PDA

View Full Version : Obama following Bush's war strategery?



huntinman
06-24-2010, 12:06 PM
Well, Obama fired his hand picked General McChrystal and turns to the hated (by libs during the last administation) General Petraeus. Is Obama admitting he was wrong and Pesident Bush was right when it comes to fighting a war?

Or is it that he is afraid Petraeus was going to run for President against Obama and he wanted to try to hang A-stan around the general's neck?

david gibson
06-24-2010, 12:08 PM
Well, Obama fired his hand picked General McChrystal and turns to the hated (by libs during the last administation) General Petraeus. Is Obama admitting he was wrong and Pesident bush was right when it comes to fighting a war?

Or is it that he is afraid Petraeus was going to run for President against Obama and he wanted to try to hang A-stan around the general's neck?

yes. ...................................

Buzz
06-24-2010, 12:16 PM
Part of the reason for Obama's lower poll ratings is that liberals are pissed about him continuing Bush's policies on the war. Personally, I don't think we can afford to fail in Ag, but I'm not optimistic that we can succeed there either.

david gibson
06-24-2010, 12:27 PM
Part of the reason for Obama's lower poll ratings is that liberals are pissed about him continuing Bush's policies on the war. Personally, I don't think we can afford to fail in Ag, but I'm not optimistic that we can succeed there either.

there you go again.

ok. so if he went the way these liberals want him to go, he will then lose the support of those who agree with him following bush's policies. a wash.

please, every poll that pops up you try to make it look like the reality is the opposite by this type of logic. i am beginning to think you really believe it.

paul young
06-24-2010, 12:31 PM
i LOVE broad, sweeping statements like you spout continuously, Bill.

i'm a liberal (by your standards, anyway) and i don't hate Petraeus. i've never hated anyone in the armed forces.

do you ever tire of putting words in other's mouths, i wonder?-Paul

huntinman
06-24-2010, 12:41 PM
i LOVE broad, sweeping statements like you spout continuously, Bill.

i'm a liberal (by your standards, anyway) and i don't hate Petraeus. i've never hated anyone in the armed forces.

do you ever tire of putting words in other's mouths, i wonder?-Paul

You must have slept through the hearings when the dems attacked Petraeus from every direction. Called him a liar...remember Hillary's suspension of disbelief? Come on guy, I can't help it if you don't keep up with your own party. Never put words in your mouth, but plenty of the dem politicians have now put their feet in their own mouths. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

BonMallari
06-24-2010, 01:11 PM
Personally, I don't think we can afford to fail in Ag, but I'm not optimistic that we can succeed there either.

I have to agree with Buzz on this one, I dont think the US has the guts or mandate to do what is really needed over there and dealing with a corrupt Afghani govt...if they dont watch out they will repeat Viet Nam all over again

dnf777
06-24-2010, 01:20 PM
I have to agree with Buzz on this one, I dont think the US has the guts or mandate to do what is really needed over there and dealing with a corrupt Afghani govt...if they dont watch out they will repeat Viet Nam all over again

What do you think is really needed in A-stan?
Its a real delicate situation. Seems like we could win really big, or lose really big, and the difference is paper thin.
Do you support a strong military solution? Political? I'm not bustin' on ya, just curious what you think.

BonMallari
06-24-2010, 01:37 PM
What do you think is really needed in A-stan?
Its a real delicate situation. Seems like we could win really big, or lose really big, and the difference is paper thin.
Do you support a strong military solution? Political? I'm not bustin' on ya, just curious what you think.

IMHO until they quit supporting the corrupt govt ANY strategy is urinating in the wind...militarily speaking I think they could flatten parts of Afg with everything short of a nuclear strike, but we know thats not gonna happen

do I support a strong military position ? Yes, but not with the current Afghan govt in place

and I think you are correct it COULD be a big win, the poker player in me says its not time to push all the chips to the center right now

dnf777
06-24-2010, 02:01 PM
This might sound simplistic, but I think the best way to win people over in foreign countries, is to get 'em hooked on the best we have! Transmit the Andy Griffith Show, I Love Lucy, Happy Days on their televisions....make Levi's and white t-shirts available, let them see fried twinkies at the county fair.....then give them a taste....THAT is how to win a culture war...and in turn, a political war. Which is what this is.

Yes we need a military force there to squash the taliban, but we must remember....ONE civilian collateral death, can undo 1000 taliban deaths in an instant. That is what McChrystal understood more than Petraeus. Of course, they were fighting different wars, and hopefully Petraeus will continue the successful tactics in A stan.

david gibson
06-24-2010, 02:07 PM
This might sound simplistic, but I think the best way to win people over in foreign countries, is to get 'em hooked on the best we have! Transmit the Andy Griffith Show, I Love Lucy, Happy Days on their televisions....make Levi's and white t-shirts available, let them see fried twinkies at the county fair.....then give them a taste....THAT is how to win a culture war...and in turn, a political war. Which is what this is.

Yes we need a military force there to squash the taliban, but we must remember....ONE civilian collateral death, can undo 1000 taliban deaths in an instant. That is what McChrystal understood more than Petraeus. Of course, they were fighting different wars, and hopefully Petraeus will continue the successful tactics in A stan.

LOL!!! people in caves watching the Flintstones and I Love Lucy with hula hoops and skateboards outside. what an image!

Blackstone
06-24-2010, 03:17 PM
Yesterday, I was listening to NPR. They had on a retired General and a political and militray analyst. I tuned in near the end of the discussion, so I'm not sure about all that was said. However, both agreed there is no simple solution to this war, and both predicted we would still be in Afghanistan in 10 years trying to resolve this. Now, that's depressing.

dnf777
06-24-2010, 04:29 PM
Very depressing.

I keep hearing the argument that we must stay the course in Iraq and Afghanistan to prevent the spread of terrorism and keep our country safe. Fine, I agree. So when to we send troops to invade and occupy every other corner of the globe where terrorist networks will surely spring up in the future, as the cost of doing business in Iraq/Astan gets too high? We've got to come up with a global plan, with cost sharing by our allies who share a stake in world peace and security. How much taxpayer money has France, England, Germany, Poland.....spent on this peace-keeping mission in the middle east? And why are they getting off so easy? The answer used to be that the US could afford it. Not anymore, Alice!