Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
None of the troops in any of the recommendations would have been deployed yet. So no matter what he could have decided, troop strength would be the same right now. I don't know how many men are supposed to die for the Karzai Drug Cartel
Lots of $$$$ being made on both ends. I think you know that this war is about that and nothing else.
No profit, no wars. Its that simple. And we have a two time Medal Of Honor recipient to remind us that "War is a racket" and never has it been more of a racket than Iraq and now Afghanistan
Obama won't accept any of the war options before him without changes, as concerns soar over the ability of the Afghan government to secure its own country
Curious isn't it, Attorney General Holder is an entity all unto himself, and 0bama defers completely to Holder's decisions regarding his appointed position. And yet, 0bama does not trust his general at all.
Could it be that 0bama dithers on Afghanistan because whatever decision is made it will be owned by 0bama, where as he can claim his attorney general had jurisdiction over the trials of terrorists, and Pelosi and the senate have jurisdiction over the health care bill, and all he can do is just sign whatever they place on his desk?
Curious isn't it, Attorney General Holder is an entity all unto himself, and 0bama defers completely to Holder's decisions regarding his appointed position. And yet, 0bama does not trust his general at all.
Could it be that 0bama dithers on Afghanistan because whatever decision is made it will be owned by 0bama, where as he can claim his attorney general had jurisdiction over the trials of terrorists, and Pelosi and the senate have jurisdiction over the health care bill, and all he can do is just sign whatever they place on his desk?
You are reaching. Where is the evidence that this is how Obama rolls? If anything he has owned the liberal side of the Healthcare Reform debate rather than hiding behind Pelosi and there is not one shred of data as to what may transpire during the trials. Again, what you perceive as 'dithering' will be dealt with as such only when and if a more august body than yourself are moved to make formal demands for a decision. Has a single American been lost between the request for additional troops and the present hour? Yes or no?
I am old enough to recall the consternation that many Americans had over Carter's handling of the Iran hostage situation. It is what essentially precipitated a crisis of confidence and the election of Cowboy Regan. Carter however did not receive 30 death threats daily nor was his inexperience with being a military or economic leader as vigorously questioned as Obama's. Regan, as you may remember, had his bad moments too. They started calling him the Teflon President because the bad stuff wouldn't stick. He remained popular even while causing pain. What, I wonder, is the difference between Obama and Carter that makes Americans so unhappy with him that they seem almost to want to storm the White House and remove him by force when Carter, Regan, Bush I and II didn't always please or act predictably but were respectfully disagreed with and obeyed for as long as their tenures lasted?
Catching up on American Idol reruns, were ya?
The original mission was to irradicate the Taliban from power.
I don't think anybody knows the mission now, as Bam-Bam has came out and stated that he'd like to see the Taliban have a presence in the Afghan government.
When he gets through bowing, we'll ask him.
It may take a few months to get an answer, though....
Curious isn't it, Attorney General Holder is an entity all unto himself, and 0bama defers completely to Holder's decisions regarding his appointed position. And yet, 0bama does not trust his general at all.
Up until the politicalization of Justice by the Bush administration the Justice Dept has traditionally operated autonomously, as it should. Now if you think that enforcing the written laws of the U.S. is as gray as determining a war strategy... what can I say.
Quote:
Could it be that 0bama dithers on Afghanistan because whatever decision is made it will be owned by 0bama,
Well there is certainly a great deal of truth, strangely, in that statement. This decision is his and his alone, not Gates, not Adm Mullen, not Gen McChrystal's it will be Obama's and comparing what is at stake, where an how to try folks already in custody and risking the lives of thousands of Americans, a bit of thoughtful consideration is more than just due diligence.
If history is to be a guide, thank god that Truman didn't differ to MacArthur, or that Kennedy didn't differ to LeMay, and too damned bad that Johnson listened to McNamara, or that Bush didn't listen to anybody.
Without an exit strategy, Obama is correct. Its his job to oversee the further going in, it will be his job to oversee the coming out.. That is indeed the presidents job, at least he finally recognizes for once what his job entails.
I agree with you all the way.
If he was doing it the other way around, they will call him weak for doing what everyone says without strategy.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
