 had happened, and we knew the Taliban had allowed Bin Laden and his terrorist pals train and plan attacks. But when President Bush took that war off the “Priority List”, invaded Iraq, and spent the next several years with a rather paltry amount of US military to “handle things”… our purpose for even being in Afghanistan was questionable at best. President Obama allowed the surge to go forward in Afghanistan, but he also insisted on a specific date to end our presence there… not exactly a ringing endorsement for his determination to win. Most Americans don’t even know what “Winning” this is even supposed to look like, but from everything I have seen and heard, the goal was to make sure the Afghan’s were well enough trained, so that they could fight the Taliban on their own, with nothing more than weaponry and training from us. I saw today that the President of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, has ONCE AGAIN stabbed America in the back, he released about 70 KNOWN Taliban fighter’s who had been caught trying to kill US troops, he’s playing the game trying to figure out a way to save his own bacon, because he knows we are almost at an end there… so he’s being NICE to the Taliban fighter’s… and couldn’t care less if those former prisoner’s take down more of OUR troops. All the way around, this WHOLE situation stinks. I just KNOW what will happen when we leave, IF we leave with NO US troops to train and assist the Afghan’s who DO want a better life, and DID help us. Your idea to allow those people to immigrate to the USA, is actually a VERY good idea, but sadly, I do not trust the current administration to DO THE RIGHT THING, and save these people. The doctor in Pakistan who was responsible for our finding and killing Bin Laden, STILL sits in a prison over there, and we have not done anything to get him out… so I don’t hold out hope for those left behind. And… we DO have a responsibility to these people.

      • I do agree we should bring back the ones that helped our troops. If they have proved themselves without a shadow of doubt and the troops are for it, then I’m for it. Yes our administration has a problem bringing Americans home and also the ones that are suffering for helping us. Sad! I don’t trust them either on anything. If they are not brought back with our troops, maybe they can hang on until we get someone in the White House that will. Yep, he released 64 terrorists back into the population and also will not sign the Treaty with the United States. Time to get out and since the President of Afghanistan wants to help the Terrorist, I think he can deal with it. We are fighting a losing war and losing men and women everyday with no help from the administration of this country, we are trying to help.

      • No, we owe no responsibility at all for any of these people. For thousands of years they have continued to let themselves be led by the nose, controlled and bullied..as a nation. If they want this then let them have it, if they don’t then THEY should do something about it. Too many times I have seen the people, that we supposedly owe a responsibility for, turn against the Allied troops that are bleeding in an effort to give them to chance to fix themselves. So, no I don’t think we owe them or their Country anything…except the deep seated bone deep contempt i have developed for them as a people over the last several years

      • Scimitar, I DO understand how you feel about this issue, God knows MANY Afghans have turned and murdered the very people (US Troops), who are there at OUR GOVERNMENTS orders, to help the civilian population, and the supposedly “like minded” members of this NEW Karzai Government. IF I were President, I would have gone in just like we did in WW2, and obliterate the enemy, setting the civilian casualties issue to the side, UNTIL the war was ended. These days, there is entirely TOO MUCH “touchy feely” EMOTIONAL baggage inserted into Military Missions, which hog-ties our troops from completing their mission, and also makes their sacrifice entirely to large…how many members of the military have been horrifically wounded and killed… that IF we had gone in with MY idea of how things should be done, would have been prevented. Considering these facts, I could not endorse ANOTHER Military engagement again, UNLESS it is done solely with weaponry… but that is just my opinion. There will always be others who are opposed to that idea, in which case we will sit by and watch the murderer’s and dictator’s who have NO problem attacking their own people. And the rest of the world looks to us AND chastises us for doing nothing… just look to Egypt, Syria and Libya and you know it’s true. I DO NOT have all the answers, I just know what WILL happen to the Afghan people who did try to help us, to make their country a “less miserable” place to live. Our Government, in OUR name, DID invade… and I, personally, will feel deep regret when we start hearing about it on a 30 second report on the evening news, as I already do when I hear about these same “short” stories concerning what is happening in Iraq. As a human being, with certain morals, I can’t NOT care… I also can’t DO anything about it, other than to bring this issue up when these type of discussions happen.

  16. Nice graphic about Afghanistan. Shall we compare Iraq numbers or should we just keep throwing out propaganda that tries to make the current regime, whose first action was to change the wars from a 2 front war, Iraq and Afghanistan, to a war in a single country. Bush lost 4852 troops under his watch, Obama has lost 1945. Thats the facts.

      • This article addresses wayyyy more than just afganistan & the fact you haven’t grasp’d this by now should concern you…..

      • You support Barack Obama. The fact that you haven’t grasped any problems with that should concern you. It certainly concerns me.

      • really, does this mention operations in Iraq once? the fact that you cannot understand Iraq and Afghanistan are 2 different operations should concern you.

      • Yes, it certainly SHOULD address how the POTUS has ham-stringed our military men and women with his new way of “making peace, not war!” What concerns me is that he continues to send our young men and women over there KNOWING many will be maimed or die because of HIS ignorance about how to fight a war!!! You are right . . . . this article should have detailed ALL of the sweeping changes in policy initiated by this administration and what a miserable failure they are!! Thank you for bringing that to our attention, girlfriend!!!!

    • Regardless of what the numbers are.the fact that this current guy in the White House is one of the biggest traitors in American history and deserves a traitors execution, just as fast as he can be tried for his crimes, is a given.

  17. Even posting these facts does not move some into knowledge. They still want to blame someone other than the current POTUS even though he has been in office for 5 years now.

    What I want to know is how do we educate the young adults when so many of the 40+ generation are so into themselves and what feels good that they have no clue. We have kids that we raised that have gone on to be brainwashed by the nonsense they read/hear. No common sense in the world of our culture. SMH

    • I gave my Nephews and Nieces a copy of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Told them to read it (one at a time) and when they finished, I told them, to read it again and write down any questions they may have. Then we discuss it and I let them talk before I say anything. Whatever questions they had, I printed out the issues on the discussion. I then recorded the latest News from different News Stations and had them watch each one. Then I asked them to listen again and write down what they thought. I made it easy for them, because they could start and stop as they needed. This was over a several weeks; because I wanted them to have time for it to sink in and to really think about it. They even had discussions among themselves. Interesting how this turned out and how hard they worked on it. It’s an ongoing discussion and when I see or talk to them on the phone, and they were told something, they come back and ask what it means. I always ask them to research it first, and then we will discuss it. I don’t want them to believe everything I say, I want them to think about it and be able to find the facts. Facts speak louder than our words. It’s up to us to teach
      them.

      • Thank you, but I’m no hero, just from a long line of a Military family. I just happened to be floored one weekend when my nephew was staying. At dinner I asked him how school and ROTC was going and what were they studying. The Holocaust Anniversary was that week and during the whole conversation he never brought up the Holocaust. After we finished talking I turned around and asked him: What did you learn this week in school about the Holocaust. He had the blankest look on his face and it took me a minute to realize he didn’t even know what I was talking about. Needless to say, it took me a little time to grasp that and then I sat him down and told him why I asked him that question. Then I gave him a couple of books to look at and read about the Holocaust History. This young man loves history, but I would never have dreamed in a million years he did not know about the Holocaust. Knowing how bad some of our schools were, I never dreamed in a Military area, it would be that way. That’s why I started with our Constitution and worked up to other issues. Anyone can do this with their kids and relatives.

  18. troop averages in afghanistan 2001-2008: just under 17,000. in 2001 there were basically no troops on the ground – with a ramp up over the years – surprise! just like the ramp in deaths….at the end of 2008, there were 32k troops. when obama took office, the military’s recommendation was to surge troops – this brought troop count over 100k. obama didn’t just invent the surge on day one. this is why the death count went up. obama couldn’t extract everyone right away – everyone who understands military ops and the political imperative to maintain / increase troop presence understands this concept, including allen west. this chart is insulting to anyone intelligent. anyone who doesn’t do a little thinking about the other numbers not shown on this graph, especially if they use this graph on face value to bolster an anti-obama argument – is basically stupid.

  19. obama should be tried for murder for his ROEs which favor not offending the enemy over the lives of US military personnel

    • Are correct in saying that he did not show the iraq war.but Col west was not talking about iraq, he talking about the failure in afganistan

      • What failure in afganistan? Mr. West’s clear intention here is to portray Pres Obama in a negative light when all it really did was portray Mr. Allen as the less than honorable man he is. Please read “yamamma”‘s comment below; his post is way more eloquent than mine.

      • Because Col West served our country and has first-hand knowledge of which he speaks, perhaps it is time for you to accept the fact that the truth hurts!

        Case in point: ask the military officer who survived a shoot-out with Infidel Husen at Fort Hood! She was the one in a wheel chair being supposedly honored at the WH, and even though she was there to be honored and had met the POTUS before, he didn’t even take the time to find out which soldier she was!!! Does THAT portray a caring President to you?

        You can say anything you want about President Bush (or Col West for that matter), but I guarantee you that President Bush would NEVER have been caught flat-footed like that because, unlike our present leader, President Bush cared about our troops and never once disrespected them the way our current dictator does on a regular basis!

        You can lick the POTUS boots and kiss his sorry “behind” all you want to, but don’t you dare call either of these men “less than honorable”. In fact, I am more than a little interested in knowing if you served your country and put your life on the line for our freedoms!!! I bet not . . . . I don’t suppose you took the time to notice that the very person whose opinion you are questioning is ALSO a member of our armed forced!!! People like you usually dont!

      • HAVE YOU EVER BEEN TO AFGANISTAN? HAVE LOST FRIENDS IN AFGANISTAN? if you cant answer yes, then you are always going to defend Obama no matter what.
        Obama has ZERO military experience, and it shows in all operations. but I know NO MATTER WHAT Obama did a good job in your eyes……
        I don’t know Col West from a whole in a wall but for you to say he is not honorable because he is posting an article addressing a issue is insane. he may not be 100% right, but that doesn’t mean he didn’t put his life on the line protecting the freedoms of this nation. unless you served in the military, you should think twice before posting crap attacking the man and not attacking the issue.

      • Bush started this mess with a search for WMDs that didn’t exist. Haliburton made billions. Bush had no active military experience either. This is biased nonsense because he’s Republican. It’s dumb.

      • How about a little historical context? It was the bleeding hearts that squealed about Saddam gassing the Kurds that initiated much of what followed. Remember? The WMD that never were? Right! CNN themselves videoed the transfer of “unexplained” munition transfers from Iraq into Syria prior to the US “invasion”. Does “truth” and “reality” matter to anyone anymore?

  20. If I want to use this chart in a paper for my essay for my class in the state university, where can I find these numbers as well?
    Angelo
    USAF veteran

    • It’s right there in the image, icasualties.org. Be sure to include the Iraq numbers unless you (like Allen West) have a vested interest in skewing numbers to one side or another.

      • OK,,,,, to accuse me of a vested interest in skewing number is going way to far. I was a medic in the Air Force, I GARENTEE YOU, I personally seen more of these number than you. Unless you was working in Landstulh or Ramstein (where the hospital in GER is at) you haven’t seen the fatalities like we did over there.
        I cant speak for Col. West. even so, the number on that chart are the exact same as the numbers he has…..
        so what are you exactly saying? do you honestly think anybody want to portray more dead people solely for political gain?
        People have lived this war. deployed or not, it is one mission, one fight.
        Col. West has more knowledge and experience with the war than others.
        btw the numbers match……

      • Rigggght. . . Because Obama is really a friend of the soldier? Allen West has made all of this up from his imagination? Ridiculous! There is nothing to skew. Obama is an insult to the title of Commander in Chief.

  21. The only ROE that should apply in a time of war is “if it isn’t dressed like you, kill it”. You would be amazed how quickly an enemy force will surrender when you march in there and kill anything that moves. Civilian casualties? Who cares? Current standards would have you believe that the military of any nation is some autonomous force which operates of it’s own volition. Not true. Every civilian who resides in a nation at war, through their normal day to day activities, is supporting their military effort in one fashion or another, voluntarily or involuntarily, and with or without their own knowledge, either logistically, financially, or materially, whether or not they support the war personally. Therefore there ARE NO CIVILIANS in a time of war. The more of the enemy you kill and the quicker you do it, the sooner the war will be over. If war is necessary, it should be fought with all due diligence and without regard for the comfort or survival of the enemy.

  22. Elections have consequences especially when the individual elected as Commander in Chief should be sitting only in a faculty lounge and not in the Oval Office.

  23. this unspoken deal Obama has with TERRORIST is working out fine for him.
    they be good & and we be nice. the American people in the interim feel safe , thinking Obama is responsible…what he is responsible of is another lie . we are safe only if we behave.

  24. I proudly served my country as a career military officer for 29 years. I am thankful that my certificate for “honorable and faithful service” bears the signature of President George W. Bush on it rather than the fraud who is currently occupying the White House.

  25. “They face a non-state, non-uniformed enemy that blends in with the civilian population and knows our ROE (Rules of Engagement).”

    Actually, no the Taliban ARE a state force – a Pakistani state force. The Taliban get funding from Saudi Arabia too so they are in part a Saudi state force as well.

    For years the President and Congress have been spending American taxpayers money to aid Pakistan.

    All this time Pakistan has funded terrorists and built nuclear weapons and perhaps this is why the American taxpayer money spent on Pakistan did not feature in President Obama’s State of the Union speech.

    Bin Laden was killed in Pakistan where he and the terrorist group he founded, Al-Qaeda, which attacked the US on 9/11, was hosted and sponsored by the Pakistani military.

    The same Pakistani military given $10 billion in military aid (and $ billions more in civil aid) by the US since 2001 is actually SUPPORTING, RECRUITING, TRAINING, SUPPLYING AND DIRECTING THE TALIBAN against our forces.

    The Taliban and other terrorist groups based in Pakistani territory are secret agents, proxies, irregular forces of the Pakistani military.

    The Taliban don’t wear Pakistani military uniform of course, because that would give the game away, even to the fools who run NATO, the Pentagon, the MOD etc.

    The evidence for Pakistan’s secret terrorist war against the West can be viewed in the BBC’s “SECRET PAKISTAN” videos.

    Part 1 – Double Cross
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSinK-dVrig
    Part 2 – Backlash
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5-lSSC9dSE

    We need a new strategy which defeats the Taliban (and Al Qaeda) by applying the Bush Doctrine versus those states which sponsor those terrorists – Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

    Applying the Bush Doctrine versus Afghanistan alone makes as little strategic sense as it would have if we’d applied Cold War doctrine to say Cuba alone but not against the Soviet Union and its Eastern European client communists states!

    It is a military fundamental that you don’t win a war by funding your enemy but rather you win a war by bankrupting your enemy, cutting off the resources the enemy needs to sustain its army.

    The correct, non-foolish war strategy, knowing what we know about Pakistan now, to fight this war is that our governments and military should change their policies in dealings with Pakistan

    – from a non-ingenious, self-defeating policy of diplomacy and aid, combined with a limited drone campaign against some Taliban targets

    – to a much more confrontational policies of ultimatums, sanctions and war against the Pakistani military and especially the Pakistani generals and former generals who dictate military policy to use the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (“the ISI”, a state within a state) to sponsor terrorism behind the window dressing of an elected but relatively powerless government of Pakistan.

    It may be Christian in some ways to turn the other cheek to the ISI as it kills our soldiers, but it isn’t waging war in a common sense fashion. It’s more akin to appeasement than war-fighting.

    It’s like when a neighbour sets his savage dog to kill your chid you only blame the dog and not the neighbour and you pay him money to keep him happy and to buy a new dog because the one he had got put down because it killed your child. That would be weak, stupid, lame and pathetic and no way to care for your children!

    The US and NATO allies have the most powerful military alliance in world history and we are being made fools of on the battlefield by Pakistan a military power which our taxpayers are paying money to!

    This is really an absurd way to fight our war, with a blind eye as to who the enemy is.

    We must end the farcical tragedy of our very stupid political and military leadership of this war!

    We should apply massive pressure to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, up to and including war if necessary. Something fairly dramatic is needed to show the state sponsors of terrorism that their plan for a secret war against us with no chance of any blow-back has utterly failed and they are looking down the barrel of a real war with us or indeed are hearing the opening shots of that war in a way that is rather too close for comfort.

  26. Deaths “skyrocketed” in Afghanistan due to troop level increases under the Obama administration. Bush’s focus was Iraq; thus his administration had more casualties in the Iraqi theater than Obama’s. The body count for each is correlated to their mission focus. He’s not distorting the numbers, but his argument lacks context and is dishonest in it’s portrayal of those numbers.

    You can’t use your former commander status to add credibility to your argument and then misrepresent the information to attempt to gain political points. If anything, as a former commander, he should have the decency to represent the facts correctly: under Bush troop levels in Afghanistan were minimal and the combat focus was in Iraq, hence the larger losses there during his tenure. Obama is the exact opposite of that: focus in Afghanistan, minimal troop concentration in Iraq.

    • Your assessment is correct. The increase in US casualties in Afghanistan that have occurred under Obama is NOT the result of a change in ROEs combined with the failure of a counterinsurgency strategy. The increase in casualties under the Obama administration are based on 3 factors to include:

      1. An increase, or surge, in the number of US troops that were sent to Afghanistan during the Obama administration, which included 17,000 in 2009, Obama’s first year in office.

      “Gen. David McKiernan, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, concerned about deteriorating security there, has asked for 30,000 additional U.S. troops. President Obama is sending 17,000 troops, but he has ordered a thorough review of the strategy before deciding to send any more. There are about 38,000 U.S. troops there now.

      Attacks with improvised explosive devices (IEDs) killed 32 coalition troops in the first two months of 2009, triple the number for the same period in 2008. Last year, there were 3,276 IED attacks, a 45% increase over 2007, and a record for the war. Insurgents killed four U.S. troops Sunday in Afghanistan with a roadside bomb.”

      Source: Poll: More view Afghan war as ‘mistake’ by Tom Vanden Brook, March 16, 2009, USA TODAY

      Source: U.S. intelligence: ‘Time is running out’ in Afghanistan – Thomas L. Day and Jonathan S. Landay, December 28, 2009

      2. An increase in the number of Taliban insurgents to match the US surge:

      “Taliban-led forces fighting US and Nato troops in Afghanistan have increased nearly fourfold since 2006, according to a US intelligence estimate presented to the US president.”

      Source: US: Taliban has grown fourfold, The Global Report, News From the Front Lines, October 09, 2009

      “The report says that the number of Taliban fighters has grown to 25,000, from 7,000 four years ago, the officials said on Friday as Barack Obama convened a fifth cabinet-level meeting on his country’s military strategy in Afghanistan.”

      Source: Taliban’s growth in Afghanistan’s north threatens to expand war – Jonathan S. Landay, August 28, 2009

      3. An increase in the use of IEDs by insurgents in response to the US troop surge that began in 2009

      “Insurgents in Afghanistan have answered the Obama administration’s troop surge with a surge of their own, planting thousands of roadside bombs that caused more U.S. troop casualties last year than the prior eight years of the war.”

      “It’s clear that the insurgency in Afghanistan remains very robust,” said John Nagl, a former Army officer and president of the Center for a New American Security, a think tank in Washington. “As we increase our capabilities in the country and the region, they are also ‘surging.’ ”

      Source: Afghan insurgents match surge with more IEDs – Tom Vanden Brook, January 10, 2011

      “The number of U.S. troops killed by roadside bombs in Afghanistan soared by 60 percent last year [2010], while the number of those wounded almost tripled, new U.S. military statistics show.”

      “Afghan insurgents planted 14,661 IEDs last year, a 62 percent increase over 2009 and more than three times as many as the year before.”

      Source: Number of U.S. casualties from roadside bombs in Afghanistan skyrocketed from 2009 to 2010 – Craig Whitlock, January 25, 2011, Washington Post

      An increase in US troops + an increase in Taliban insurgents + an increase in the use of IEDs by Insurgents = an increase in US casualties.

  27. The increase in US casualties in Afghanistan since Obama took office in 2009 is NOT the result of a change in ROEs combined with the failure of a counterinsurgency strategy.

    The increase in casualties since Obama took office are based on 3 factors to include:

    1. An increase, or surge, in the number of US troops that were sent to Afghanistan during the Obama administration, which included 17,000 in 2009, Obama’s first year in office.

    “Gen. David McKiernan, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, concerned about deteriorating security there, has asked for 30,000 additional U.S. troops. President Obama is sending 17,000 troops, but he has ordered a thorough review of the strategy before deciding to send any more. There are about 38,000 U.S. troops there now.

    Attacks with improvised explosive devices (IEDs) killed 32 coalition troops in the first two months of 2009, triple the number for the same period in 2008. Last year, there were 3,276 IED attacks, a 45% increase over 2007, and a record for the war. Insurgents killed four U.S. troops Sunday in Afghanistan with a roadside bomb.”

    Source: Poll: More view Afghan war as ‘mistake’ by Tom Vanden Brook, March 16, 2009, USA TODAY

    Source: U.S. intelligence: ‘Time is running out’ in Afghanistan – Thomas L. Day and Jonathan S. Landay, December 28, 2009

    2. An increase in the number of Taliban insurgents to match the US surge:

    “Taliban-led forces fighting US and Nato troops in Afghanistan have increased nearly fourfold since 2006, according to a US intelligence estimate presented to the US president.”

    Source: US: Taliban has grown fourfold, The Global Report, News From the Front Lines, October 09, 2009

    “The report says that the number of Taliban fighters has grown to 25,000, from 7,000 four years ago, the officials said on Friday as Barack Obama convened a fifth cabinet-level meeting on his country’s military strategy in Afghanistan.”

    Source: Taliban’s growth in Afghanistan’s north threatens to expand war – Jonathan S. Landay, August 28, 2009

    3. An increase in the use of IEDs by insurgents in response to the US troop surge that began in 2009

    “Insurgents in Afghanistan have answered the Obama administration’s troop surge with a surge of their own, planting thousands of roadside bombs that caused more U.S. troop casualties last year than the prior eight years of the war.”

    “It’s clear that the insurgency in Afghanistan remains very robust,” said John Nagl, a former Army officer and president of the Center for a New American Security, a think tank in Washington. “As we increase our capabilities in the country and the region, they are also ‘surging.’ ”

    Source: Afghan insurgents match surge with more IEDs – Tom Vanden Brook, January 10, 2011

    “The number of U.S. troops killed by roadside bombs in Afghanistan soared by 60 percent last year [2010], while the number of those wounded almost tripled, new U.S. military statistics show.”

    “Afghan insurgents planted 14,661 IEDs last year, a 62 percent increase over 2009 and more than three times as many as the year before.”

    Source: Number of U.S. casualties from roadside bombs in Afghanistan skyrocketed from 2009 to 2010 – Craig Whitlock, January 25, 2011, Washington Post

    An increase in US troops + an increase in Taliban insurgents + an increase in the use of IEDs by Insurgents = an increase in US casualties.

    • Didn’t Obama say that one of his first priorities in his FIRST election was to take our troops out of Afghanistan? Anyone who can’t see Obama for who he truly is and his agenda to make the entire world a Socialist state doesn’t deserve to call themselves patriotic or American.

  28. Great article Mr. West. If we’re not there to win, bring them home. It seems that no president in a long time knows how to FIGHT-a-WAR. You kill people and break things till the enemy Quits. We beat them in ‘NAM, but the damn left-wing politicians turned tail and ran. the way they all have since. No need to tell me why you voted for NDAA. No reason will justify killing the 4th amendment.

  29. Where are the Iraq numbers?
    I think Bush’s numbers look great in Afghanistan, because instead of hunting down Bin Laden and Al Qaeda… we were stuck looking for WMDs in the wrong country.

  30. A better metric of military ‘efficiency’ would be to include the number of boots on ground. And a ‘per capita’ death rate.
    The graphic is propaganda nonsense without that context.
    Once included, a person would easily see that although deaths increased, the number of troops increased by a equal or greater amount.
    Thus fulfilling the promise that was made on 9/11, that we would track them down and kill the enemy… instead of getting bogged down in another country.

  31. Allen West, I think on this your’re wrong. It is vitally important for our president to have had some military background in order to lead our military through war, any war. We’re not living in la la land, wonderland, or Oz land you know. The real world requires experience on all fronts. This guy doesn’t have any experience, ANY AT ALL! He’s the most incompetent US Leader in US History and the hands down winner of the idiocy award.

    • Barrack Hussein Obama – “LIAR OF THE YEAR 2013”
      Barrack Hussein Obama – “JOKER OF THE YEAR 2014”
      Worst president since WW II.
      Bwahahahahahaaaa!!!!!

  32. The Democrats have played this whole thing perfectly. If I were an evil steaming bag of fly-ridden, maggot-eaten horse sh*t, it’s exactly what I would do. Pull out of Iraq way too early, pull out of Afghanistan way too early, announce the whole thing openly to the enemy (whom you love more than your own county) and keep the entire war on terrorism from becoming a feather in George Bush’s hat. Next, conveniently forget how well the surge worked, but do one of your own to instill the false impression that our Commander-in-Chief has some tactical ability, and pull our troops out of both theaters too early. In so doing, you effectively snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and then blame it all on the Bush administration. And the sponge-headed liberal voters along with the easily influenced fringe-conservatives, independents and undecideds, who don’t know that “facts” and “truth” are not always reflective of one another, will believe it. Genius, albeit evil, still…genius.

  33. You people are appalling. When it was Bush’s war you cheered. Now you act shocked and concerned. You question Obama’s war experience, but you ignored the fact the human larvae THAT SENT PEOPLE TO WAR IN THE FIRST PLACE was in the National Guard, which is basically the cub scouts of our American military. Hey I forget: has Bush found his weapons of mass destruction yet? No? He’s not busy, maybe he should go over and look for himself.

    • How do you know we cheered? Bush was cut to pieces daily. I wonder why gas used in Syria is a WMD but used in Iraq is is not? But as usual, everything Obama goes to Bush.

    • How about a little historical context? It was the bleeding hearts that squealed about Saddam gassing the Kurds that initiated much of what followed. Remember? The WMD that never were? Right! CNN themselves videoed the transfer of “unexplained” munition transfers from Iraq into Syria 6 moths prior to the US “invasion”. Does “truth” and “reality” matter to anyone anymore?

    • not true .. bush won the war in Iraq ..
      more troops = fewer numbers were killed under Bush.

      Obama record in Afgan 1800 killed …so far

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here