PDA

View Full Version : How many will be watching...



Uncle Bill
12-01-2009, 12:58 PM
...the POTUS try to choke on his title of "Commander-in-Chief" in front of a batch of military students? I don't intend to be fed a batch of lies by "His Phonyness", so don't intend to view that "photo-op."

I pray for those of you with loved ones in the military. Thankfully, I no longer do. God bless you in harms way, still willing to carry out the mission. I apologize for allowing a government to be put in place that is tying your hands with those pathetic PC rules of engagement. It's my hope you can overcome all those handicaps.

Stay safe, and be assured there are MANY real Americans that support what you are doing...and NOT providing comfort for the enemy.

UB

dnf777
12-01-2009, 01:01 PM
why watch when you can get the 2-minute drill of what to think by Faux News?

I intend to watch, because this is not just Obama's plan. This was formulated with input from generals, Mr. Gates, and the sec. of the Army, and JTOS.

road kill
12-01-2009, 01:09 PM
why watch when you can get the 2-minute drill of what to think by Faux News?

I intend to watch, because this is not Obama's plan. This was formulated with input from generals, Mr. Gates, and the sec. of the Army, and JTOS.

We already know that!!:D

BonMallari
12-01-2009, 01:38 PM
I will watch so I can draw my own conclusions...

JDogger
12-01-2009, 10:37 PM
...the POTUS try to choke on his title of "Commander-in-Chief" in front of a batch of military students? I don't intend to be fed a batch of lies by "His Phonyness", so don't intend to view that "photo-op."

I pray for those of you with loved ones in the military. Thankfully, I no longer do. God bless you in harms way, still willing to carry out the mission. I apologize for allowing a government to be put in place that is tying your hands with those pathetic PC rules of engagement. It's my hope you can overcome all those handicaps.

Stay safe, and be assured there are MANY real Americans that support what you are doing...and NOT providing comfort for the enemy.

UB

Head in the sand much, Bill? Do you really hate the President so much that you intend to deny yourself the opportunity to critique his speech? Or, as I suspect, you will wait for Rush, Hannity and Faux news to do it for you, and then you can blithely parrot them as you so often do. Talk about falling on swords, your cuts are bleeding you dry.
The President takes the advice of his military commanders..., and still your hatred rears. Tsk, tsk. I think you need to go hunting again. :rolleyes:

JD

ducknwork
12-02-2009, 06:11 AM
What military advisor recommended to start withdrawing troops? I thought our military was there to capture victory, not stay for a little while, but get out soon enough for the next election.

Roger Perry
12-02-2009, 07:58 AM
What military advisor recommended to start withdrawing troops? I thought our military was there to capture victory, not stay for a little while, but get out soon enough for the next election.

Obama pledged Tuesday night to an audience of Army cadets at the U.S. Military Academy that the shift from surge to exit strategy would depend on the military situation in Afghanistan.


Or did you hear something different?

K G
12-02-2009, 08:27 AM
More than once he said "18 months" and "summer of 2011"....or did you hear something different....:cool:

kg

dnf777
12-02-2009, 08:38 AM
What military advisor recommended to start withdrawing troops? I thought our military was there to capture victory, not stay for a little while, but get out soon enough for the next election.

So I'm sure that those of who who support an open-ended committment with no exit strategy are willing to send an open-ended blank check to the IRS to cover the cost of another Bush-style endless war, until he can pass it off on the next guy? They can just write in your tax amount as the costs soar to new record highs? And you promise NOT to complain about the deficit this will create??

Somehow I think I'm being completely absurd! Am I wrong?

Pete
12-02-2009, 08:42 AM
.
The President takes the advice of his military commanders..., and still your hatred rears. Tsk, tsk. I think you need to go hunting again. :rolleyes:



I didnt realize it was our military leaders tying the hands of our troops
So the generals and alike are the ones who think its a no no to punch out the terrorists,
see I learn alot here.


Pete

Bob Gutermuth
12-02-2009, 09:21 AM
Won't waste a perfectly good evening listening to anything the Chump in chief has to say.

ducknwork
12-02-2009, 09:52 AM
So I'm sure that those of who who support an open-ended committment with no exit strategy are willing to send an open-ended blank check to the IRS to cover the cost of another Bush-style endless war, until he can pass it off on the next guy? They can just write in your tax amount as the costs soar to new record highs? And you promise NOT to complain about the deficit this will create??

Somehow I think I'm being completely absurd! Am I wrong?

How much sense does it make to say 'We are going to fight this war until 'x' date and then we're coming home'? I thought we stayed until the job was finished, not until we feel like coming home. Give McC all the troops he wants and we'll get this done FOR REAL in 18 months (or whatever timeframe he stated) instead of quitting. It wouldn't be endless as you say if we gave them all the troops requested to completely carry out his plans.

Are you willing to write a blank check to the IRS for the next war when we have to go back because we didn't finish the job this time?

Dave, if you are performing surgery and you have dinner plans with your wife at 6, what do you do when something unexpected happens? Do you leave at the time that you had originally planned to leave or do you stay until you complete the surgery, regardless of how late it makes you?

ducknwork
12-02-2009, 10:05 AM
Speaking of exit strategy, how are we going to make that work again? It seems as though there are some important details that have been left out...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20091202/us_time/08599194455600

JDogger
12-02-2009, 10:12 AM
I thought our military was there to capture victory, .

What will victory in Afghanistan look like to you? What would you like to happen? You do realize we're not at war with Afghanistan, don't you?

JD

achiro
12-02-2009, 10:17 AM
Why all the theatrics? Why did this have to be a formal POTUS speech? Not even talking about the fact that it took him this long to even come to a conclusion while troops continue to die and the enemy continues to strengthen, why wait the additional week or whatever we've been waiting for this stupid speech? Dude just do your ******* job and get things done! I always thought Clinton was bad about doing things according to poll numbers but this guy takes it to a whole new level.
Please like me, please like me, please like me...:rolleyes:

YardleyLabs
12-02-2009, 10:24 AM
It seems to me that it is idiotic for a country such as our to ever provide another country with an open ended commitment of our military resources. This is particularly true when the government of that country has marginal legitimacy and competence and needs to change itself and undertake major political reforms to become viable. By promising open ended support in such circumstances, we encourage long term dependency and stake our own reputations on leaders whose reputations are questionable at best.

I believe that one of the factors that helped immensely in Iraq was when the Bush administration began setting its own deadlines for US engagement rather than continuing to reject the notion of deadlines and milestones. Ultimately, what we do in Afghanistan needs to be informed by the situation on the ground -- both the military situation and the political situation. However, it is good to make it clear from the beginning that our role in the future is finite and that our support is dependent on progress made by the Afghan government in implementing political reforms.

Bob Gutermuth
12-02-2009, 10:28 AM
FDR never imposed time limits on the liberation of Europe during WWII, nor did Wilson in the Great War.

road kill
12-02-2009, 10:32 AM
Last night was a rambling incoherent double butt smooch.
Politicallly driven, not driven by the right thing to do at all.

What a disgrace for the noble history of West Point, the finest colleg on the face of the earth!!

WaterDogRem
12-02-2009, 10:42 AM
Gotta love the unenthusiastic and falling asleep cadets. Even they didn’t buy his talk coming from both ends.

Franco
12-02-2009, 10:46 AM
What will victory in Afghanistan look like to you? What would you like to happen? You do realize we're not at war with Afghanistan, don't you?

JD

Good question. It is not like we have two uniformed militaries fighting a battle or battles.

We are talking about a state of mind and lets face it, most in that entire region hate us. So, we would have to kill millions of them. Then, they would raise several more generations that will want us dead. This is the same reason I don't think all the blood and money we spent in Iraq will bring about what we want in Iraq after we leave.

We can't let Al Queda off the hook for what they did on 9/11/01. I think we find out who and where they are via CIA operatives and surgically bomb them no matter which hell-hole country they are hiding in. Pakistan would not be off-limits! Boots on the ground is not a road to victory.

I also agree that Obama is in way over his head.

achiro
12-02-2009, 10:47 AM
noble history of West Point, the finest colleg on the face of the earth!!
According to Chris Matthews, that is "enemy territory" Please get it right next time.

Roger Perry
12-02-2009, 11:04 AM
I also agree that Obama is in way over his head.

Good Limpbaugh quote. Are you going to wait to hear him pop off today so you can quote him again?

Limbaugh says Obama ‘in over his head’

Franco
12-02-2009, 11:36 AM
I also agree that Obama is in way over his head.

Good Limpbaugh quote. Are you going to wait to hear him pop off today so you can quote him again?

Limbaugh says Obama ‘in over his head’

I haven't listened to Limbaugh or Hannity in years!

But, I don't think you can give Limbaugh credit for that statement as many domestic and international media and politicos have said the same thing!;-)

Bob Gutermuth
12-02-2009, 12:00 PM
I listen to Rush and Sean as often as possible. Its insurance against the day that the idiotic fairness doctrin takes them off the air.

Goose
12-02-2009, 12:02 PM
Our Kenyan President has more friends and family over there than over here so why is it so surprising he wants the U.S. out?

We live in Cuba now.

ducknwork
12-02-2009, 12:42 PM
What will victory in Afghanistan look like to you? Render the terrorist, be it Al Qaeda, Taliban, etc, incapable of committing more acts of terrorism anywhere in the world. Educate the people of the region so that they are able to think for themselves rather than blindly follow terrorist organizations. Leave the Afghan govt/military in a condition of strength to stand up and fight against the corruption and violence in their own country without the aid of other countries, therefore keeping the terrorists down. Among other things... What would it look like to you?You do realize we're not at war with Afghanistan, don't you? Of course, but we are at war IN Afghanistan, are we not? Do you have a point?

JD

......................

Bayou Magic
12-02-2009, 12:52 PM
I also agree that Obama is in way over his head.

Good Limpbaugh quote. Are you going to wait to hear him pop off today so you can quote him again?

Limbaugh says Obama ‘in over his head’

I don't listen to Limbaugh, and I believe this president is in over his head. So, how do you classify me and the many who share that opinion.

fp

Steve Amrein
12-02-2009, 12:59 PM
I am just pissed that he bumped the Charle Brown Christmas special.

BTW do his speech writers not know how to spell terrorist or victory ?

I wonder what its like to give a speech to people that are made to sit in the seats and that you loothe evrything about them.

K G
12-02-2009, 01:16 PM
It seems to me that it is idiotic for a country such as our to ever provide another country with an open ended commitment of our military resources. This is particularly true when the government of that country has marginal legitimacy and competence and needs to change itself and undertake major political reforms to become viable. By promising open ended support in such circumstances, we encourage long term dependency and stake our own reputations on leaders whose reputations are questionable at best.

I believe that one of the factors that helped immensely in Iraq was when the Bush administration began setting its own deadlines for US engagement rather than continuing to reject the notion of deadlines and milestones. Ultimately, what we do in Afghanistan needs to be informed by the situation on the ground -- both the military situation and the political situation. However, it is good to make it clear from the beginning that our role in the future is finite and that our support is dependent on progress made by the Afghan government in implementing political reforms.

It's ALWAYS good to let your enemies know your plan...'cause, we know they'll do EXACTLY what we expect them to do with that information...:rolleyes:

Look for al Qaeda and the Taliban to slack off their attacks (or move their focus elsewhere), lull the US and NATO into thinking the Afghani battle is won (time is of no consequence to a motivated combatant), and take the gloves off as soon as the last US transport lifts off in 18 mos...............

Yessir....this is how it's done....looking forward to that victory toast in the late summer of '11. The success of this "mission" and its timing will go a LOOONG way toward ensuring a second term for BHO....

...or not....:cool:

kg

badbullgator
12-02-2009, 01:40 PM
More than once he said "18 months" and "summer of 2011"....or did you hear something different....:cool:

kg

Keith there you go with little things like facts when your talking to roger again........:rolleyes:

Bob Gutermuth
12-02-2009, 01:47 PM
We backed the wrong side in the war between the USSR and the mudjahideen.

YardleyLabs
12-02-2009, 01:57 PM
It's ALWAYS good to let your enemies know your plan...'cause, we know they'll do EXACTLY what we expect them to do with that information...:rolleyes:

Look for al Qaeda and the Taliban to slack off their attacks (or move their focus elsewhere), lull the US and NATO into thinking the Afghani battle is won (time is of no consequence to a motivated combatant), and take the gloves off as soon as the last US transport lifts off in 18 mos...............

Yessir....this is how it's done....looking forward to that victory toast in the late summer of '11. The success of this "mission" and its timing will go a LOOONG way toward ensuring a second term for BHO....

...or not....:cool:

kg
Keith,

Given a system of government where we demand to know what is being done in our names and all participants have the right to speak freely, what makes you think that we have kept any part of our war strategy secret from al Qaeda and the Taliban at any time in the last eight years? The fact is that we formulate our policies in public and reap all the benefits and costs which that entails. If our policy encourages the Taliban to lie low for the next two years, we win.

ducknwork
12-02-2009, 01:59 PM
When else have we told our enemy the exact point in time at which we are going to quit?

badbullgator
12-02-2009, 02:00 PM
Jeff, Jeff, Jeff…..come on now. EVERYTHING the Bush administration did was a secrete and Roger is uncovering it bit by bit, so of course our strategy was a secrete.

Bayou Magic
12-02-2009, 02:11 PM
Keith,

Given a system of government where we demand to know what is being done in our names and all participants have the right to speak freely, what makes you think that we have kept any part of our war strategy secret from al Qaeda and the Taliban at any time in the last eight years? The fact is that we formulate our policies in public and reap all the benefits and costs which that entails. If our policy encourages the Taliban to lie low for the next two years, we win.

WHAT!!! 2 years is meaningless to a people that have been in conflict for years!!! Please tell me that you are not serious.

fp

YardleyLabs
12-02-2009, 02:14 PM
When else have we told our enemy the exact point in time at which we are going to quit?
Actually Bush announced a timetable for beginning to withdraw troops from Iraq in the middle of the Presidential campaign last year. This became a core part of the negotiation with the Iraqi government concerning the role of foreign troops and the beginning of plans to transfer responsibilities back to Iraqi forces. That directly parallels what Obama is doing now and hopefully it will have similarly beneficial results. We'll see.

Hew
12-02-2009, 02:32 PM
Actually Bush announced a timetable for beginning to withdraw troops from Iraq in the middle of the Presidential campaign last year. This became a core part of the negotiation with the Iraqi government concerning the role of foreign troops and the beginning of plans to transfer responsibilities back to Iraqi forces. That directly parallels what Obama is doing now and hopefully it will have similarly beneficial results. We'll see.
I saw you make this point in an earlier post and held my tongue. But if you're going to keep hammering it...

Bush began talking about a timetable last summer; and only because he was backed into a corner by al Maliki (who could, like the rest of the world sense that Obama was a foregone conclusion and he wanted to get an earlier start getting on Obama's good side). It was well after the benefits of the surge were already being reaped so therefore the announcement of any form of withdrawal timetable by Bush had no impact on pacifying the country because it was already pacified. Quite a different context than Obama announcing timetables at the HEIGHT of a war.

I'm happy that Obama did the right thing. I support his decision completely. He also said a lot of the right things, too. Announcing a timetable for withdrawal in the same breath as the surge was not a shining moment of intelligence or clarity, however. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt as I'd much rather have his correct actions combined with rhetorical jibberish than to see soaring rhetoric combined with stupid/dangerous policies.

Buzz
12-02-2009, 02:33 PM
We backed the wrong side in the war between the USSR and the mudjahideen.

Bob, you surprise the crap out of me once in awhile and say something that I agree with.

Buzz
12-02-2009, 03:14 PM
What a disgrace for the noble history of West Point, the finest colleg on the face of the earth!!

Great college and great tradition and history. However, I never put anyone on a pedestal based on where they went to school. I once took a summer calculus class with a West Point student. I felt sorry for him, he never had a clue. He didn't belong in an engineering curriculum. I have had the same experience with others who have graduated from great institutions. And then again, I've had the opposite experience too...

road kill
12-02-2009, 03:24 PM
Great college and great tradition and history. However, I never put anyone on a pedestal based on where they went to school. I once took a summer calculus class with a West Point student. I felt sorry for him, he never had a clue. He didn't belong in an engineering curriculum. I have had the same experience with others who have graduated from great institutions. And then again, I've had the opposite experience too...
Really, but you would put Palin down for where she went to school.

And don't liberals see total wisdom in Harvard, Yale or Princeton?
I mean, isn't that part of the infatuation with President Obama??:D

Gerry Clinchy
12-02-2009, 03:32 PM
Possibly the most surprising thing about O's decision was that he agreed to send this many troops to A'stan.

While I agree that setting an 18-mo timetable seems ill-conceived to me, too ... it looks like his own party is the one beating him up, while Republicans are supporting his decision, with only minimal criticism of the 18-mo deal. Keeping in mind that, being a politician, the 18 mo timeline can also be some pressure on the Afghan govt to start getting its act together if they want US commitment. No doubt, it also was meant to "appease" those in the D party who would be up in arms about the significant troop increase.

It also appears to me that O may have finally made a tough decision. With the input that only would be available to the highest levels of command, he saw that it had to be done.

Some twist of fate when his own party batters him on this decision, but the Rs come to his defense. Maybe the Rs are not just O-haters after all?

What sounded like a young soldier called into the Dennis Prager show today. He recommended the book "The Bear on the Mountain", which was a study of the Soviet fiasco in A'stan. His point was that the goals of previous invaders was always to subjugate A'stan & "acquire" it. Even the T and AQ want control of A'stan for their own goals, without regard for the welfare of the citizenry.

The goal of the US & its allies is a different one, i.e. to allow the Afghanis to build a stable government and improve the standard of living of their people. If that is accomplished, they will not allow the T or AQ to take that away from them. There is no question, that given something to defend, the Afghans will defend it fiercely.

The greatest challenge is how to accomplish this kind of unified effort in a culture that has long been run by tribal chieftains; with many areas isolated from each other due to terrain. It's a hopeful sign that the Mortensen's book is required reading in the military!

It also occurred to me that the Russians would be royally ticked off if the US were to succeed where they failed so monumentally. OTOH, they, and lots of other countries, must undoubtedly recognize that allowing the wackos to control A'stan & use it as a way to get their hands on Pakistan's nukes, would be make them as unsafe as the US.

Buzz
12-02-2009, 03:39 PM
Really, but you would put Palin down for where she went to school.

And don't liberals see total wisdom in Harvard, Yale or Princeton?
I mean, isn't that part of the infatuation with President Obama??:D

I don't know where Palin went to school, and I don't care.

I never thought any more of Bush because he went to Yale. Or Kerry for that matter.

dnf777
12-02-2009, 09:11 PM
Really, but you would put Palin down for where she went to school.

And don't liberals see total wisdom in Harvard, Yale or Princeton?
I mean, isn't that part of the infatuation with President Obama??:D

And which former president has degrees from both Harvard and Yale??? :D

K G
12-02-2009, 10:55 PM
Keith,

Given a system of government where we demand to know what is being done in our names and all participants have the right to speak freely, what makes you think that we have kept any part of our war strategy secret from al Qaeda and the Taliban at any time in the last eight years? The fact is that we formulate our policies in public and reap all the benefits and costs which that entails. If our policy encourages the Taliban to lie low for the next two years, we win.

I see ZERO benefit from announcing our MILITARY policies in public. Fighting what amounts to a guerrilla war on THEIR terms will be tough enough without letting them know in advance how long we're going to be there. To think that "we win" if the Taliban curtails their activity and waits us out is as naive as it gets.

Frank said it best: 'WHAT!!! 2 years is meaningless to a people that have been in conflict for years!!! Please tell me that you are not serious." They waited out the Soviets (with our help)...they can wait us out too, and then get back to the business of growing their terrorist network.

If this mission succeeds, it will be due to the mission being executed correctly. No, I'm no military strategist (don't think we have too many of those posting here...:D), but it may well take a cave-to-cave search in conjunction with the Pakistanis and a well-placed MOAB or two to break the back of the Taliban and al Qaeda...

...and that's the OPTIMISTIC point of view....God help our troops and their commanders.

kg

road kill
12-03-2009, 06:32 AM
And which former president has degrees from both Harvard and Yale??? :D



The one responsible for everything that has ever gone wrong, ever!!

Ain't that right RP??

JDogger
12-03-2009, 10:11 AM
.Render the terrorist, be it Al Qaeda, Taliban, etc, incapable of committing more acts of terrorism anywhere in the world. Educate the people of the region so that they are able to think for themselves rather than blindly follow terrorist organizations. Leave the Afghan govt/military in a condition of strength to stand up and fight against the corruption and violence in their own country without the aid of other countries, therefore keeping the terrorists down. Among other things... .....................

Just how long are you willing to take to achieve these goals? I know you'll say, "As long as it takes." Problem is, that could be a very, very long time.
In the meanwhile Al Qaeda moves to Yemen, the Sudan, Somolia etc. Do we move the fight there then?

JD

ducknwork
12-03-2009, 10:57 AM
Just how long are you willing to take to achieve these goals? I know you'll say, "As long as it takes." Problem is, that could be a very, very long time.
In the meanwhile Al Qaeda moves to Yemen, the Sudan, Somolia etc. Do we move the fight there then?

JD

So what does victory look like to you? I noticed you conveniently edited out that part of the quote, you sneaky little bugger you...:D


BTW, I thought it was called the Global War on Terror, wasn't it? Besides, I am sure that they are already in all of the places that you mentioned, and more. Not to exclude the USA...Find them where ever they are and do what is necessary to disrupt the terror networks. (It doesn't have to ALL be military action, you know...)

BonMallari
12-03-2009, 11:51 AM
What is Afghanistan's biggest export....opium...what now, is someone gonna suggest we are in it to take over the export of the opium market...IMHO leaving Afghanistan is the smart prudent strategy, telling them when you are leaving was the mark of a POTUS that has no previous military experience and almost no foreign relations experience..my other question is WHERE IS HILARY IN ALL THIS :confused: probably the quietest Sec of State we have had in decades..of course with her shrill voice that's not necessarily a bad thing:razz:

JDogger
12-03-2009, 12:35 PM
So what does victory look like to you? I noticed you conveniently edited out that part of the quote, you sneaky little bugger you...:D


BTW, I thought it was called the Global War on Terror, wasn't it? Besides, I am sure that they are already in all of the places that you mentioned, and more. Not to exclude the USA...Find them where ever they are and do what is necessary to disrupt the terror networks. (It doesn't have to ALL be military action, you know...)

Hmm...victory in Afghanistan? The one and only time would have to be Alexander, then he left too.

YardleyLabs
12-03-2009, 04:43 PM
Interesting findings from Gallup following the speech:

From Gallup.Com: Obama’s Plan for Afghanistan Finds Bipartisan Support

President Obama’s newly announced policy on Afghanistan receives support from 51% of Americans, while 40% are opposed. The policy has an unusually similar level of support among Republicans (55%) and Democrats (58%), compared with 45% of independents.

K G
12-04-2009, 11:29 AM
We backed the wrong side in the war between the USSR and the mudjahideen.

I respectfully disagree. We screwed up the end game and are now reaping what we sowed.

For more information, check out these books: Steve Coll's The Ghost Wars, (focuses on America's involvement in the region up to Sept 10, 2001) and Ahmed Rashid's Descent into Chaos (focuses on our involvement post Sep 11, 2001).

We helped the Taliban decimate the Russian forces, then abandoned them...not a good strategy, and we're paying for it now.

kg

Buzz
12-04-2009, 11:35 AM
We helped the Taliban decimate the Russian forces, then abandoned them...not a good strategy, and we're paying for it now.

kg

Maybe I should read those books too. I'm curious, did they adopt their extremist religious views because we abandoned them?

BrianW
12-07-2009, 08:25 AM
The Islamist religious roots of the Taliban go much further back than the Soviet occupation, back to the late 40's in British India.
Imo, the American alliance against the Russians was more of a "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" convenience. They wanted (still do) all the "infidels" out so they could have their "sharia state". It didn't/doesn't matter if it's Hindus, Communists or Christians

K G
12-07-2009, 08:49 AM
Maybe I should read those books too. I'm curious, did they adopt their extremist religious views because we abandoned them?


The Islamist religious roots of the Taliban go much further back than the Soviet occupation, back to the late 40's in British India.
Imo, the American alliance against the Russians was more of a "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" convenience. They wanted (still do) all the "infidels" out so they could have their "sharia state". It didn't/doesn't matter if it's Hindus, Communists or Christians

I think Brian covered your question pretty well, Buzz. I think we just gave them the opportunity and motivation to use that "extremism" on us.

kg