President Barack Obama is sending 30,000 extra U.S. troops to Afghanistan on an accelerated timetable that will have the first Marines there as early as Christmas and all forces in place by summer. But he'll also declare Tuesday night that troops will start leaving in 19 months. So apparently the President has decided to disappoint everybody, both hawks and doves alike.
So my question is, where do we get these additional troops when several military experts have said we just don't have that many left to send? Are they coming from Iraq? Is that part of the plan?
There have been MORE American deaths in Afghanistan in 2009 then IN ANY OTHER YEAR PRECEDING IT! Those are not deaths that happened under the Bush administration, those are deaths that happened on President Obama's watch. That seems to indicate that we can expect even MORE American deaths as we increase our military presence in the country and more aggressively go after al-Qaeda.
I am still trying to support my president, but damn I am having trouble digesting this decision.
I am very aware that America has made promises to the Afghan people that Obama feels compelled to keep, and he should feel a sense of responsibility. But what about his responsibility to the people who elected him? What about the families whose loved ones will lose their lives in the months and years to come? President Obama was NOT elected to win the war in Afghanistan, those people voted for the other guy, Obama was elected to END the war in Afghanistan.
I will be watching today's speech. I have no idea what President Obama could say to make this seem like a good idea to me, but I have trusted him up to this point so I will hear him out.
Update: Here is the full speech for those who may have missed it or wish to see it again.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Feel free to share your feelings.
While I DON'T agree with adding more troops...I think we underestimate the DAMAGE that Darth Cheny and that IDIOT W Bush actually did....I think it is worse than WE even thought...sumthin's up...OYE!
ReplyDeleteI'm not really understanding where all the outrage on the left is coming from on this one. During the campaign, I thought Pres. Obama made it abundantly clear that he thought it was going to take more troops in Afghanistan to end this thing. He wrote this in July, 2008:
ReplyDelete"As president, I would pursue a new strategy, and begin by providing at least two additional combat brigades to support our effort in Afghanistan. We need more troops, more helicopters, better intelligence-gathering and more nonmilitary assistance to accomplish the mission there. I would not hold our military, our resources and our foreign policy hostage to a misguided desire to maintain permanent bases in Iraq."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/14/opinion/14obama.html?_r=2
BO fucking LIED and Democrat are still pussies. Put Grayson in the bullpen. Fuck Obama
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LsSppYxSHk
Democrats will get their ass kicked in 2010 by whitetrash medieval village idiots because of this
Pullout by 2011? Just in time for election?
ReplyDeleteStop that; I am not a cynic!
Grayson is an anomaly. Hmmm, it is puzzling, though, how he managed to avoid The Operation. You know, the one that Democrats must submit to before taking office: having their spines surgically removed.
ReplyDeletePresident Obama inherited a rock meet hard spot situation. I am confident that he has listened to all the experts and strategists and has considered all the alternatives.
ReplyDeleteUnlike dubya, this is most likely not the first time our President has sat down to play a game of chess...and if I were to guess, my guess would be that, in not too long from now, our President will look Cheney and all the other neocons straight in the eyes and loudly announce, "Checkmate, you blood thirsty sons of a neocon!"
And with that, we and the world along with us will shout, "Job well done, Mr. President! Thank you!"
It seems that many who voted for Obama now forget that part of his platform was to focus more attention and put more resources, both human and financial, into the war in Afghanistan, because Bush had screwed up when he had failed to see this necessary war through and had instead invaded Iraq.
ReplyDeleteHe said so from the beginning. Shame on anyone who did not know or thought otherwise when they went into the voting booth. Obama made it very clear.
I supported him then and, while I have many questions about this war that I hope Obama will answer, I still remember watching the Twin Towers come down and that attack was launched out of Afghanistan and I support him now. It is too bad Bush screwed it up so bad, but he did.
One way or another, it is up to Obama to try and straighten out this mess. It is a responsibility now has, to itself and to Afghanistan.
Is more troops the answer? I don't know.
I will listen to what he has to say and watch what develops and mourn for those who must die and be maimed, and for their families. But I know we cannot just walk out of Afghanistan and anyone who thinks we can has a very short memory.
I personally disagree with the decision to send more troops to Afghanistan, but I must admit that, during his campaign, President Obama pledged to escalate the war in Afghanistan. I don't think more troops are the answer, but I am at least somewhat relieved that there is a timetable to end this war.
ReplyDeleteAnon 1:13
ReplyDelete1. You lack class
2. You lack intellect
3. You apparently think that by being the school-yard bully type, you will make everyone quake in their boots. You are wrong.
4. Your words clearly demonstrate that you are devoid of any meaningful thought processes.
You strike me as someone who, when they are not online proving that they are a complete dip shit, that you are busy stealing some first grader's lunch money.
Maybe you should, at least, go back and get your G.E.D. What do you say--think you could cut it?
Barack Obama was not elected to end the war in Afghanistan, he was elected to end the war in Iraq. But overall, he was elected to fix the economy, not to win wars. I don't agree with his decision, but I don't know why Lefties are getting so pissed off, either. Barack Obama did not "LIE." He said repeatedly during the campaign, that he wanted to "win" the war in Afghanistan. Lefties don't listen. I can't even understand why he is doing this. He needs to get his priorities straight. He needs to think about his domestic agenda, first. As for these congressional democrats who are whining about his decision, why the fuck didn't they start talking about stop funding the wars when GWB was still in charge? Idiots.
ReplyDeleteThe President did say he was going to get out of Iraq but FINISH Afghanistan. Maybe to finish it quickly you need a lot of troops. Git er done, so to speak.
ReplyDeletePowell Doctrine: overwhelming force and an exit plan. That is what I believe we will hear tonight.
The first thing I do is visualize the impact sending more troops to Afghanistan will have on the good people who are just trying to survive and live their lives and our soldiers who will die or be injured. Then I think of the hoardes of people who will not show any signs of an injury, but will carry deep psychologicial scars that will make their lives difficult or impossible to live.Then I think of all the heroin which will be sold for cheap prices all over the world and how many lives will be destroyed. Then I think of the loss of the rights of women. Then I think of how many more radical religious terrorists it will create. Then I think of the money we are spending on this crazy battle to make another country conform to an image of what we want them to be. How many people could have healthcare, education, healthy food, and how much infrastructure could we have built? If we are spending this much on another country I would rather just give them the money for schools, food, etc. That would probably do more to stop the civil wars than anything. It all makes me sad and nauseous.
ReplyDeleteThe Walter Cronkite & Tim Russerts' are no longer with us. We have turned to blogs because we can no longer trust MSN. I am so disappointed in Obama. It would seem that the World Bank is running this country & that our president is nothing but a prop.
ReplyDeleteJoan Walsh from Salon.comwassaying the same thing tonight on Hardball, concerning the speech. I have foundmyselffelling the sameway.
ReplyDeleteAre we all delusional? What can he possibly say that will make 30.000 more troops sound reasonable.
I am so depressed and angry.
hrh@1:27pm I resent the hell out of that. President Obama certainly doesn't not lack spine, nor does a lot of other Democrats. Not only did Dubya and Darth Vader lack spine, they lacked intellect and a thought process other than their "shock and awe" spectacular in Iraq. I am not happy about this either but I am sick and tired of the entire world thinking President Obama has a magic wand he can wave to clean up eight years of the Bush Administration. Grow up.
ReplyDeleteSo far in Iran we have manged to destabilize areas,get our troops killed,waste money.If we pull out now,we leave behind those areas that are unstable.Its like a vacume,ready to be filled by whatever group can jump in and hold it be whatever means neccesary.
ReplyDeleteThis is not the first time!! We did the very same thing in the same place,and the Taliban and others moved in when we pulled out,and solidified their positions.
Promises to the Afghan people? Did they ask us to come there?Did they ask us to bring them a war that will make no improvements to thir lives?These are not college students sitting around on their laptops seeking freedom of expression and womens rights,they are village and hill people tending goats,hunting for firewood,and scrabbling for a life.Right now that life is harder than it was,when we leave,it will return to what it was.
I dont want us there,but now that we have gone in and started this,we need to make it work,for the Afghan people who have their lives to live,and for the USA by deterring the very real possibility of the country going from bad to worse,becoming a haven for the terrorists as Pakistan truly is.
Then Senator Obama did say that he would send more troops to Afghanistan. We invaded Afghanistan because of 9/11, remember? Unlike Iraq, we actually had a reason to invade.
ReplyDeleteMy gripe is that once we attacked Iraq, the boots on the ground (in Afghanistan) were ignored. Rumsfeld felt that the job was done there, except that it wasn’t. Men were still being killed in battle and the Taliban (who knew the region well) were more formidable an opponent than we thought.
No bin Laden and Al Qaeda moved to Pakistan.
My bigger gripe is to those people who bitch at President Obama for sending more troops there.
I bet you are the same people who proudly waved the American flag, hated anyone that looked/dressed like a Muslim, and glued yourself to the tv to watch all of that “Shock and Awe” unfold. Yeah, we teached “them” to invade our Country.
.
We spent billions rebuilding Iraq and now they tell us that most of it will probably go unused.
If we just pull out of Afghanistan without some kind of closure, there will be those who will say that President Obama is a coward. If we stay, they will say that he is a war monger.
I say, send in the troops, secure what they can for the Afghan people, and leave. If we do nothing for the people, then Afghanistan will once again become a breeding ground for terrorists.
How are we going to pay for it? Who knows? Maybe we should have asked Bush the same question. But I guess THAT, would have been un-American.
Cammie if you believe that then you are a fool, we will hear platitudes and bs from a confirmed liar who has no respect for the Constitution or the freedoms we are born with. You liberals are the cause of the economic problems and can't even be honest about it. Also, it was Clinton that let Bin Laden go free when the terrorist was offered to him already captured in the 1990s.
ReplyDeleteI don’t understand how escalating a war in a region that has historically been unwinable is a good idea, but what do I know?
ReplyDeleteSpeaking again of Obama being a master chess player, here’s another take on this analogy:
Cenk Uygur over at The Young Turks had an interesting comment the other day. Cenk’s a fair guy, and he’s been more than fair in his analysis of the Obama record so far and is still willing to hold off judgment by giving Obama more time. But, Cenk also freely admits that he’s concerned that he’s not seeing the “Change We Can Believe In,” and often questions “Is this the same guy I voted for?”
Cenk said (not word for word), “Obama as a master chess player? I just don’t see it. Unless…he’s not playing chess with Washington…he’s playing chess with us.”
I hate to keep bringing up Afghanistan=Graveyard of Empires, but it is a historic fact and we will be but the latest to bring our empire down by interfering in a country that we don't understand.
ReplyDeleteI realize that our economy is being boosted by the industrial war machine and I don't really have an opinion as I know no one personally that is involved in the military.
However, boosting our economy by engaging in a war that we cannot win will cost other people their loved ones. The people that have family involved are the ones that need to stand up and say hell no to more involvement in a war that will never be won. If those people are okay with it, then I guess I'll just treat it as I have every other war that we've fought and lost.
If people keep sending their kids and husbands and wives to the slaughter without questioning our purpose there then what room do I have to question our actions?
It disturbs me that the left is so damn inpatient. For christ sakes did we think because he's a dem and not gop that he was just going to come in and eliminate everything.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all his main priorities are and should be These Wars, Health Care, Economy. We'll get to the others when these get through or better. Then we'll move on to the climate and social issues. Not only does he have no choice but to let the social issues fall by the wayside for now because of the huge mess GW and Cheney made of so many things, but most prominent at election time was economy.
I think O supporters allowed themselves to think that his Presidency would be like his campaign, but have forgotten that O didn't have access or clearance to certain info that he has now. I also wonder why the left has forgotten how often and how much he talked about Pakistan (and is the only American Politician to this date that pronounces it correctly). I think Obama has been getting info on Afghanistan for quite awhile and I think he and his realize their are issues to be dealt with at the Afghaninstan-Pakistan borders. He must have said it 200 times during the campaign, not enough focus on the role they play in Al-Queda, Taliban, etc.
I'm not in support of either of the wars, but I also don't expect nor desire the President of The United States to make decisions about something this great based solely on Americans not liking war. Duh, ya think he doesn't know that?
Now I also say if you supported O during the campaign, you need to step back and again and maybe write down a list of all the reasons you voted for him(I would hope you can name more than 1).
I voted for O because:
I really believe this is a man who always takes and claims full responsibility for his actions and choices, therefore he doesn't make them lightly and isn't easily pressured.
He's forward thinking
His voting record in the Senate and at the State level
His ability to stay calm
His statements and claims checked out 99% of the time
The fact that he cares not only about 10yrs from now, but 70 years from now
He has two small children who must grow up in the world he will partly responsible for
He never went for the attack, the dirt, the lies to counter his opponent, but instead always took the high road
He does not see honesty and transparency as a burden
I read Dreams of My Father and Audacity of Hope long before the election. I like the way he thinks and the way he interprets and sees life
He's extremely intelligent, yet not unable to value the opinion of those less informed or of a lesser education than his own
He values education
He seems to have a genuine desire to get our children's priorities back in line and that education and giving of yourself to others can be the two most rewarding things you'll ever have the opportunity to experience.
He knew the Iraq war was nothing more than GW trying to #1 show Pops he can do something he couldn't #2 because he thought his father was What you say................A QUITTER! Sorry couldn't help myself on that last little bit. :)
That's just a little bit of my list. I'll be damned though if I will give up on him or complain about the deeply complex issues that I know nothing about because I don't like a choice he makes.
How do we know O or anyone else is wrong on Afghanistan? Have we seen all the intelligence?
Go to vanityfair's online site and do a search on Afghanistan. You'll find article by a reporter that has literally lived with the troops since day one. He sends back a very lenghty report every 3-4 months.
I trust our Commander in Chief.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous @ 1:58 PM said, ...As for these congressional democrats who are whining about his decision, why the fuck didn't they start talking about stop funding the wars when GWB was still in charge?
ReplyDeleteThat's the point. GWB didn't fund the wars; he just tacked their cost on to the deficit.
Well, the speech is over, and let the pundits begin their savaging.
-----------------
BTW, if anyone's interested, there's an interesting stand just taken by the conservative blogger at Little Green Footballs, Charles Johnson -- reported at Crooks & Liars.
I feel sad tonight but I realize I am sad over the whole FUBAR mess, and not angry at the President.
ReplyDeleteThe emphasis on Pakistan and the border region tells me that he wants bin Laden, if he is still alive, and Mullah Omar. This border area is where they are supposed to be and if we get cooperation from Pakistan to come in from the Afghan side maybe the worst of them can be routed.
akshamu @ 3:50
ReplyDeleteWhat drugs are you on? Or, are you just drunk?
Seriously, you need a couple of cups of hot black coffee and a good night's sleep.
This was going to happen and he told us it was going to happen before we voted for him. Didn't you listen to him during the Presidential campaign? WHY are we surprised?
ReplyDeleteHe is merely doing what he said he would do.
I didn't like it then - or now. But, OMG - can you even IMAGINE the alternative (McCain/Palin???) I cannot.
OP @ 1:13
ReplyDeleteYeah i took it to the bank. Watch the video! BO lied
Dems will stay home in 2010! I will for sure
Circle the wagon for Obama. Dems will lose majority in both houses without one single scandalous affair, just by being the usual spineless Dems
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qp9YJjZFGQw
SoCalWolfCal, when the Rethugs were in the minority, they managed to pass all sorts of legislation; with the Democrats in the majority now, practically nothing gets through.
ReplyDeleteObama's waffling stance on health care is a major embarrassment to those who voted for him. Beginning from an already compromised stance and then negotiating most everything away is a strong action? (Well, truth be told, it's because Boss Rahm has secretly promised the insurance companies and health care providers that there will be no public option, in order to ensure campaign money for 2012. Unfortunately, the secret deal with big pharma leaked early. Damn!)
Keeping Cheney Administration hacks on, and other pandering to the Rethugs, in the hope that if we (Democrats) give them (Rethugs) the farm, then they'll stop being mean to us, is, and has consistently been, the laughable negotiating stance of the Democrats.
Q: What is the Grand Canyon?
A: It's the distance between Obama's rhetoric and his actions. Sorry to say.
He has done good things, mostly by simply not being Cheney/Bush, and the US has begun to regain legitimacy worldwide again. But he has retained so many of their policies and people, it looks to be mostly more of the same. But waddya expect from a Corporate Democrat? Even though he deceitfully ran as a Progressive.
He could already have accomplished one helluva lot as a Progressive, but is so hung up on being bi-partisan, he has frittered away so much of his political capital. And the Rethugs are loving it!
SCWG, I've read lots of your comments here and other sites and respect and almost always agree with what you have to contribute. But cannot, for the life of me, figure out how you can say a lot of Democrats have a spine. Other than Grayson and that bully, Boss Rahm, who?
Here's a perfect example: A few months ago I heard Rep Conyers (D-MI) on Amy Goodman's program. When she asked him about confronting Rethugs on some issue (don't remember what), he became visibly shaken and blurted out how the Democrats couldn't do that because the Rethugs would become angry and say bad things about Democrats. I was dumbstruck. Is this anyone's idea of someone with a spine? Am I missing something here?
Have to say watching CNN coverage pi$$es me off but I have no other option.
ReplyDeleteThey divide Afghanistan in two parts on John King's wall map to show where there are more Taliban. They say it's a U.S. war. They point out the majority of flags of NATO positions on the side of the line where there is not as much engagement. John King, on more than one occasion pointing at his map, says it's U.S., British and even some Aussies in the other arena. They continue to say Kandahar is the worst but continue to neglect the flag shown on his map in that area. Not once did they acknowledge it. What the hell, we've only had troops there since 2002.
Well, dear Americans, your troops when deployed to Kandahar as that is where they are talking about sending part of the initial deployment in 2010, will have access to Canada's leading coffee chain as we not only sent our troops into Kandahar, but a coffee/donut shop was built for them. Tim Horton's had cost over a million dollars the first year it was there!! It was what the troops had said they missed the most!!
KaJo 4:45
Bush did not add the cost of the wars into the budget. It's like he had a separate set of books that he hid. Obama added the cost in which in turn raised the deficit even higher.
...
ReplyDeletedon't agree with my president here. in fairness, he always supported the afghanistan thing even though I didn't, so I knew what I was getting when I voted for him - his continuation of war doesn't surprise me. I still support him as my president but this move sux.
this is why kucinich was my first pick.
When 9/11 happened, I stood behind my president, even though I didn't support nor vote for him in the election. But he was our president and I trusted he had America's best interest at heart. Then he turned his head and decided to attack Iraq (Remember "because that man tried to kill my poppy" that slipped from his lips?)
ReplyDeleteWhen we found there was no yellow cake, no wmd, no, no, no ad nauseum, added to Rumsfeld's statement that "Each and every one of them raised their hands.." in reference to our armed forces and the look on Colon Powell's face as he testified there WAS yello cake, WAS wmd, etc.. etc...
How soon we forget, after being held hostage by a regime hell bent on fear mongering, fighting two wars, and squandering the trillions Clinton somehow managed to put in our surplus, for eight long years.
I won't be so quick to judge President Obama, this mess was a result of the Bush Doctrine. I'll put all my support behind him, because he's my President, and not just because I voted for him.
Afghanistan, where empires go to die. We should ask the USSR how well Afghanistan turned out for them.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous @ 5:35 PM replied to me, KaJo 4:45 -- Bush did not add the cost of the wars into the budget. It's like he had a separate set of books that he hid. Obama added the cost in which in turn raised the deficit even higher.
ReplyDeleteI didn't say "budget" -- I said "deficit". Big difference, and I know which is which.
I agree with the first Anonymous commenter. It was abundantly clear to me that Obama was going to accelerate the troop action in Afghanistan. Look at transcripts of his speeches and comments about the subject. It was withdrawal from Iraq that he promised. Obama has always insisted that he never did support or understand the Iraq war. He always felt that Afghanistan was where we should have struck.
ReplyDeleteAnd of course there have been more American deaths in Afghanistan under the Obama command. We have deployed more troops there. We did not have much in Afghan under Bush.
KaJo 5:56
ReplyDeleteI said budget - meant deficit.
As I said -- it's like he kept two sets of books. One he was willing to share the numbers -- the other he kept hidden. That's were the war figures were.
He did tell us during the campaign that we needed to focus on Afghanistan, so it's not as if we didn't know this when we voted for him.
ReplyDeleteI can't figure out how progressives blame him for this. DId he start the war in Iraq, the bungling of which caused the chaos to spill over to Afghanistan?
Are we children who just want him to end this no matter what?
hey, I was a protestor of Bush when he started this debacle, but I knew once it was started, we were in it for a long time.
No magic cure for this disaster.
Should Obama ignore the terrorism growing in Afghanistan because we want the war to end?
Sadly, it doesn't work like that.
And I am a peace-monger, so this makes me as sad as anyone else.
But reality bites. Thank you, W, for the legacy of death.
Obama said he would have voted NO on Iraq, when he was interviewed in 2001 prior to the vote to possibly go to war if evidence supported it.
ReplyDeleteNow we are there. It has already happened. Wishing it away won't make it go away...
Of course, Bush ignored the evidence and congress and just issued an order and wiped his hands of the UN and the constitution.
3:58 PM
ReplyDeleteAnonymous
You should read Sara Jones' latest article about just that issue re the left's impatience with Obama.
I think you'd like it. "Obama's Brilliant First Year: When Should We Impeach?"
I can't link here, but she writes for Politicususa and posts on Mudflats and Palingates sometimes. Celtic Diva linked to her Ft Hood write up the other day.
@3:50 p.m.
ReplyDeleteBullshit! How convenient you leave out eight years of Bush fuck-ups! 9/11 still happened on Bush's watch! GB let Osama bin Laden get away on purpose, so he could go fucking around in Iraq! That LIAR Bush had eight years to catch him! You fucking CANCER-vatives fucked up the economy! People had jobs before you dickheads took over! They why you fucking lost the election! Freedom! Constitution! Blah, blah, blah! Same old tired shit! You teabagging assholes don't know shit about the Boston Tea Party, or the constitution, so STFU!
@ 1:13 p.m.
ReplyDelete"BO" didn't fucking "lie," shitface! He said he was going to do this, all along. Progressives just don't listen! They hear certain key words, like "peace," and they tune out, and hear nothing else, and then complain that they have been "betrayed!" If they thought St. Dennis Kucinich was so great, they should have fucking picked him! Most people probably won't stay home from voting on the Afghanistan decision alone. It's what happens at home, is what matters in 2010. Asshole.
We have no idea about the "secret intelligence" involved here. I know that President Obama would not send troops if it wasn't necessary. In his campaign he spoke of finishing the job in Afghanistan - what Bush should have done to begin with. I am so sad for our troops and families, but I believe that they understand what is going on. Please read Joe Biden's book "Promises to Keep"...
ReplyDelete"BO"-- yeah, you're a progressive. RIGHT.
ReplyDeleteENOUGH.
Oh you muricans are so silly sometimes. There will be not withdrawal anytime. The US doesn't fight a war and then give up the conquered country. Why everyone knows the US is building permanent bases in Afghanistan even now.
ReplyDeleteI see this has been addressed already, but why are people surpised and disappointed? Obama has consistantly said he would focus on Afghanistan because the threat to us is there. He never said he would end the war in Afghanistan. In fact he said the opposite.
ReplyDeleteIf you recall, it was McCain that said something to the effect of it would be ok with him if the war (Iraq,Afghanistan) lasted 100 years.
SPREAD THE WORD: http://www.sarahwatch.org/
ReplyDeletePresident Obama has always said we should have kept our forces in Afghanistan and stayed out of Iraq.If we had this may have already been over.Not the war. We can't and I don't think anyone has ever won there but maybe catching Bin Laden may have already happened if we had kept our forces in Afghanistan. Did Bush really say that about his poppy? I am not pleased about the additional troops but do understand why they are needed.If nothing is done the troops already over there,ours and our allies are in danger, extreme danger. Better 30,000 than not enough to keep people safe over there.
ReplyDeleteO/T Please go to this site and show your support for Andrew Sullivan.
ReplyDeletehttp://newledger.com/2009/12/andrew-sullivan-crosses-the-line/
President Obama spent countless hours with the head Military Commanders... and.. I DO believe that he would not send more troops into Affganistan if it had not been VERY carefully planned.
ReplyDeleteI TRUST my President. His speach tonight was not a "happy" speach to make. HE and the MILITARY know more about what's going on over there than we will ever know. I feel in my heart that he does not like this task, but if it MUST be...so be it.
PLEASE don't call me SARAH...but I missed spelled Afghanistan........there I corrected it..OK?
ReplyDelete"The status quo is not sustainable"
ReplyDelete~ President Barack Obama,
Nobel Peace Prize Recipient, in his speech escalating war in Afghanistan.
Announced sending an additional 30,000 troops, after sending 21,000 troops in April 2009
That quote is the one part of his speech I agree with.
The rest is bullshit & sounds like Bush 2.0 to me.
Look what Michael Moore put together...
War President ~
Obama: 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan
Obama: "We Did Not Ask for This Fight"
Bush: "We Did Not Seek This Conflict"
Obama: "New Attacks are Being Plotted as I Speak"
Bush: "At This Moment ... Terrorists are Planning New Attacks"
Obama: "Our Cause is Just, Our Resolve Unwavering"
Bush: "Our Cause is Just, Our Coalition [is] Determined"
Obama: "This Is No Idle Danger, No Hypothetical Threat"
Bush: "The Enemies of Freedom Are Not Idle"
Obama: "We Have No Interest in Occupying Your Country"
Bush: "I Wouldn't Be Happy if I Were Occupied Either"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
But the thing that bothers me, is the "reason" given by Obama ~ That we are there for revenge of 911.
2976 people died in the 911 attacks
5296 US soldiers have died in the Iraq & Afghanistan wars (combined) to date.
Hundreds of thousands of civilians have died in Iraq & Afghanistan.
Have we not yet spilled enough blood?
The new boss is a lot like the old boss.
We have a President with a Nobel Peace Prize who will have sent 51,000 troops to Afghanistan to escalate wars.
Since he defaulted on his promise to get troops out of Iraq (you posted the vid), best we not hold our breath that in 18 months, the troops will pack out & leave the Middle East.
Seriously?
We are all too old for fairy tales.
Please spare me any future photos of Obama lying a wreath on MLK's grave.
He must have been absent when they studied the life's work of MLK and his dedication to non violence.
These are now Obama's wars.
I support President Obama's decision. And I thought he gave a very frank and informative speech.
ReplyDeleteAnon at 8:24, did as you asked and got so carried away I left several!
ReplyDeleteThe delusional whackjob aka sarah palin has posted on her FB - taking credit, saying Obama listened to HER! See Shannyn Moore's blog for details.
ReplyDeleteWhat a loon Palin is! The woman needs to be in an institution.
All this says is that the Dems+Gop are the same.
ReplyDeleteWhy are we still calling them by different names?
The sad part is, before most people wakeup,alot of people die.
In 2010 who loses? we lose. Dems+Gop never lose.
Where the hell is Samuel Clemmens when ya need him.
I I I Gotta lower my head a bit for you Gryphen. I didnt want to bemoan your skills. Just kinda look at the bigger realm. I know we aint got jumpin frogs in Alaska but there is much to wager on. And i will wager on you keepin on.
ReplyDeleteHe has given the military what they asked for. More troops. He has also shifted the ball to their court. If they do their job and hold off the Taliban while the Afghani's get their coillective shit together, everyone wins.
ReplyDeleteNo matter what happens, he has given the hawks one last chance to prove they can do it. We're out by 2011 no matter what happens and that is that.
The right war hawks will bitch because setting an exit is "comforting the enemy". The left will bitch because they can't read speeches that show Obama said he was going to finish the place Bush should have leveled in 2001.
I agree with commentor at 11:02 PM. President Obama is doing what Bush should have done in the first place.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, like everyone here, I do not like, or advocate any kind of war. Just being real on "what is".
I agree with Commenter #1....in that the President spoke quite a bit about this effort while campaigning.
ReplyDeleteWill the proressive, liberal left ever learn that "sniping" at your own is always counter-productive?
Resist the sipping sister sarah's bathwater...
To Fran the only sane person on this blog well said.the rest of you need to get a reality check america is in afganistan and iraq for the oil only,not for bin laden and 9/11 which was carried out by the bush administration watch loose change 2nd edition for the facts and check out the oil pipeline running through afganistan
ReplyDeleteWe need to remember that Bush could have had bin Laden, if he'd really wanted him: Afghanistan offered to surrender him if we would commit to not executing him. That's why we invaded in the first place: because Bush didn't want to bring bin Laden to justice, he wanted to posture about killing him for 9/11- he didn't really want to do it or he wouldn't have let him escape.
ReplyDeleteAnd of course, it's well known that the United States lacks the capability to keep somebody in a permanent high-security penitentiary under constant observation. [/sarcasm]
We invaded Afghanstan for the sole reason that Bush/Cheney saw an opportunity to jump off into Iraq. Once they made their move on Iraq, they couldn't have cared less about Afghanistan.
BTW, I sometimes disagree with the President's decisions, but I am morally certain he is gathering information and thinking about it before he makes them. It makes a refreshing change. I kept wanting to give Bush a tape measure and tell him to head into the bathroom and figure it out for himself.
Ivyfree
Anonymous @ 4:00
ReplyDeleteI like your list. Now let's look at the proverbial elephant in the room,, shall we:
The president is not our monarch, though many on the autocratic, dominionist Right would prefer he were... as long as he is their guy!
The 9/11/2001 horrors went a long way into pushing us towards being a compliant nation, as shown by the lack of outrage over the excesses of the previous administration.It will take time and education to rectify that disaster.
Let us consider the constitutionally anchored "Checks and Balances" principles which are designed to limit arbitrary decisions by a president. We have had a serious imbalance in governance for several decades, and too many either do not, dare not address that issue. The nation has been taken over by what President General Eisenhauer warned about:
The military/industrial complex.
The few progressive presidents have not been able to do more than mitigate the worst excesses, and that, by all indications, only temporarily. May the upcoming 21st century generation be willing and able to change that autocratic stranglehold. At least one can hope.
Tom Friedman think this surge idea stinks. That's enough for me. Read his column. very inciteful.
ReplyDelete