President Obama's Half-Baked Commitment Speech to the War On Terror!

srkruzich · December 06, 2009, 06:25:54 PM

Quote from: Sarah on December 02, 2009, 11:47:59 AM
Didn't read it did ya? He's actually right on about most of it. Obama was an idiot for saying what we were going to do and letting the enemy know it. Sheesh! Like telling the thief, "We're only going to have our security system on for 2 days and then we're shutting it off". Makes you want to bang your head against the wall. And everyone knows Obama wants to be the Saviour of the day so to heck if he's going to give any credit to anyone else or give any semblance to the fact that he could possibly be wrong about something?

Jerry never reads anything that isn't edited and approved by the democraticunderground.net

jerry wagner · December 06, 2009, 10:36:17 PM

Quote from: srkruzich on December 06, 2009, 06:25:54 PM
Jerry never reads anything that isn't edited and approved by the democraticunderground.net

I read the entire article.... it is good to know, though, that you are in my mind and aware of my actions.

Anmar · December 08, 2009, 10:09:27 AM

I just now saw the speech. It felt like i was watching Bush speak.

To everyone who is harping about giving a timeline, the troops need to know that there are clearly defined goals, that there is an exit strategy, and that we're not just sending them into combat without a plan.

Some people claim that the enemy will just wait until we leave. They haven't done so in Iraq, but it would be great if they did! You see, we won't be there forever and 18 months without attacks will give plenty of time to train the new afghan security forces. It will also allow American military forces to actually leave their bases and make headway in the campaign for the hearts and minds of people. The more we fight, the more we antagonize the local population, which turns them to join up with the extremists.

We could make a lot of progress with 18 months of peace.

srkruzich · December 08, 2009, 06:00:55 PM

Quote from: Anmar on December 08, 2009, 10:09:27 AM
I just now saw the speech. It felt like i was watching Bush speak.

To everyone who is harping about giving a timeline, the troops need to know that there are clearly defined goals, that there is an exit strategy, and that we're not just sending them into combat without a plan.

Some people claim that the enemy will just wait until we leave. They haven't done so in Iraq, but it would be great if they did! You see, we won't be there forever and 18 months without attacks will give plenty of time to train the new afghan security forces. It will also allow American military forces to actually leave their bases and make headway in the campaign for the hearts and minds of people. The more we fight, the more we antagonize the local population, which turns them to join up with the extremists.

We could make a lot of progress with 18 months of peace.

Well we could wait n see, but I personally am not willing to send my son off into that unknown. We do know they are terrorists wanting to kill any american they can. And buying 18 mo of peace only to give them time to strengthen and then attack, not worth it.
I am hoping i have convinced my son to come home and say the hell with it before he gets sent into some crap that this fool in chief won't commit to getting the job done.

redcliffsw · December 08, 2009, 07:04:06 PM

more comment on the Obama speech at West Point.........

Is 'victory' in Obama's vocabulary?
-Mychal Massie
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=118245

Warph · December 08, 2009, 09:21:38 PM

There was too much 'I' in Obama's West Point speech. George H.W. Bush #41 famously took the word 'I' out of his speeches.... their called 'I-ectomies'..... because of a horror of appearing to be calling attention to himself. The big Zero is plagued with no such fears. "When I took office ... I approved a long-standing request ... After consultations with our allies I then ... I set a goal." That's all from one paragraph. Further down he used the word 'I' in three paragraphs an impressive 15 times. "'I believe I know'... 'I have signed'... 'I have read'... 'I have visited.'"

I, I.... ay yi yi. This is a man badly in need of an I-ectomy.

After Obama announced his plan he seemed to slip in, "After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home." Then came the reference to July 2011 as the date departure begins. Okay, lets see now... an additional 30,000 US soldiers are to march into Afghanistan..... and in 18 months then, they will march right back out again.... just in time for Obama's re-election campaign, the horror of war is to end and the draw down will begin. It was startling to hear a compelling case for our presence followed so quickly by an abrupt announcement of our leaving.

It sounded like a strategy based on the song Groucho Marx used to sing, "Hello, I must be going."

Warph · December 08, 2009, 09:40:14 PM

Quote from: redcliffsw on December 08, 2009, 07:04:06 PM
more comment on the Obama speech at West Point.........

Is 'victory' in Obama's vocabulary?
-Mychal Massie
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=118245

Great post, Red. I especially like the comment that Massie made, "Shirley Temple performance".... LOL.... good stuff!

The speech was as though Obama had taken one of his old campaign speeches and merged it with a comic book of G.I.Joe. "Extremists kill in the name of Islam," he said, before adding that it is one of the "world's great religions." He promised that responsibility for the country's security would soon be transferred to the government of President Hamid Karzai... a government which he said was "CORRUPT!" Then, "The Taliban is dangerous and growing stronger." "America will have to show our strength in the way that we end wars," he added. It was a dizzying combination of surge and withdrawal, of marching to and fro.

Anmar · December 09, 2009, 12:05:14 AM

Steve, any time we send our military off to war, the outcome is unknown.

Varmit · December 09, 2009, 07:25:12 AM

No, Anmar, it is not. Victory, before the fight is over is a mindset. One that obama doesn't have. If a person enters into a fight with the mindset that "gee, I might lose" then he has already lost the fight. I understand that in Vietnam we lost, but only because our boys weren't allowed to do their job. Because then, like now, the politicans want to fight this war from a desk in washington instead of letting our military do what they are trained to do.

jarhead · December 09, 2009, 09:09:05 AM

Billy,
I knew there would come a time that I didn't agree with what you say and finally, now is that time. We DID NOT lose the Viet Nam war. The last ground forces left Nam in August 1972 and Siagon didn't fall until 1975. You could say we left before the gig was over but you can't say we lost the war because when the war was lost, we were long gone.