Personally for me I don't have an issue with him not holding to a deadline about pulling out of a war zone before it is stable. I think when a person is not yet President they don't have all the same information to make decisions, and therefore, shouldn't make any promises in regards to military action with timetables.
JMO
__________________
Happy moments, PRAISE GOD.
Difficult moments, SEEK GOD.
Quiet moments, WORSHIP GOD.
Painful moments, TRUST GOD.
Every moment, THANK GOD.
The New York Times has outed President Obama’s backwards strategy of surging troop strength in Afghanistan without a plan.
An August 6, 2009 NYT’s article entitled “White House Struggles to Gauge Afghan Success” begins,
As the American military comes to full strength in the Afghan buildup, the Obama administration is struggling to come up with a long-promised plan to measure whether the war is being won.
It continues,
Those ‘metrics’ of success, demanded by Congress and eagerly awaited by the military, are seen as crucial if the president is to convince Capitol Hill and the country that his revamped strategy is working. Without concrete signs of progress, Mr. Obama may lack the political stock — especially among Democrats and his liberal base — to make the case for continuing the military effort or enlarging the American presence.
That problem will become particularly acute if American commanders in Afghanistan seek even more troops for a mission that many of Mr. Obama’s most ardent supporters say remains ill defined and open-ended.”
Senator Carl Levin, who recently called for a doubling of troops in Afghanistan, said,
No plan? surge for surge's sake?
Quote:
Obama is flailing in the breeze.
Quote:
When will Harry Reid proclaim of Afghanistan that “The war is lost”?
Mike it's way more fun to shoot him down. Don't y'all bird hunt up there? I nailed a loon in the "birther" thread the other day. He has not been back for some reason. I took a photo then I ate it.
(laughing) I voted for McCain and have no love for your obamanation. If you didn't want to be fighting opium dealers in Afghanistan then Ronnie Reagan should not have sold them all that hardware and provided all that training. In case you haven't noticed we also voted with our feet and have no more business with the thieves in washington. We do have free healthcare and a real, fully funded retirement system with real money in it. As opposed to the stack of IOU's in yours. Speaking of poverty (laughing again) Thank you for asking.
To politely answer your question - I don't know. Last I saw we were pounding on raggedy villagers along with women and children and accidentally smart-bombing weddings. It appears that Muslim weddings are a threat to national security as this is not the first time this has happened. I nominate you to travel over for a fact-finding mission and get back with us on this. Please run your mouth as much as possible in a loud and annoying manner like you do here. While you are over there. Please.
Quote:
Originally Posted by coadie
So why are we in Afghanistan? You seem to have such a love fest for obama and know his heart and his ways.
Except for theor opium and poverty, what do they have? Why don't those musims get their act together? Is it selling cocaine to finance war?
So why are we in Afghanistan? You seem to have such a love fest for obama and know his heart and his ways.
Except for theor opium and poverty, what do they have? Why don't those musims get their act together? Is it selling cocaine to finance war?
*sigh* Coadie, his consistent position has been that military action in Afghanistan is a direct response to those who attacked us on 9/11 and wish to continue to attack us. That was their base of operations and the region where the most threatening attacks on US soil is being birthed. They have said many times that taking our eyes off of Afghanistan and focusing on Iraq (who didn't attack us or play a significant role that we know of) has allowed those who pledge to attack us again to flourish in Afghanistan/Pakistan and have greater numbers and resources than ever.
I have never once heard Obama say we need to get out of Afghanistan. He actually argued the opposite...that Al-Quaeda's activities in Afghanistan make them the much larger threat to Americans and that by diverting so much from there to Iraq we have left ourselves more vulnerable.
His position has always been that we need to prioritize our operations in Afghanistan. That being said, however, they have to have a plan of action. I am confident that the career military commanders that we have in place regardless of who the President is, are perfectly capable of developing a strategy that will disrupt what Al-Quaeda has been able to do in the last few years.
__________________
There are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Chuck Norris lives in Houston.
Either the United States will destroy ignorance, or ignorance will destroy the United States. – W.E.B. DuBois
*sigh* Coadie, his consistent position has been that military action in Afghanistan is a direct response to those who attacked us on 9/11 and wish to continue to attack us. That was their base of operations and the region where the most threatening attacks on US soil is being birthed. They have said many times that taking our eyes off of Afghanistan and focusing on Iraq (who didn't attack us or play a significant role that we know of) has allowed those who pledge to attack us again to flourish in Afghanistan/Pakistan and have greater numbers and resources than ever.
I have never once heard Obama say we need to get out of Afghanistan. He actually argued the opposite...that Al-Quaeda's activities in Afghanistan make them the much larger threat to Americans and that by diverting so much from there to Iraq we have left ourselves more vulnerable.
His position has always been that we need to prioritize our operations in Afghanistan. That being said, however, they have to have a plan of action. I am confident that the career military commanders that we have in place regardless of who the President is, are perfectly capable of developing a strategy that will disrupt what Al-Quaeda has been able to do in the last few years.
Absolutely 100% correct. I've got him on ignore Tstew so you can try and educate him on the difference in Iraq and Afghanistan and the different military operations in the two.
__________________
In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity. Augustine
WASHINGTON, D.C., July 17, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The United States Senate approved an amendment yesterday adding "hate crimes" legislation to the annual Defense Authorization bill, which would add "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" to the list of federally-protected classes.
The Senate voted 63 - 28 to attach S.909, the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act (MSHCPA), to the $680 billion defense bill meant to support US troops fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada favored attaching the hotly-debated bill as an amendment, instead of putting it forward as a stand-alone bill, in hopes of easing its passage, but his tactic drew outcry from Senate Republicans.
Folks don't forget they added the pedophile protection to this. So spending on the military and protecting the long list of paraphiliacs is going to protect america.
Coadie your record skipped to another subject mano...
Quote:
Originally Posted by coadie
WASHINGTON, D.C., July 17, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The United States Senate approved an amendment yesterday adding "hate crimes" legislation to the annual Defense Authorization bill, which would add "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" to the list of federally-protected classes.
The Senate voted 63 - 28 to attach S.909, the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act (MSHCPA), to the $680 billion defense bill meant to support US troops fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada favored attaching the hotly-debated bill as an amendment, instead of putting it forward as a stand-alone bill, in hopes of easing its passage, but his tactic drew outcry from Senate Republicans.
Folks don't forget they added the pedophile protection to this. So spending on the military and protecting the long list of paraphiliacs is going to protect america.
Linear Mode
